Wyvern Attacks

[calithena]

"A Wyvern hasn't the fearsome breath of a true Dragon, but they are equipped with a poisonous sting in their tail and poison enough to use it repeatedly. It is their primary defense, and they will use it two-thirds of the time (biting otherwise, die of 5 or 6 indicates the latter). "

This is an example of a creature with multiple attack types getting a single attack, in different varieties.

I got sick of multiple attacks playing too much high level 3e and AD&D. I like the Wyvern approach better and it opens up some other possibilities as well.

What do you think? Multiple attacks, or nay?

[Deleted]

Personally, I like the idea of bite OR attack.

I have an occasional qualm about allowing only one attack in a one minute combat round, but I drink beer with tequila shots until the pangs of guilt over realism go away.

[Deleted]

Having some monsters do multiple attacks and some varying single attacks is what makes things interesting.

It's also why larger hydrae were so fearsome.

And as for "one attack in a one minute combat round," just remember that what you're rolling for is not one individual swing of the sword or whatever, but rather an abstract expression of whether or not you've done anything useful to the other guy in the last minute.

[Deleted]

It was a lame attempt at humor, nothing more. I've never had a problem with the combat system.

And I agree about the hydra, it is fierce monster in any rules set, but particularly scary in the original rules!

[aldarron]

Aug 12, 2011 10:28:13 GMT -6 @dubeers said:

It was a lame attempt at humor, nothing more.

Wha..? Now you tell me. <attempts to screw cap back on tequila bottle; staggers up out of chair>

[Deleted]

Hey! Don't cork that bottle yet, I can still stand ...

[talysman]

As far as I'm concerned, monsters with "multiple attacks" shouldn't get multiple attack rolls unless they can simultaneously target multiple opponents, like the hydra and maybe the chimera, or other multi-headed creatures. Otherwise, it's an either/or choice, like the wyvern, or a bonus on the attack roll.

I whipped up a "dual wielding" house rule based on that principle (attacking with two weapons gives you one attack roll at +1.) I even used a statement by Old Geezer about how Gary handled high-level fighters attacking orcs as a basis for a super-simple house rule for that (Fighters can attack a number of hit dice worth of identical, ordinary humans and creatures equal to their hit dice, with one attack roll and one damage roll applied to all opponents.) Keeps multiple attack rolls a rare and horrifying event.

[aldarron]

Do you have a link for (or a copy of) that quote John? (or we could just ask mike again...)

[talysman]

I don't have a link or the exact quote, but here's what I recall him saying: when a fighter attacked 1 HD creatures like orcs, Gary would roll a die based on the character's level (d4 for 4th level, d6 for 6th level, d8 for 8th level, etc.) Whatever he rolled is how many orcs that fighter killed. Mike can perhaps confirm whether there was an attack roll first, then this die roll, or whether that "kill roll" replaced the normal attack completely.

Either way, I took that as carte blanche to use a single attack roll and single damage roll for multiple attacks. I mean, I'm being less extreme than Gary, so who could call it "too unbalanced"?

[calithena]

Very useful thread to me. Thanks.

I suppose if you wanted a different rule of thumb, you could change the standard from one attack per combat-capable limb (which seemed to become the AD&D and 3e default) to one attack per head/brain. I kind of like that actually.

But then what is the advantage to extra arms?

[talysman]

Aug 14, 2011 12:53:03 GMT -6 calithena said:

Very useful thread to me. Thanks.

I suppose if you wanted a different rule of thumb, you could change the standard from one attack per combat-capable limb (which seemed to become the AD&D and 3e default) to one attack per head/brain. I kind of like that actually.

But then what is the advantage to extra arms?

Using two-handed sword and shield, and possibly carrying a torch as well?

[calithena]

Well sure. But presumably a guy with four battleaxes should have some advantage against a guy with just one. Multiple attacks became the norm, and bonuses to hit or damage are some standard one-attack fixes. Just casting about for new ideas...

[talysman]

Aug 14, 2011 15:22:21 GMT -6 calithena said:

Well sure. But presumably a guy with four battleaxes should have some advantage against a guy with just one. Multiple attacks became the norm, and bonuses to hit or damage are some standard one-attack fixes. Just casting about for new ideas...

Well, I would just extend the dual-wielding rule I mentioned above: extra arms or "strikers" (to use GURPS jargon) don't add extra attacks, but add +1 each to attack rolls. four-armed white ape? Attacks at +3.

[waysoftheearth]

I've been reading EPT lately and found that it handles multiple attacks differently. High level fighters (and presumably, high HD monsters too?) still roll exactly one attack, but can roll multiple damage dice on a hit. The damage is then distributed over a number of available targets.

In my own games I dice to see how many attacks a monster with multiple attacks can bring to bear against a single target. I.e., the carrion crawler which recently made an appearance attacked a single opponent d6 times in each round rather than the 8 times listed.

I have always thought that large monsters should be able to hit multiple PCs with a single attack by virtue of sheer size. A charging rhinoceros is never going to stop at flattening one PC! It could go right through ten Men, even though that would be considered a "single attack". Same logic would apply to the swipe of a Dragon's tail, or a Giant's club, and it looks as though the EPT method handles this scenario very nicely.

[aldarron]

Aug 14, 2011 17:57:38 GMT -6 waysoftheearth said:

I've been reading EPT lately and found that it handles multiple attacks differently. High level fighters (and presumably, high HD monsters too?) still roll exactly one attack, but can roll multiple damage dice on a hit. The damage is then distributed over a number of available targets.

In my own games I dice to see how many attacks a monster with multiple attacks can bring to bear against a single target. I.e., the carrion crawler which recently made an appearance attacked a single opponent d6 times in each round rather than the 8 times listed.

I have always thought that large monsters should be able to hit multiple PCs with a single attack by virtue of sheer size. A charging rhinoceros is never going to stop at flattening one PC! It could go right through ten Men, even though that would be considered a "single attack". Same logic would apply to the swipe of a Dragon's tail, or a Giant's club, and it looks as though the EPT method handles this scenario very nicely.

In early blackmoor Dave was definetly using Hit Dice as Damage Dice, and I think he was applying the shared damage rule as seen in EPT., but that has been a little harder to know. The Great Svenny's ability to literally slay hundreds of orcs in a single round would seem to prove it, even with Dave's "cleave" rule. I worked it into Dragons at Dawn combat anyway. Works pretty well for the players provided the chance to hit is on the low side.

[badger2305]

The high-level fighters get attacks equal to their hit dice when facing ordinary (1HD) fighting men and creatures comes from "Questions Most Frequently Asked About Dungeons & Dragons Rules" from The Strategic Review #2:

- Round 2: lniative goes to the Hero.
- Score required to hit Orcs -- 11 (4th level fighter vs. AC 6).
Assume the following dice score by the Hero. Note that he is allowed one attack for each of his combat levels as the ratio of one Orc vs. the Hero is 1:4, so this is treated as normal (non-fantastic) melee, as is any combat where the score of one side is a base 1 hit die or less.
Hero: 19; 01; 16; 09. Two out of four blows struck. There are 8 orcs which can be possibly hit. An 8-sided die is rolled to determine which have been struck. Assume a 3 and an 8 are rolled. Orcs #3 and #8 are diced for to determine their hit points, and they have 3 and 4 points respectively. Orc #3 takes 6 damage points and is killed. Orc #8 takes 1 damage point and is able to fight.

[cooper]

High level fighters getting multiple attacks goes back to CHAINMAIL and was included as an option in men and magic, A hero-1 or third level fighter can attack an ogre once on the FCT or once using te alternate d20 system or he can attack as "3 men" when fighting mundane foes using the mass combat system (1:1) or as strategic review modified it, 3x using the alternate d20.

[howandwhy99]

NPCs have their actions scripted, but having the option of what attack type to make is something the PCs own too.

"I use the kick, punch, eye gouge, headbutt, sword thrust, drop my sword and waste 'em with my crossbow attack."

DM: "Which one attack are you doing this round?"

[jmccann]

Aug 28, 2011 9:41:06 GMT -6 badger2305 said:

There are 8 orcs which can be possibly hit. An 8-sided die is rolled to determine which have been struck. Assume a 3 and an 8 are rolled. Orcs #3 and #8 are diced for to determine their hit points, and they have 3 and 4 points respectively. Orc #3 takes 6 damage points and is killed. Orc #8 takes 1 damage point and is able to fight.

I like this. It is a little like quantum physics - the quantity is not known until it is measured, then the set of possible results collapses to the answer. It is also very practical - don't waste time rolling up stats till you know you need them.

Edited for markup fail.

[Necropraxis]

For dual wielding or multiple attacks, I like roll two damage dice and take the highest. It gives some advantage benefit for choosing to forego a shield, but does not require extra attack rolls (which could potentially double the damage or more). I think I came across that in some Grognardia post. Not sure what the ultimate provenance is.

The "number or orcs killed" by die sounds like a fun rule too; may have to give that a shot.

[cooper]

Nov 24, 2011 16:09:13 GMT -6 Necropraxis said:

For dual wielding or multiple attacks, I like roll two damage dice and take the highest. It gives some advantage benefit for choosing to forego a shield, but does not require extra attack rolls (which could potentially double the damage or more). I think I came across that in some Grognardia post. Not sure what the ultimate provenance is.

The "number or orcs killed" by die sounds like a fun rule too; may have to give that a shot.

Statistically, rolling 2 dice and picking the highest is about the same as just rolling 1 die and adding +1 to the total.