Length of a Combat Round

[aldarron]

Cooper pointed out this in another thread and its interesting enough to be discussed on its own a bit:

Nov 1, 2011 10:29:25 GMT -6 cooper said:

Yeah, double-checked; the only thing I disagree with is the 10 second melee round assumption, which is based off of Holmes and not accurate to OD&D. In OD&D book 3 it clarifies that combat is resolved as per Chainmail's Man-to-Man rules. In Chainmail's Man to Man rules it states that all previous rules in Chainmail stand, save those specifically modified in that section.

The rules of the man to man section of chainmail explicitely reference rounds and the mass combat section states that there are multiple rounds of combat during the 1 minute turn. So his 10 second rounds are not really off from the MtM rules at all.

Gygax, in strategic review #15 addresses this directly when he opted not to follow CM for 0d&d's combat round on grounds of lethality.

The quote referenced is actually The Dragon 15

"Movement was adjusted to a period ten times longer than a CHAINMAIL turn of 1 minute, as exploring and mapping in an underground dungeon is slow work. Combat, however, stayed at the CHAINMAIL norm and was renamed a melee round or simply round. As the object of the game was to provide a continuing campaign where players created and developed game personae, the chance for death (of either character or monster) was reduced from that in CHAINMAIL, so that players could withdraw their characters from unfavorable combat situations."

I understand the "reduction of Lethatlity" reference to mean the introduction of Hit Points, which is not I think how Cooper took it.

Anyway,

As Cooper and The Grey Elf observed, OD&D does not give the length of a combat round explicitly - we know it from AD&D and years of habit as 1 minute.

Cooper has suggested that because multiple attacks can occur in CHAINMAIL during a players turn, which are considered 1 minute long, that it is incorrect to equate D&D 1 minute movementround with the length of a combat round in D&D. The Combat Turn, by this way of thinking is 1 minute as in CM and the combat round something less than that.

This is an interesting idea. I'd point out that "turn" in CM and sometimes even in D&D, means nothing more than what it means in monopoly or chess. Its your "turn" to move your armies and that movement is understood to encompass 1 minute. Round, likewise, refers to an exchange of blows that take place within that 1 minute turn. Gygax fails to explain it that way but its' fairly obvious from the fatigue rules:

FATIGUE
Continued activity brings on weariness:
1. Moving 5 consecutive turns.
2. Moving 2 consecutive turns, charging, then meleeing.
3. Moving 1 turn, charging, then meleeing 2 rounds.
4. Meleeing three rounds.

So, was everyone wrong to think Gygax and Arneson intended a 3lBB combat round to be one minute? The above could be taken to mean that.

On the other hand.... Empire of the Petal Throne, which was written before Greyhawk was published and is very closely based (word for word in some places) on the 3lBB's. It explicitly says "A normal "turn" is assumed to take ten minutes. In combat, however, there are ten "combat rounds" per turn of one minute each." section 724 "The Combat Round"

EPT has many of its own quirks, combatants always get a strike in a round, even if they have been killed, and fighters have a seperate damage dice progression, for ex., but is Barker redefining the length of a combat round/turn here or is he just making explicit what was commonly understood for D&D? It's also possible that both are true, meaning that Gary and Dave may have simply adopted a common interpretation for something they themselves hadn't bothered to define. I dunno.

From a strictly 3lBB perspective, how long is a round?

[Finarvyn]

I always found time in OD&D to be tricky. If a combat round is 1 minute, clearly one die roll represents a lot of abstract hack-parry-thrust as opposed to a single slash with a weapon. Also, you need a time appropriate to movement in context of combat and a 1 minute round would allow each character to totally move around a room as much as desired.

I find that it's easier not to pin myself down to a specifc time frame. Then I don't have to work out the mathematics.

[talysman]

Nov 3, 2011 16:20:45 GMT -6 Finarvyn said:

I find that it's easier not to pin myself down to a specifc time frame. Then I don't have to work out the mathematics.

Same here. I go with the idea that a turn is a turn, just like in chess or checkers, and a round is another name for a turn when discussing combat, because several turns (rounds) of combat may happen in the space of one exploration turn.

The exploration turn is stated in U&WA as being "approximately" ten minutes and consists of two moves (four if running.) I think the "approximately" is a clue that we aren't really dealing with a special name for a unit of time, but rather with a turn as used in other games, which can represent about ten minutes, but might be a different length of time entirely wherever it's appropriate.

Immediately after that (last sentence on page 8,) it states that there are ten melée rounds in a turn. That means a round is theoretically one minute, but since the exploration turn is only approximate, I would assume the round is only approximate as well; we don't really care how long a particular flurry of blows lasts, we just want to know if the entire combat is shorter than one turn or longer.

[cooper]

Why dungeon "exploration" turn and not wilderness exploration turn? Why isn't the round 2 hours in the wilderness?

The theory is, someone who is coming to D&D from chainmail already has something called a "combat turn" and combat rounds. Combat turns are 1 minute and there are multiple rounds of combat during a combat turn. Gygax codifies this at 10 rounds in men and magic. What's important here is that exploration turns of 10 minutes in the dungeon and 1 day in the wilderness would be unrelated to combat turns--which already exist in the previous (and required according to the preface of M&M) document.

Gygax and Arneson talk about things taking "1/4 exploration turn to accomplish", or that some things take "1/2 a turn"--but this is in the context of exploration turns. Rounds are specific to combat and the combat turn is 1 minute, ergo the combat round is 6 seconds (10 seconds in holmes).

Indeed, look at gygax's own combat example:



Note that the orcs are stunned for 7 turns (7 minutes probably?)

Or here in the waterborne combat section:



Certainly it doesn't take a giant 1 exploration turn (10 minutes) to cut a rope, but rather a combat turn from CHAINMAIL.



likewise, still in the waterborne combat section after a ship has been grappled (in combat) describing how many many can board a ship:



Certainly, a crocodile doesn't have a mvt. rate of 15" per 10 minutes? The assumption in this part of the book is a combat "turn" of 1 minute.




I give you the Balrog who attacks once every 5 minutes


I think the answer, actually is that in all cases in combat a "turn" should be understood as 1 minute "round" and that by the time of dragon #15, gygax had changed the name "combat turn" simply to "round". So a balrog can only "fly" for 3 minutes (after all, balrogs don't really have wings right ) Trolls, regenerate 3 HP per minute (not 3 hp per "turn"). Ring of regeneration should be 1 hp per round otherwise both abilities are useless. Potions should last 6 minutes, not 1 hour (perhaps...unless they're exploration turns...)




Here the ochre and black jelly should do 1d6 dmg per "turn" which is a combat "turn" which is 1 minute. Right? Gygax never uses rounds in any section of the monster and treasure section. "rounds" in 0d&d almost seem superfluous. A combat turn is 1 minute.




Here it seems each "round" a staff can cast a web spell, and giants will break out of the web in 2 "rounds" a flaming sword in 1 "round".



notice the vocabulary here. "...in but one turn". Really? only one turn? Surely he doesn't mean, "hey it only takes 10 minutes to summon an elemental...by which time all your friends are dead!".
----------

There is only one place in the books and only one combat example or creature write up that references rounds. That is the dragon subdual rules. Where it specifically mentions fighters dealing damage with their swords each round and subduing it during that turn. Does the author mean it would have been subdued that "combat" turn? Or that "exploration" turn?

[aldarron]

Excellent post Cooper, but hey wouldn't a wilderness turn be 2hrs and 15 minutes..

Seriously though, as you are finding, there are lots and lots of examples of the word turn being used when it is clear that the one miniute CHAINMAIL turn is meant - including the durations of virtually all the spells and magic items. I've long since fixed all that in CoZ and The Book of Elder Magic. There's even more if you take in the FFC and first two supplements.

I always used to think these were all simple mistakes of habit confusing round and turn. But your argument has got me thinking they weren't the ones confused and these weren't mistakes at all. It does make sense to interpret rounds as btb 6 seconds in light what you've pointed to.

Exalt on you boyo.

[cooper]

Nov 3, 2011 20:00:15 GMT -6 aldarron said:

I always used to think these were all simple mistakes of habit confusing round and turn. But your argument has got me thinking they weren't the ones confused and these weren't mistakes at all. It does make sense to interpret rounds as btb 6 seconds in light what you've pointed to.

I agree with gygax that a 10 round melee turn at the CHAINMAIL level is extremely brutal however. I think it really aught to be that melee can take no more than 10 rounds per turn. In chainmail movement allowances were per turn (1 minute), not per round (so you get 12" for the whole turn), morale was checked every round and there was fatigue after 3 rounds of melee, etc. Having to sit there and slug it out for 10 rounds before checking morale, etc would be akin to giving ad&d fighters an attack roll every segment (in fact this is exactly what it is).

I'd probably be most happy just changing all the combat "turns" in the 0d&d books and renaming them "rounds" just as gygax says to do in Dragon #15. Which just changes potions, abilities, and some spell durations.

However, were I to run combat as CM does, which is yes a turn is 1 minute long, that doesn't mean 10 arrows get shot by a single archer before the fighter finishes his charge! It would mean a movement phase, a missile fire and spell phase, and then multiple rounds of melee, morale checks as warranted, and fatigue rules.



Basically, as above except during step #6, the melee portion of the "turn", multiple rounds of melee can take place, step #8 the word "round" must be changed to "turn".--this would be exactly as CM is run.

How do spells work? Can a dragon breath fire every round? Let's look at the balrog entry. The balrog tells us that the special ability works once per "turn" but that it can still melee every round.

In chainmail terms a myrmidon and a magician attack a balrog and 10 goblins. In turn #1 the magician casts a sleep spell (or fireball) and takes out all the goblins. The fighter charges and melee for up to 10 rounds (8 of which are under fatigue) with the balrog before a new turn (and movement points) are returned; He scores 5 hits doing 20 dmg. The balrog rolls 2d6 and scores an 11 (he bursts into flames) He melees the fighter for 10 rounds scoring 6 telling blows doing 18 damage. His whip missed an attack against the magician, else the magician would have been pulled into his flames and taking 2, 3, or 4 dice damage depending on the size of the balrog. In turn #2 the wizard may opt to cast another spell, or enter melee himself during the movement phase, move and throw a dagger, or throw two daggers and not move. The balrog must dice again to determine if he still flames. Morale checks could happen during any portion of the turn.

To be honest 10 rounds probably wouldn't happen to often, just as they wouldn't in chainmail. 10 hit dice balrog has on average 35 hit points. My guess is by the 3rd round of melee (if all of the fighters hits landed by this point) the balrog would have to make a morale check.


What's most interesting in this above encounter is the parity between the Mu and the Fm. The magic user does a lot of damage from range, but the fighter equally does a lot of damage at close range. When combat goes this way, d6 weapon damage isn't actually the hinderance it is made out to be. An arrow may end up doing 2 dice of damage (if the archer doesn't move) and a 1st level veteran fighter probably ends up landing 3.5 telling blows in 10 rounds, against an AC 5 foe--average of 12 dmg.

Ad&d achieved the same goal with a different effect; exceptional strength, weapon spec. and variable weapon damage (1.5 attacks 1d12+8 dmg, or 11 dmg average against the same AC 5 foe).

[Stormcrow]

I haven't read this topic closely, but here's how I believe turns and rounds and so forth were conceived.

In Chainmail, each side has a turn of one minute. This turn contains everything that happens: movement, spells, melee, missiles. When melee is engaged there are multiple "rounds" of melee until one side or the other breaks off or is slaughtered. These melee rounds have no set length.

In D&D, the basic unit of time is the ten-minute turn, which consists of two full moves, or actions taking an equivalent time. If combat is begun, it takes place over a number of rounds of unspecified duration, just like melee in Chainmail. Unless the referee rules otherwise, all rounds of a combat are contained in a single turn. It doesn't really matter exactly how long a round is; it's as long as it takes for all members of both sides to take their actions. As has been observed, the term round is not used consistently in the booklets.

There is a "wilderness turn." It's called the day.

Trying to find deeper meaning in any of this is a bit pointless.

[Deleted]

The combat turn in EPT is one minute because that's what I used when I taught Phil to play D&D.

We always read "ten minute turn" as only applying to dungeon exploration.

[aldarron]

Nov 4, 2011 10:03:45 GMT -6 @gronanofsimmerya said:

The combat turn in EPT is one minute because that's what I used when I taught Phil to play D&D.

We always read "ten minute turn" as only applying to dungeon exploration.

Thanks Mike! Phil's wording is actually a little ambiguos in that paragraph. It looks like he is saying the rounds are one minute each, but I suppose he meant the Combat Turns are one minute each!

[aldarron]

Nov 4, 2011 7:41:41 GMT -6 Stormcrow said:

...In D&D, the basic unit of time is the ten-minute turn, which consists of two full moves, or actions taking an equivalent time. If combat is begun, it takes place over a number of rounds of unspecified duration, just like melee in Chainmail. Unless the referee rules otherwise, all rounds of a combat are contained in a single turn...

That is very close to the way Moldvay has it IIRC, but he specifies the lenght of a round as 10 seconds, following Holmes, I suppose.

Nov 4, 2011 7:41:41 GMT -6 Stormcrow said:

It doesn't really matter exactly how long a round is; it's as long as it takes for all members of both sides to take their actions. As has been observed, the term round is not used consistently in the booklets.

Yeah, I agree the exact length isn't at all critical - when you are talking about seconds. But when the scale is either seconds or minutes it matters a great deal as to what characters might reasonably do within a round. We do have the quote in UW&A p8 "Melee is fast and furious. There are ten rounds of combat per turn." So the length of a turn is the critical issue, since btb there are 10 rounds in an OD&D turn. I've long since concluded that most of the "turn" refernces in OD&D mean 1 minute, but never thought to apply it to that quote before as Cooper has done.

[sham]

The use of the term "turn" was one of my early confusions when learning the LBB after decades of AD&D.

Derailing the thread a bit, but this is on the topic of duration of rounds/turns and etc.

The Move Turn is pretty slick when you consider that one hour of dungeon exploration equals 10 moves and a break. I stopped worrying about the definite time/duration of a round or Melee Turn after grokking this. Now I simply think of a Move Turn as two actions. Normally that's two moves, or a move and a search for secret doors, and so forth.

Melee is simple one Move Turn in most cases. The combat itself (1 action), then regrouping (1 action). Melee Turns are the individual exchanges of blows taken by both (or more) sides in combat. Melee Turns continue until an outcome is reached. Regrouping occurs thereafter and the two actions constitute a single Move Turn. If an encounter is extremely short, I don't count it as an action at all.

[cooper]

Wow, just found an example in the greyhawk supplement no less. Time stop lasts, "2-5 melee turns". Truly 1 minute "rounds" didn't exist until ad&d. No spell in greyhawk (I'll check eldritch wizardry) references rounds at all. Spells with long durations use hours or days. Strength spell for example lasts 8 hours. Other spells last, 1 game day, or 1 week etc


Interesting:

fear--duration 6 turns (movement or melee as applicable)

? Is movement exploration turns?

jack pot

delayed blast fireball, "10 melee turns (or 1 movement turn)"

Snake charm: 7-12 melee turns or 2-5 turns.

More precidence for spells having different durations based on exploration or combat (or as I like to think, "narrative or combat")--find the path: 6 turns+level or 1 day outdoors.

[aldarron]

Nov 9, 2011 0:35:18 GMT -6 cooper said:

jack pot
"delayed blast fireball, "10 melee turns (or 1 movement turn)"

NICE!!

[talysman]

That's an important find, but you're reading too much into it: the one-minute melée round existed right from the start (book III, bottom of page 8.) But it means the same thing as "melée turn", and in the OD&D days (as you've shown,) Arneson, Gygax, Kuntz, and others saw no need to be pedantic and use strictly separate terms when describing spells and the like. A turn's a turn; the time a turn lasts depends on what you're talking about.

Some people don't like their peas touching their mashed potatoes. As more people entered the hobby, we got more people like that, who wanted strictly-defined terminology, so AD&D had to cater to them and strictly define a turn as 10 minutes, only using the term "round" for the 1-minute duration. Gygax didn't give in on some other issues, like use of the term "level" for four different things, but in other ways, AD&D is about stricter definitions and compartmentalization, to make those people happy.

[Stormcrow]

A round by any other name would last as long.

[Sean Michael Kelly]

Nov 9, 2011 12:19:25 GMT -6 Stormcrow said:

A round by any other name would last as long.

Have an exalt just for that! ;D

[aldarron]

Nov 9, 2011 11:36:23 GMT -6 talysman said:

That's an important find, but you're reading too much into it: the one-minute melée round existed right from the start (book III, bottom of page 8.) But it means the same thing as "melée turn", and in the OD&D days (as you've shown,) Arneson, Gygax, Kuntz, and others saw no need to be pedantic and use strictly separate terms when describing spells and the like. A turn's a turn; the time a turn lasts depends on what you're talking about.

Some people don't like their peas touching their mashed potatoes. As more people entered the hobby, we got more people like that, who wanted strictly-defined terminology, so AD&D had to cater to them and strictly define a turn as 10 minutes, only using the term "round" for the 1-minute duration. Gygax didn't give in on some other issues, like use of the term "level" for four different things, but in other ways, AD&D is about stricter definitions and compartmentalization, to make those people happy.

Definetly agreeing with you John in regards to the loose usage of the term "Turn". I wonder if Gygax even really kept it straight in his own mind, really.

But, I see no evidence for the equivalance you are seeing in the terms "round" and "turn" in the text. I do see (nice work for pointing that out Falconer) that some 4 years later (1978) in Dragon 15, Gygax says "Combat, however, stayed at the CHAINMAIL norm and was renamed a melee round or
simply round." But to be honest, I'm not sure how trustworthy this "memory" is given that Gygax is essentially neck deep in developing and promoting AD&D. If the one minute round was the intention in OD&D then all those instances when turn is written and one minute is clearly meant, go back to being mistakes.

OTOH, CHAINMAIL distinguishes round from turn. Round is always assumed to be equal to or less than a turn. In other words, there may be multiple rounds of combat in a turn, but there are never multiple turns in a round. I don't think OD&D ever used round and turn as synonyms.

What cooper has established convincingly is that the D&D term "Turn" is not solely 10 minutes in duration, but is sometimes a lesser period of usually about 1 minute, as per CM. "10 rounds per turn" read in this context yields 6 second rounds, not 1 minute rounds. The quote in Greyhawk reaffirms the 1 minute combat turn.

Sure, we've always interpreted "10 rounds per turn" to mean the 10 minute "exploration" turn, and that's still a possible reading but it now seems less likely that was what was intended at the time, being contradictory to the meaning of turn given in CM and often as used in OD&D.

YMMV.

[Zenopus]

I always interpreted the passage on pg 8 of U&WA in the same manner as Talysman, but I had noticed those "melee turns", and now I can see this other way of interpreting it that you are talking about, aldarron. It's very close to the Holmes system, the only difference being 10 sec rounds instead of 6 sec rounds (perhaps they were rounded up?). It makes me wonder whether Holmes viewed U&WA in this fashion on his own, or based on communication with Gygax.

So - are all the spell durations in Men & Magic in melee or movement turns?

[aldarron]

Nov 10, 2011 23:17:22 GMT -6 Zenopus said:

I always interpreted the passage on pg 8 of U&WA in the same manner as Talysman, but I had noticed those "melee turns", and now I can see this other way of interpreting it that you are talking about, aldarron. It's very close to the Holmes system, the only difference being 10 sec rounds instead of 6 sec rounds (perhaps they were rounded up?). It makes me wonder whether Holmes viewed U&WA in this fashion on his own, or based on communication with Gygax.

Yeah, Holmes is an interesting factor here too. It doesn't really prove anything one way or other, but it has always struck me as odd that he was able to have those 10 second rounds in what seemed like a contradiction to OD&D, whithout, Gygax or anybody else, as far as I know, commenting on it. TSR certainly didn't shy away from editing other parts of the book. It may well be because rounds were considered kindof unspecific, CHAINMAIL-like matters of a few seconds and ten seconds is a nice simple number (as opposed to 6), that it wasn't considered unorthodox. So maybe Holmes 10 second rounds were an acceptible "basic" version of the 10 rounds per 1 minute turn interpretation.

I've argued much the same in regards to the Dex based initiative; that it wasn't a Holmes invention so much as an interpretation/implementation of an idea already clearly present in Men and Magic. Holmes may have considered both rounds of seconds and dex initiative more or less "by the book" methods.

Nov 10, 2011 23:17:22 GMT -6 Zenopus said:

So - are all the spell durations in Men & Magic in melee or movement turns?

Oh they are absolutely the 1 minute turns ala CHAINMAIL. That's the case regardless of how you interpret the length of a combat round. The spell and magic item descriptions make that pretty clear, plus there's the overlap with CHAINMAIL spells where the duration in turns is unchanged or halved, movement rates per turn are the same etc.

[Harbinger]

Nov 10, 2011 23:17:22 GMT -6 Zenopus said:

So - are all the spell durations in Men & Magic in melee or movement turns?

Oh they are absolutely the 1 minute turns ala CHAINMAIL. That's the case regardless of how you interpret the length of a combat round. The spell and magic item descriptions make that pretty clear, plus there's the overlap with CHAINMAIL spells where the duration in turns is unchanged or halved, movement rates per turn are the same etc.

I think this holds for the magic item descriptions, but I'm not so sure of the spells, for example:

Detect Invisible (Objects): A spell to find secreted treasure hidden by an Invisibility spell (see below). It will also locate invisible creatures. Durations: 6 turns. Range: 1” x the level of the Magic-User casting it, i.e. a “Wizard” would have a range of 11”, more if he was above the base value.

It seems likely here 6 turns = 60 minutes.

[Deleted]

Nov 22, 2011 10:02:02 GMT -6 Harbinger said:

It seems likely here 6 turns = 60 minutes.

That's not the way Gary played it.

[Deleted]

Nov 22, 2011 14:07:04 GMT -6 @gronanofsimmerya said:

Nov 22, 2011 10:02:02 GMT -6 Harbinger said:

It seems likely here 6 turns = 60 minutes.

That's not the way Gary played it.

How did Gary play it?

[Harbinger]

Nov 22, 2011 14:07:04 GMT -6 @gronanofsimmerya said:

Nov 22, 2011 10:02:02 GMT -6 Harbinger said:

It seems likely here 6 turns = 60 minutes.

That's not the way Gary played it.

Here's what puzzles me if the spell 'turn' is in minutes - most of the durations are 6 or 12 turns. If you were choosing a duration length for a spell, why would you choose 6 and 12 minutes as your durations? These values don't fit well into the 10 minute exploration turn - better to choose 1/2, 1/4 of a movement turn.

Now 6 and 12 turns do make sense as choices if they mean 60 minutes and 120 minutes as that fits nicely with the 5 turns + rest one turn exploration cycle.

[Deleted]

Nov 22, 2011 16:36:27 GMT -6 @theperilousdreamer said:

Nov 22, 2011 14:07:04 GMT -6 @gronanofsimmerya said:

That's not the way Gary played it.

How did Gary play it?

Essentially, the spell lasted for one "use", like checking inside a room.

[aldarron]

Nov 22, 2011 23:11:36 GMT -6 Harbinger said:

Nov 22, 2011 14:07:04 GMT -6 @gronanofsimmerya said:

That's not the way Gary played it.

Here's what puzzles me if the spell 'turn' is in minutes - most of the durations are 6 or 12 turns. If you were choosing a duration length for a spell, why would you choose 6 and 12 minutes as your durations? These values don't fit well into the 10 minute exploration turn - better to choose 1/2, 1/4 of a movement turn.

Now 6 and 12 turns do make sense as choices if they mean 60 minutes and 120 minutes as that fits nicely with the 5 turns + rest one turn exploration cycle.

Likely, because 6 and 12 are multiples of a d6. I've noticed some spells in a draft of D&D last x + 1d6 turns and you see the same in Swords and Spells, where durations of 2-12 or 1-6 are given. Remember that the game began without the "funny dice" and multiples of 6 or of 10 were the norm. The idea that a detection spell would last for an hour while the MU is walking around etc., doesn't make a whole lot of sense. It could easily be a game breaker.

The 10 minute exploration turn is almost certainly an idea that came about as they were writing the rules, after a lot of the spells had already been invented, and Gygax probably wasn't concerned about revising the spell durations or spelling out the differences. Heck, in Swords and Spells the length of a turn is doubled to 2 minutes but duration of spells is basically the same as in the 3lbb - except that ranges are sometimes given, as mentioned, instead of the flat 12 turns or what have you.

[Stormcrow]

I think it's more likely that this is an example of Gary writing something different than the way he played. If the spell was used to detect invisible objects inside one area, why add a duration? It might be the amount of time you can "hold" it before you make the actual detection. Whether it's six combat turns or six exploration turns doesn't seem so important in that case. It's just "six chances to choose what your character does," whether you make one choice per combat turn ("I attack") or one choice per exploration turn ("We walk up that tunnel").

[aldarron]

Was looking for something else and noticed this old thread I started odd74.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=holmes&action=display&thread=3500

what's interesting in there is Jason pointing out that Warriors of Mars (july 1974 - about 5 months after D&D) specifies a 10 second combat round. Its tangentel, but backs up the notion that combat rounds were assumed to be seconds long in D&D

[Deleted]

Nov 3, 2011 21:57:49 GMT -6 cooper said:

To be honest 10 rounds probably wouldn't happen to often, just as they wouldn't in chainmail. 10 hit dice balrog has on average 35 hit points. My guess is by the 3rd round of melee (if all of the fighters hits landed by this point) the balrog would have to make a morale check.


What's most interesting in this above encounter is the parity between the Mu and the Fm. The magic user does a lot of damage from range, but the fighter equally does a lot of damage at close range. When combat goes this way, d6 weapon damage isn't actually the hinderance it is made out to be. An arrow may end up doing 2 dice of damage (if the archer doesn't move) and a 1st level veteran fighter probably ends up landing 3.5 telling blows in 10 rounds, against an AC 5 foe--average of 12 dmg.

This is a very interesting approach to combat that I've never thought of. Would you do this using the Chainmail man-to-man rules? If so, how would you handle morale? The only time the Chainmail rules say to test morale is if an army is reduced by 1/3 or as the result of a cavalry charge (unless I'm missing something). I feel like it needs morale since, as mentioned before, a full 10 rounds of combat/turn is quite brutal.

[WSmith]

Very interesting thread. I generally don't sweat the exact time a "round" takes... except that movement matters. FWIW, and I am not sure this is relevant, a 10 second combat round would mean 6 combat rounds in a combat turn... as in 1d6. I dunno. Just brainstorming.

[cooper]

concerning morale. 0d&d does supplement CHAINMAIL's morale with an individual 2-12 (2d6) score rolled each time a monster is encountered (what's fun is you can find a dragon with a 2 morale and a kobold with a 12! Lot's of RP opportunities). Mentzer basic goes into more detail about when a morale check is warrented (first time someone dies on either side, 50% losses etc).

Chainmail actually has 3 separate morale systems Shown Here as an example.

What intrigued me the most was it's initial assumption about combat, if you look at the magic-user and how it evolved, or more accurately, subsequent weakening, by the time of the greyhawk supplement, it is possible to attribute this to the change from being able to cast one spell per combat turn to being able to cast one spell per round. This heightened the power of the magic users magic by ten fold! So it's little wonder that gygax decided to cut their hit points down considerably.

Personally, I like the idea of spells being rarely used in combat (players will complain less about the vancian system if they aren't expected to have to fire off magic missiles every round) and if magic users, a la gandalf, can mix it up in melee from time to time and save their spells for exploration abilities, or for 'one off' sleep/fireball time spells. The fighting-man reigns supreme on the battlefield, as he should, but the magic-user makes up for this in a plethora of devious and useful spells outside of combat.