"Attack at double value"

[retrorob]

DRAGONS:



If the female
is attacked the male will attack at double value unless he is simultaneously

attacked, and vice versa.



LYCANTHROPES:



If the young are attacked the female adult will fight

at triple value for four melee rounds, but thereafter drop to one-half value. If an adult

female is attacked its mate in the family pack will fight at double value thereafter.

What do you make of it? Does "double" mean simply 2d6 damage? Or maybe it's some relict from CHAINMAIL? 

[retrorob]

Here is what I came up with (as separate options of course):

- 2d6 damage
- 2nd attack roll
- double HD for attack purposes, so HD 4 changes into 8
- HP value is doubled

[Deleted]

This almost sounds like Arneson type language that made it through the edits and rewrites into the final product. I remember seeing similar language in First Fantasy Campaign and the Blackmoor supplement's adventure. He had a tendency to randomly throw out terms like "Brains" with no context. It meant something to the author but it's inconsistently portrayed and left wide open to interpretation.

I personally like the idea that they attack as a creature of double their actual HD, having read that higher up. It's not the first place my brain goes, which is to double the attack damage, but in hindsight that would be extremely over powered in OD&D with its relatively grounded HP values for protagonists.

[captainjapan]

Definitely not Chainmail. They have point values for things, but without variable damage for the men, they are relegated to attacks on structures.

It's referring to hit point values in Blackmoor, although how to figure the damage dealt, I do not know.

[Zenopus]

FYI, the meaning of this language was just polled/discussed on Dragonsfoot in relation to the entry for Su-Monsters in the Monster Manual (via Eldritch Wizardry).

www.dragonsfoot.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=84623


There may be some further insights there. For example, the entry on Sahuagin in Blackmoor also refers to double value and equates it to a doubling of HD, although that still doesn't necessarily clarify the full extent of "double value" when it is just for attack purposes.

efnisien wrote:

I would go with double hit dice too, since that is what the use of the phrase "double value" seems to be suggesting when it was used in OD&D+supplements (for su-monsters, lycanthropes and dragons, as already mentioned; also for giant toads & frogs).

Compare the OD&D entry for Sahuagin, it mentions that for every 10 normal sahuagin (2HD) there is a chance of a "double value" fighter i.e. a "Hero type" (Hero = 4HD). The usefulness of the "double value" phrase is that it could apply both to the original Chainmail fantasy combat table but also to the "Alternative" combat system that came to be the standard.

For almost all these monsters this terminology was changed in AD&D - dragons and lycanthropes got flat bonuses, the "double value" attacks frogs/toads got when their tongues were hit was dropped entirely, and the HD of sahuagin lieutentants/chieftains was changed. The only one left with more-or-less the original OD&D description was the su-monster, so that was perhaps an oversight in the revisions when compiling the MM.

[retrorob]

captainjapan 

I mentioned CHAINMAIL because of this:

If they are fighting

inside of, or within 6" of, a wood, other than an Entwood, they will double their

melee capability.

Zenopus

Thank you. What a coincidence! I wasn't aware of that.

Blackmoor supplement has also an intriguing entry about Frogmen:

There are 8 frogmen with double strength and hit point values, each

of these also having +2 on saving throws and defensive capabilities. There are 5 frogmen with

triple values and +3 on saving throws and defense, and 2 frogmen with quadruple capabilities

and +4 to saving throws and defense!

[geoffrey]

I double the dragon's HD for the purposes of rolling to hit.

[captainjapan]

Aug 6, 2020 9:50:53 GMT -6 retrorob said:

captainjapan 

I mentioned CHAINMAIL because of this:

If they are fighting

inside of, or within 6" of, a wood, other than an Entwood, they will double their

melee capability.

That DOES sound like Chainmail. Chainmail uses the terms, ability and capability, for attack probability. Does "values" also appear in the Ent entry?


edit: My bad. You're still talking about the Chainmail Lycanthrope. The Lycanthrope invites more Lycanthropes to fight at his side. So, instead of putting more werewolf figures on the table, you just give the one a flat 2X 4 Armored Foot fighting ability. Sheesh, these lycanthropes are tough!

[derv]

Some have speculated that this is remnants from the TC campaign that has origins in Strategos. It would have been used to modify the odds.

I've also ruminated on this in The Eighteen Pages doc. Essentially, a "double value" monster would deliver 2x damage dice and could take 2x the hits yet still attacks on the same HD (level) column. So a double valued male werewolf would still fight as a 4 HD monster, but do double dice in damage and have it's hp's doubled.

[aldarron]

Aug 6, 2020 17:43:08 GMT -6 derv said:

Some have speculated that this is remnants from the TC campaign that has origins in Strategos. It would have been used to modify the odds.

I've also ruminated on this in The Eighteen Pages doc. Essentially, a "double value" monster would deliver 2x damage dice and could take 2x the hits yet still attacks on the same HD (level) column. So a double valued male werewolf would still fight as a 4 HD monster, but do double dice in damage and have it's hp's doubled.

righto, We've talked about this a good bit before but I don't think it has ever had it's own thread. There are loads of examples in the FFC but a classic example is in ToTF:

"There are 8 frogmen with double strength and hit point values, each of these also having +2 on saving throws and defensive capabilities. There are 5 frogmen with triple values and +3 on saving throws and defense, and 2 frogmen with quadruple capabilities and +4 to saving throws and defense!" [Blackmoor Supplement II, p. 45]

It means the monster has their HP totals and damage totals multiplied by the amount (double, triple, whatever) and their Saving throws increased by the matching integer (+2, +3, etc.)

Oh you also see this in the assassin poison "ferocity" entry btw.,with the exception that an attack bonus is included (but it is not clear to me if that might be an editorial mistake), and there is a neat mention of it as Troll Rage in Arneson's Longtooth Lounge in Citybook II.

Ferocity attack discussed here odd74.proboards.com/thread/12555/ferocity-work

[captainjapan]

These (the sahuagins') cities will have great fighters and magic users as well as
underwater horrors that live and fight for the Sahuagin. The ratio of these is as follows:

per ten Sahuagin there is a 25% chance of a double value fighter (Hero type)

per sixty there is a 15% chance of a triple value fighter (Superhero)

per one hundred of these individuals there is a 10% chance of a quadruple
value fighter.

per five hundred of these individuals there is a 20% chance of a quintuple (5)
times normal value fighter (Leader).

per one thousand individuals there is a 50% chance of a six times normal value fighter.

                                                                    - Supplement II, Blackmoor pg. 22, Sahuagins

Sahuagins are, normally, 2 dice creatures dealing 2-12 damage (or else by weapon type).

So, I am confused as to how a "triple value fighter" can be called a Superhero. I thought Superheroes were 8 Hit Die types in D&D and in Chainmail.

Unless, value refers to the to-hit target, some number of columns removed, on the Monsters Attacking matrix. In which case, for the Sahuagin, double value means +1 toHit, and triple value means +2 toHit ? In addition, the level title, Superhero, means, at most, a 6HD Sahaugin (again, according to the Monsters Attacking matrix)

Or, it was just an oversight on the part of the author.

[derv]

captainjapan I wouldn't get too hung up on the specifics in Sup II recognizing that Kask was the primary editor and it was published after Greyhawk's introduction of variable damage. It's the terminology that's significant. Hit Dice were a different thing to Arneson and were closer akin to damage dice. The Hero & Superhero designations were levels. The intent is that they are leader types. Kask did not likely understand the terminology being used or why.

Your triple value fighter and your quadruple value fighter could both be superheroes. The triple value fighter would deliver damage x3 and the quad would be x4. Same for hit points (based on 2 HD).

Dan suggests above that they would also get a saving throw bonus of +3 and +4 respectively.

[captainjapan]

Aug 9, 2020 15:38:41 GMT -6 derv said:

captainjapan I wouldn't get too hung up on the specifics in Sup II recognizing that Kask was the primary editor and it was published after Greyhawk's introduction of variable damage. It's the terminology that's significant. Hit Dice were a different thing to Arneson and were closer akin to damage dice. The Hero & Superhero designations were levels. The intent is that they are leader types. Kask did not likely understand the terminology being used or why.

Your triple value fighter and your quadruple value fighter could both be superheroes. The triple value fighter would deliver damage x3 and the quad would be x4. Same for hit points (based on 2 HD).

Dan suggests above that they would also get a saving throw bonus of +3 and +4 respectively.

I thought the exact same thing and was going to do an about face. But, the Sahaugin is Steve Marsh's creation.

[derv]

I'm not sure what that leads you to conclude instead.

I would ask myself where else does Marsh use this type language in his descriptions-past or present. Why does the description of Sahaugin magic users not contain similar language, instead switching to level numbers.

Also consider a Superheroes (8 HD) average hit points are 28 (3.5 x 8), a Heroes 14 (3.5 x 4). A double valued 2 HD Sahaugin would also be 14 (3.5 x 2)x2 points, Quadruple value 28 (7 x 4) points.

[captainjapan]

I'll say it's just an editing oversight.

Clearly, the "Superhero" title should have been attached to the next line of the text. A Superhero is a quadruple value sahuagin fighter. The dm rolls 8 dice to determine his hit points and he is allowed to attempt 8 attacks against single hit die opponents, for 2-12 damage/ ea.

Steve Marsh would not have been exposed to twin cities combat parlance, if it didn't show through in the 3lbb's. Marsh wasn't at TSR very long, probably less than Arneson was. His major credit is editing the D&D Expert Rules. By that time, any usage of the terms double, or triple value, or fighting strength, or capability had been scrubbed.

[derv]

There's a Q&A with Marsh from 2005 on Dragonsfoot that's still active. It may interest you. Page 1 addresses your subject.

Marsh is still answering questions. Maybe you could ask him what he makes of the double and triple value inclusions and whether they were part of his original design.

[captainjapan]

Thanks, derv. Pg. 13 of the Q&A answers the question directly. I'm sorry I'm on my phone or else I'd link directly to it. Thanks also to Aldarron for asking the question in 2010. It just goes to show, there are no new questions. Steve Marsh, if he did write that the triple value fighters were Superheroes, had an exponential values progression in mind.

(2 dice Sahuagin fighter)^2 = Hero

(2 dice Sahuagin fighter)^3 = 4 dice Hero^2 = Superhero

I say, "if he did write it", because, when pressed by Aldarron, he admitted that he wasn't sure if he'd written that part at all.

[derv]

Sounds like a good rationale. I'm a bit of a skeptic though. How do you feel about Sahuagin Leaders of quintuple value or even sextuple value? Seem reasonable as an exponential value in your judgement?

[captainjapan]

Ha!
No, it does not.

[aldarron]

Yeah, Sahaugin are a curiosity. It's interesting that Sahaugin are one of the few monsters the d20 Blackmoor line choose to revive (as Sar aigu).

What I would say is that "Sahaugin" is certainly Marsh's creation, but I think the language and size of the entry betrays the hand of the editor. My guess is that Kask mushed together the Marsh' Sahaugin with some monster Arneson submitted that Kask didn't like so much.

The Merman entry mentions "More intelligent than lizardmen," and there is an entry for Lizard Men in Greyhawk, but maybe Arneson made a redundant or expanded version or maybe it was some other lizard type (Black Lagoon?) - who knows, but whatever the case, I doubt the "triple values" language came from Marsh. AFAIK there is no other example of him using such language. And so it goes without saying that the "values" entry as edited by Kask is probably a bit muddled from whatever it originally was.

[derv]

Aug 11, 2020 6:23:14 GMT -6 aldarron said:

What I would say is that "Sahaugin" is certainly Marsh's creation, but I think the language and size of the entry betrays the hand of the editor. My guess is that Kask mushed together the Marsh' Sahaugin with some monster Arneson submitted that Kask didn't like so much.

That would be my conclusion as well.

[Zenopus]

Perhaps the Frogmen terminology from the Temple (quoted above) was simply applied by the editor (Kask) to the Sahuagin entry.

Are these the only two instances of "quadruple values" in a D&D rulebook?

[derv]

I'm not aware of many others that use the term "value". Double value, yes. Beyond that, not so much.

You mentioned the frogmen description on the island- double, triple, quad.

Mermen take quadruple damage from fire weapons. The FFC talks about Hero types and magic weapons getting "Hits times six" against Trolls and Ogres.

I also find it odd that the descriptions for Sahuagins include these values and the titles together. Not typical. I would assume the titles were an add on in an attempt to bring it in sync with D&D.

[retrorob]

Vol. II has also a nice passage about Rocs:

ROCS: (...) the data given for Rocs is understood to be that for the small variety, and that for the largest Rocs should be doubled or even trebled.

As HD=size, I guess it's about doubling or tripling big Rocs Hit Dice.

Do you think this can be understood as attack at double or triple value we've discussed here?

[derv]

In the most general of ways “value” was a way of creating variation.

The basis seems to be grounded in war game point values.

If you want to use Chainmail as an example you could say Lightfoot are worth 1 point, Light Horse are triple value; Heavyfoot are worth 2 points, Medium Horse are double value; Armoredfoot are 2 1/2 points and Heavy Horse are double value. The combat tables in Chainmail do not reflect these exactly, but the principle is there.

Now introduce the idea of a Hero. Let’s say Heavyfoot. A Hero is a HF x 4 or quad value.

It’s just a way of creating variation.

If you want to look at this exponentially, as Marsh suggest, a MH Hero could be expressed as HF 4^2.

I don’t think we can say conclusively what the intention was by the editors for any of these D&D entries. We can only talk about how Arneson and the TC originally used the term and how it was used in wargaming prior.

As for application, a person should do what seems best.

[jeffb]

Aug 6, 2020 9:56:23 GMT -6 geoffrey said:

I double the dragon's HD for the purposes of rolling to hit.

Me three.

[derv]

Aug 14, 2020 4:03:14 GMT -6 retrorob said:

Vol. II has also a nice passage about Rocs:

ROCS: (...) the data given for Rocs is understood to be that for the small variety, and that for the largest Rocs should be doubled or even trebled.

As HD=size, I guess it's about doubling or tripling big Rocs Hit Dice.

Do you think this can be understood as attack at double or triple value we've discussed here?

 First Fantasy Campaign:

"Rocs: Since their nests are only on the very highest peaks, thus, only in mountain squares, there is a 1/6 chance of finding such a nest. If a nest is found, there is a 40% chance the 1-3 eggs are hatched with 2-12 value for the flightless fledglings. The adult Rocs will range in value from 4-24 points. 60% chance of them remaining Neutral, 20% Hostile, and 20% Friendly (not too friendly); captures as with Dragons (although he may carry off an equivalent amount of points if you fail to hold him- 1/4 chance). Capture value 10 GP times point value. Tarns have same value."

"Tarns: Same as Rocs but larger in some cases (War Tarns 10-60 points, Cargo 5-30 points, Racing Tarn 2-12 points)."

"Both: Should the largest member of the attacking be killed, the whole group will break off for one turn and take a morale throw."

If I was going to modify HD, I would use 2 (hatchlings), 4-6 (average), and 8-10 (large).

[cometaryorbit]

Aug 14, 2020 4:03:14 GMT -6 retrorob said:

Vol. II has also a nice passage about Rocs:

ROCS: (...) the data given for Rocs is understood to be that for the small variety, and that for the largest Rocs should be doubled or even trebled.

As HD=size, I guess it's about doubling or tripling big Rocs Hit Dice.

Do you think this can be understood as attack at double or triple value we've discussed here?

I think the larger Rocs actually have more HD. (And a similar phrasing is used for the larger versions of Sea Monsters, the smaller ones being equal to a Purple Worm).

Whereas the monsters that "attack at double value" in a particular situation don't actually have more HD, they just attack as if they did.

...I guess?

[retrorob]

Aug 15, 2020 19:40:00 GMT -6 cometaryorbit said:

It's how I read it too. If it weren't for supplement Blackmoor (Frogmen etc.), I probably wouldn't even have thought about double damage.