Movement (in CM and OD&D)

[DungeonDevil]

In Men & Magic movement is LF 12", HF 9", AF 6". Now in CM (p. 10) it has LF/Archers at 9". I am going to assume that this was a typo, where LF should be 12" just as it says in M&M. Should then Landsknechts/Swiss be 9" (the same as HF)? Funny how I only spotted this when comparing it with M&M!

[chicagowiz]

Since OD&D came after Chainmail, why do you assume Chainmail was the typo? I'm inclined to read Chainmail that most footmen were given roughly the same movement rate, unless encumbered by armor... and that Gary/Jeff were very taken with Landsknechts/Swiss troops. That does make some sense (WRT to LF/HF), to me, the difference in the two is a bit more armor and training, probably not enough to modify movement. OD&D seems to want to guide someone to making the assumption that LF == no armor/leather, which would imply the 12" movement rate.

[Matthew]

I tend to agree with Michael; it is worth noting that OD&D also contains the only reference to "medium foot", which appears in the description of the dervishes, if I recall aright. Clearly CM was being adapted by Arneson and Gygax to suit their current ideas, and some new standardisation is to be expected.

[DungeonDevil]

Movement in CM, just doesn't seem to add up to me.
I just find it very incredible that Arquibusiers and X-bowmen are able to move more adroitly than can LF. Additionally, I cannot believe that LF can be outdistanced in a turn by (presumably more heavily-armed and accoutred) Landsknechts/Swiss with their zweihaenders and katzbalgers, pikes or halberds and so on.
My gut instinct would be to switch the first 12 in the column with the 9 that occurs immediately thereafter.

[chicagowiz]

Apr 17, 2011 13:24:39 GMT -6 DungeonDevil said:

Movement in CM, just doesn't seem to add up to me.
My gut instinct would be to switch the first 12 in the column with the 9 that occurs immediately thereafter.

I'd never argue against someone coming up houserules that they feel strongly about. If it works for your game and campaign, awesome! I'm not sure it's a typo or just how they felt at the time. What does excavating S&S tell you? That's probably a more telling direction that trying to use OD&D Vol 1 as determining if it was a typo or not.

[coffee]

Remember also that the writers of these rules were amateur historians, as well as gamers.

The Swiss/Landsknechts were highly disciplined troops, whereas a lot of light foot would have been conscripts (i.e.; not nobility, since they couldn't afford heavier armor).

Just something for your consideration.

As mentioned earlier if you find something that works better than the rules as written for you, then by all means use it. The point after all is to have fun playing the game.

[DungeonDevil]

S&S? Is that Swords & Spells? I'm afraid I have INT 0 when it comes to that. I've heard that it was hastily thrown together and, according to one of my former contacts, it's full of wonkiness. Perhaps somebody here at ODD74 has put it through its paces and can offer first-hand experience on the matter.

[chicagowiz]

S&S does indeed mean Swords & Spells. Let me check real quick:

Hm. Interesting. It differentiates between Men and Elves for armor types, but Dwarfs and Halflings get one movement rate no matter what.

Each troop type can have 3 movement rates based on their organization/formation - Mass/Line, Column or Unorganized/Open Order. Charge Bonus is given.

Men
Lt. Armor - 12/15/18/4
Hvy Armor - 6/8/9/2

Elves
Lt. Armor - 12/15/18/4
Hvy Armor - 7/10/12/2

Dwarfs - 4/-/8/2
Halflings - 9/-/12/3

Leather armor + shield = light
Plate = heavy

I've not played S&S, being content with Chainmail and (so far just by reading) Battlesystem.

[thorswulf]

Disciplined indeed! And well drilled as well! I think that could probably be extended to most highly trained troops like Turkish Jannisaries.

[aldarron]

Apr 16, 2011 3:16:42 GMT -6 DungeonDevil said:

In Men & Magic movement is LF 12", HF 9", AF 6". Now in CM (p. 10) it has LF/Archers at 9". I am going to assume that this was a typo, where LF should be 12" just as it says in M&M. Should then Landsknechts/Swiss be 9" (the same as HF)? Funny how I only spotted this when comparing it with M&M!

I think its because in M&M movement is based on the Charge rates of CHAINMAIL. LF does equal 12 when in combat. All combat in OD&D is at a charge.

[DungeonDevil]

A-ha! Thanks, Aldarron!

[Matthew]

May 18, 2011 11:01:09 GMT -6 aldarron said:

I think its because in M&M movement is based on the Charge rates of CHAINMAIL. LF does equal 12 when in combat. All combat in OD&D is at a charge.

That does not seem to be the case for any of the other entries as far as I can see, so I reckon that is not the explanation.

[aldarron]

<shrug> fits the man types. Not so much the monsters. Then again, Heroes move at 12" seemingly regardless of armor.

[snorri]

May 20, 2011 12:37:49 GMT -6 aldarron said:

<shrug> fits the man types. Not so much the monsters. Then again, Heroes move at 12" seemingly regardless of armor.

It make sense and could be grabbed as such for OD&D. 'At Hero level, characters move at 12', regardless of armor'

[cooper]

At hero level, the fighting-man will probably have magic armor, so doesn't that explain the mvt. 12 if used in d&d?

[Matthew]

May 20, 2011 12:37:49 GMT -6 aldarron said:

<shrug> fits the man types. Not so much the monsters. Then again, Heroes move at 12" seemingly regardless of armor.

I am not quite seeing it; which man types are you matching up?

[aldarron]

Your right Matthew, I just noticed from the list on M&M p10 Heavy foot (9") does not match the charge rate (12"). LF and AF do match the charge rate (12", and 6" respectively), but the mismatch of Heavy Foot seems to belie the idea.