How Many Hits Does It Take?

[Kris Kobold]

May 17, 2012 10:41:40 GMT -6 talysman said:

May 17, 2012 9:12:48 GMT -6 aldarron said:

In fantastic combat - wheter it is in D&D or CM - there's normally one attack per round. (some creatures might get two or three if they have special attacks - but that's not the usual by definition)

But "normal" combat in either D&D or CM can have multiple attacks as is demonstrated by the reference to the troll who attacks a normal man. If that troll were attacking another troll, there would only be one attack each, in either game.

I still get the impression that people may be reading more precision into the vocabulary used in the rules (and FAQ,) BUT... the distinction between fantastic combat normally being only one attack per round and other combat involving multiple attacks on normal men almost leads me to think that "fantastic combat" means any combat where both sides would normally get multiple attacks -- troll vs. hero is "fantastic" (one attack each,) troll vs. mercenaries is non-fantastic (troll gets multiple attacks.) Non-fantastic combat is anything you don't want to (or need to) focus on.

I think the definition for "fantastic" combat is combat between opponents of more than 1 HD. If two opponents have more than 1 HD, then they have only one attack per exchange ("round"/"turn"). This might have been considered dull, though, leading to certain monsters of more than 1 HD to have "attack routines" (e.g., claw/claw/bite). "Normal" combat, however, occurs under two conditions only: 1) both opponents are 1 HD or less, and only have one attack each, or B) one opponent is 1 HD or less and the other is more than 1 HD (i.e. "fantastic"). In this case, the 1-HD or less opponent gets but one attack, while the more-than-1-HD opponent attacks as many time as he has hit dice.

That is:

Normal opponent vs. normal opponent = normal combat
Normal opponent vs. fantastic opponent = normal combat
Fantastic opponent vs. fantastic opponent = fantastic combat

[waysoftheearth]

May 17, 2012 9:12:48 GMT -6 aldarron said:

But "normal" combat in either D&D or CM can have multiple attacks as is demonstrated by the reference to the troll who attacks a normal man. If that troll were attacking another troll, there would only be one attack each, in either game.

I haven't tried to find all the references to "normal" and "fantastic" combat Gygax makes in other places but it's very clear he is making that distinction in both D&D and CM.

I guess this is actually what is at the root of the "quibble" which I initially misdirected at Aldaron's essay.

In my view, the alternative combat system makes no distinction between "fantastic" and "non-fantastic" combat; it being a single unified system. So when these terms appear in the FAQ they create confusion for the non-Chainmail buffs -- i.e., the greater part of all D&D players (including myself).

Perhaps this only reveals my own lack on antiquity, but I have never once paused -- in any D&D game I've ever run -- to consider whether a combat should be fantastical or non-fantastical. It is just "combat".

therefore, I believe there is a reasonable case to call these throwbacks to terminology EGG was accustomed to using for other purposes. Use of these unexplained (in the absence of chainmail) terms certainly doesn't help clarify the example of the d20-based alternative combat system any.

In fact, it appears to me that removing the two "incidental" occurrences of fantastical and non-fantastical doesn't subtract anything from the message that is conveyed about the alternative combat system. It makes it less obscure.

[aldarron]

May 17, 2012 17:18:00 GMT -6 waysoftheearth said:

....In my view, the alternative combat system makes no distinction between "fantastic" and "non-fantastic" combat; it being a single unified system. So when these terms appear in the FAQ they create confusion for the non-Chainmail buffs -- i.e., the greater part of all D&D players (including myself).

Perhaps this only reveals my own lack on antiquity, but I have never once paused -- in any D&D game I've ever run -- to consider whether a combat should be fantastical or non-fantastical. It is just "combat".

therefore, I believe there is a reasonable case to call these throwbacks to terminology EGG was accustomed to using for other purposes. Use of these unexplained (in the absence of chainmail) terms certainly doesn't help clarify the example of the d20-based alternative combat system any.

In fact, it appears to me that removing the two "incidental" occurrences of fantastical and non-fantastical doesn't subtract anything from the message that is conveyed about the alternative combat system. It makes it less obscure.

Yeah, that's the direction the game went fairly quickly. After Greyhawk was published with it's own multiple attack structures for monsters and so on the old CM distinctions fell by the wayside, and "normal combat" morphed in to the vestigial AD&D rule for fighters vs 1 HD monsters.

But, the 3lbb's definetly do make a distinction between fantastic and normal creatures and fantastic and normal combat, just as the FAQ does. Aside from the references we've already seen to normal and supernormal, here are the fantasy references:

Elves are more able to note secret and hidden doors.
They also gain the advantages noted in the CHAINMAIL rules when fighting certain fantastic creatures. M&M P8

Drums of Panic: The beating of these kettle drums will cause men and fantastic creatures who fail to make their morale throw to flee in rout M&T p37

LAND COMBAT:
The basic system is that from CHAINMAIL, with one figure representing one man or creature. Melee can be conducted with the combat table given in Volume I or by the CHAINMAIL system, with scores equalling a drive back or kill equal only to a hit. Battles involving large numbers of figures can be fought at a 20:1
ratio, with single fantastic types fighting separately at 1:1 or otherwise against but a single 20:1 figure. UW&A p25

So again, the upshot is that there is a real distinction between the fantastic and the normal and fantasy types fight each other one blow at a time, but gain multiple attacks vs. normals.

[waysoftheearth]

May 17, 2012 19:42:38 GMT -6 aldarron said:

But, the 3lbb's definetly do make a distinction between fantastic and normal creatures and fantastic and normal combat, just as the FAQ does. Aside from the references we've already seen to normal and supernormal, here are the fantasy references:

Elves are more able to note secret and hidden doors.
They also gain the advantages noted in the CHAINMAIL rules when fighting certain fantastic creatures. M&M P8

Drums of Panic: The beating of these kettle drums will cause men and fantastic creatures who fail to make their morale throw to flee in rout M&T p37

LAND COMBAT:
The basic system is that from CHAINMAIL, with one figure representing one man or creature. Melee can be conducted with the combat table given in Volume I or by the CHAINMAIL system, with scores equalling a drive back or kill equal only to a hit. Battles involving large numbers of figures can be fought at a 20:1
ratio, with single fantastic types fighting separately at 1:1 or otherwise against but a single 20:1 figure. UW&A p25

If the text was absolutely rife with references to "fantastic" creatures I might be swayed, but these three examples hardly make a compelling case.


The Elves' benefits "versus certain fantastic creatures" can just as rightly be read as "versus certain monsters" by the alternative combat system player.

Despite it saying so in M&M, it seems dubious to me whether Elvish PCs were ever intended to enjoy the whole gambit of combat benefits ascribed to bodies of Elvish troops fighting bodies of orcs, goblins, and the various big monsters. This is supported by the observation that these benefits are not mentioned again in later publications (GH and the PHB).

In a campaign where Elvish PCs are intended to be super-beings compared to the other player races it is plausible that a referee might want to translate the benefits given to Elvish troops in Chainmail to Elvish PCs under the alternative combat system. I have never seen it done myself, however.


Drums of panic "will cause men and fantastic creatures to flee" can once again rightly be read as "will cause men and monsters to flee" by players employing the alternative combat system.


The entry under LAND COMBAT is hidden away at the back of vol 3 amid the suggestions to try various "sub-games" to introduce naval, aerial and land battles into the campaign. These sections describe large scale actions which are essentially other wargames, and are rarely (if ever) part of any small scale dungeoneering game. It is no surprise that Chainmail (and Chainmail references to "fantastic creatures") would be called upon to resolve land battles at the larger scale.

May 17, 2012 19:42:38 GMT -6 aldarron said:

So again, the upshot is that there is a real distinction between the fantastic and the normal and fantasy types fight each other one blow at a time, but gain multiple attacks vs. normals.

There certainly is when the Chainmail system is employed. But my present notion (subject to change without notice) is that Chainmail's "fantastic-normal" distinction is wholly replaced, in the alternative combat system, by distinction based on number of hit dice.

1 HD persons/monsters are the alternative system's equivalent to Chainmail's "normals". 2+ HD persons/monsters are the alternative system's equivalent to Chainmail's "fantastics".

This is why the alternative combat system player never need ask whether combat is "fantastic" or "normal". It is always simply "combat".

I may need to think some more on that myself...


edit: spelling

[aldarron]

<shrug> You've got prolly a dozen or more references there between "normal" "supernormal" and "fantastic" and a clear distinction made between fantastic and normal combat in in the FAQ. Gygax specifically says "normal (non-fantastic) melee", is the sort where multiple attacks are allowed, whereas "When fantastic combat is taking place there is normally only one exchange of attacks per round." Compared to a lot of other things in the 3lbb's (like the much debated combat round) that's a fairly substantial amount of documentation.

Since the troll is also given multiple attacks per round, we know the rule applies to monsters, but we don't know if clerics and mu's should get the benefit, or if they do whether it should be by level or Fighting Capability or what. It's also an open question whether any creatures with more than 1 HD are "normal" - I'd guess that'd be up to the referee.

[Finarvyn]

May 18, 2012 11:13:17 GMT -6 aldarron said:

I'd guess that'd be up to the referee.

And unfortunately that's the real answer to everything here. While AD&D was an attempt to codify everything, OD&D was a much more crude version of the rules and didn't close up all of the possible ambiguous situations. This is made worse by the "as in Chainmail" parts where Gary stapled two rules sets (Chainmail and OD&D) together rather than start from scratch. Had he started over and wrote his way through all "as in Chainmail" type references, we would avoid most of the angst of this discussion.

Not that I blame Gary, of course. Who would have expected that a quirky little rules set would have exploded into the phenomenon that it bacame.

[waysoftheearth]

A detailed knowledge of Chainmail can certainly colour anyone's reading of what appears in the 3LBBs, which is perfectly fine in that context. But what I have been trying to argue is how the other 99% of D&D players who have never seen Chainmail might interpret OD&D.

May 18, 2012 11:13:17 GMT -6 aldarron said:

<shrug> You've got prolly a dozen or more references there between "normal" "supernormal" and "fantastic"

<shrug> Let's review them all then, and we shall see.


Every occurrence of the word "normal" in the 3LBBs
(I've greyed out the cases irrelevant to this argument)
(I've added my own comments in green)



M&M p15
at half normal movement

M&M p19
Normal men equal 1st level fighters

M&M p21
Protection/Normal Missiles

M&M p26
Protection from Normal Missiles: The recipient of this charm becomes impervious to normal missiles. This implies only those missiles projected by normal (not above normal) men and/or weapons.

M&M p26
stepped on and crushed by a normal man

M&M p27
causes normal brush or woods

M&M p28
by normal process of evaporation

M&M p30
if normally a 12 or better were required to save against magic

M&M p30
1-6 normal-sized animals

M&T p4
Creature may "charge" also and get bonus to normal move.

M&T p5
Attack/Defense capabilities versus normal men

M&T p5
Although Bandits are normal men, they will have leaders who are supernormal fighters, magical types or clerical types.

The first distinction between normal and supernormal men. Supernormal indicating, in this case, men with fighter, magic-user or cleric levels.

M&T p5
There is also a chance that there will be magical accouterments with the super-normal types

This meaning NPC fighters, magic-users and clerics might possess magic items.

M&T p6
There will be the following super-normal types with them

Followed by possible fighters, magic-users and clerics of various levels (all above 1st level).

All super-normal individuals with the force will be riding Heavy, barded horses.

Referring to the same fighters, magic-users and clerics.

Berserkers
When fighting normal men they add +2 to their dice score when rolling due to their ferocity.

Nomads
similar to Bandits as far as super-normal types

Meaning nomads will have the same fighter, magic-user and clerical leader types.


M&T p9
Ghouls paralize any normal figure they touch

Wights cannot be affected by normal missile fire

silver-tipped arrows will score normal damage

impervious to all normal weaponry

M&T p16
For every 50 Elves encountered there will be one of above-normal capabilities

Again, indicating an elf with PC levels above 1.

M&T p17
the two creatures do not herd together and will normally fight each other.

M&T p18
They normally do one die roll of damage.

M&T p19
No Elemental may be hit by normal men unless magically armed.

Raising the question whether an elemental can be hit by a 2nd level fighter without a magic weapon?

M&T p29
1-4 Times Normal Strength
indicates it is twice normal strength

M&T p31
a Magic Arrow normally does from 2-7 points of damage
This potion doubles the normal speed attainable

M&T p32
Normal fires will not have any effect on a person who has gained Fire Resistance
makes a normal man act like a hero in all respects

U&WA p9
blasting sections of the stone equal to the remainder of their normal shape

U&WA p16
Exploration by foot is at normal speed.
exploration by air will be at half normal flying speed.

U&WA p17
indicates that there is a normal adventure at the

U&WA p27
Treat as normal missile fire
Treat as normal, except that the usual form of catapult fire will not be allowable.


So that's all of them. It is clear that the 3LBBs make a distinction between "super normal" and "normal" men, and that this is the distinction between those with and without PC levels. There are exactly five references to "super normal" and two to "above normal", all in reference to levelled fighters, magic-users and clerics.


Let us continue...

Every occurrence of the word fragment "fantas" in the 3LBBs
(I've greyed out the cases irrelevant to this argument)


M&M p1
Dedicated to all the fantasy wargamers
CHAINMAIL Fantasy Rules

M&M p2
Their fantasy rules were published
interest in fantasy wargaming
medieval fantasy campaign game
From the CHAINMAIL fantasy rules
not just fantasy buffs
to set up a fantasy campaign
in this fantasy game
towards a fantastic future
fantasy will soon become the major contender
These rules are strictly fantasy
the de Camp & Pratt fantasies
where the fantastic is fact

M&M p4
the major aspects of fantasy campaigns
designing your own fantastic-medieval campaign

M&M p5
all levels of fantastic-medieval wargame play

M&M p8
They also gain the advantages noted in the CHAINMAIL rules when fighting certain fantastic creatures.

M&M p18
Fighting Capability: This is a key to use in conjunction with the CHAINMAIL fantasy rule

M&T p37
will cause men and fantastic creatures who fail to make their morale throw to flee

U&WA p24
but some other fantastic world

U&WA p25
with single fantastic types fighting separately at 1:1

U&WA p36
everything herein is fantastic

So there are exactly three references to "fantastic creatures", the three Aldaron pointed out above.

The Land Battles reference (U&WA p25) is particular to mass battles rather than dungeon expeditions.

The Drums of Panic (M&T p37) seem likely to have been devised specifically for mass battles. Even if this is not so, "fantastic creatures" would very likely be read as a generic reference to "monsters" by any reader unfamiliar with Chainmail's "fantastic combat" classification, and nothing would be lost.

The Elves reference (M&M p8) is the only irrefutable reference to some other system of classifying certain creatures as "fantastic". My guess is that this snippet of information has been ignored by virtually all players of the alternative combat system for decades, without undue sufferance.


In my view, the compelling piece of information is that nowhere in the entire half volume dedicated entirely to the description of all the monsters, are any of them ever classified as "fantastic". Therefore, the classification of monsters as "fantastic" is entirely a carry over from Chainmail. It is not extant in the 3LBBs, other than via the three "curious" references to Chainmail, discussed above.

A fresh reader of the 3LBBs without any prior knowledge of Chainmail would therefore not be left with the impression that some monsters are "fantastic" and others are "normal".

May 18, 2012 11:13:17 GMT -6 aldarron said:

a clear distinction made between fantastic and normal combat in in the FAQ. Gygax specifically says "normal (non-fantastic) melee"

That is true, but as I argued above I believe this to be an unfortunate faux pas on behalf of the author.



edit: spelling

[talysman]

May 18, 2012 19:59:03 GMT -6 waysoftheearth said:

In my view, the compelling piece of information is that nowhere in the entire half volume dedicated entirely to the description of all the monsters, are any of them ever classified as "fantastic". Therefore, the classification of monsters as "fantastic" is entirely a carry over from Chainmail. It is not extant in the 3LBBs, other than via the three "curious" references to Chainmail, discussed above.

You might be overlooking something obvious, here: the monster tables in M&T. These cover two pages, and aren't organized alphabetically or numerically by hit dice. The organization is by loose "monster type".

First page starts with normal men, then the humanoids in hit dice order, then undead, then mythological and legendary beasts of various kinds. Second page continues with mythological and legendary beasts, then the "cleanup crew", then ends with horses, mules, insects and animals. I think other than the small number of creatures at the beginning and end of the list, the bulk of the monsters are all fantastic.

Some of the quotes you greyed out actually seem to suggest that "fantastic" is being used throughout in the more common sense (not normal or natural,) rather than as jargon unique to the game. It resembles Chainmail probably because Chainmail used the term in the same way: with the exception of heroes, wizards, and other high-level types, 1 HD men and humanoids are "normal", as are natural animals, while everything from mythology, legend, and fantasy literature is "fantastic".

[waysoftheearth]

May 19, 2012 0:00:19 GMT -6 talysman said:

I think other than the small number of creatures at the beginning and end of the list, the bulk of the monsters are all fantastic.

I think all monsters are fantastic too.

In the general sense of the word "fantastic" all D&D combat is fantastic. D&D is purely fantasy. 1 HD men and dwarfs and orcs fighting it out is pure fantasy -- regardless of which resolution system is used.

But I think it a very improbable stretch that a reader with fresh eyes would conclude from the 3LBBs that the alternative combat system distinguishes between "normal" and "fantastic" monsters based on the order they appear in M&T's list. Very improbable indeed.

The crux of it is what we already know. The Chainmail combat system is characterised by d6s and by its two distinct combat models; the normal and the fantastic. The Alternative combat system is characterised by d20s and its single combat model.

I'll admit I'm a bit... "bemused" by the level of resistance there seems to be to this reasonably straight forward observation.

I suppose others will be equally "bemused" by my own inability to see Chainmail in the pages of the 3LBBs.

Ah well, it is what it is

[aldarron]

There's no disagreement from me that normal means "regular" and "fantastic" means creatures of myth and fantasy. The "normal" creatures we've been discussing are all 1-2HD "man-types". The 3lbb's equate "normal" with man-type in most cases. I don't see anything difficult about accepting that as a general guide.

I'm also a bit confused by the switch in discussion to what "a reader with fresh eyes would conclude from the 3LBBs". In such a scenerio there's no point in discussing the FAQ and the 1 HD rule at all.

What I've been trying to get at is what Gygax intended as a rule in relation to the combat interaction of normal creatures and creatures of myth and fantasy, since he does make that distinction into a rule in the FAQ as a means of explaining what was meant in the 3lbb's.

Even if you wish to disregard everything but the 3lbb's you are still left with the Troll combat reference and the Bandit reference, which clearly indicate some creatures are normal man-types, some are not and the ones who aren't get multiple attacks against those who are. Keep in mind that there is absoloutely nothing about the Attack/Defense rule (M&T p5) that says it applies exclusively to CHAINMAIL or that it even applies to CHAINMAIL at all. In fact it references "Vol III" not CM.

capabilities versus normal men are simply a matter of allowing ne roll as a man-type for every hit die, with any bonuses being given to only one of the attacks, i.e. a Troll would attack six times, once with a +3 added to the die roll. (Combat is detailed in Vol. III.)

So a person with "fresh eyes" should certainly apply it to multiple attacks when fighting "normals" while using the alternate system. By extension, single attacks are implied when fighting supernormals, since multiple attacks only apply against "normal men". The only difference the FAQ introduces is the clarification that normal combat involves any creature of 1HD or less whether "man-type" or not, presumably, and that can be read as meaning only 1HD or less creatures if that's your preference.

Lastly, and meaning no disrespect, insisting that Gygax was mistaken the multiple times he referred to fantastic combat or "normal (non-fantastic) melee." stretches the imagination a lot farther than I'd be willing to go.

[Deleted]

May 19, 2012 8:10:28 GMT -6 aldarron said:

Lastly, and meaning no disrespect, insisting that Gygax was mistaken the multiple times he referred to fantastic combat or "normal (non-fantastic) melee." stretches the imagination a lot farther than I'd be willing to go.

None taken, though I would like point out I never actually made that claim. In point of fact, I was very careful to state "at times".

Peace, fellow gamer. I'm EOT on this discussion.

[aldarron]

May 19, 2012 8:28:05 GMT -6 @dubeers said:

May 19, 2012 8:10:28 GMT -6 aldarron said:

Lastly, and meaning no disrespect, insisting that Gygax was mistaken the multiple times he referred to fantastic combat or "normal (non-fantastic) melee." stretches the imagination a lot farther than I'd be willing to go.

None taken, though I would like point out I never actually made that claim. In point of fact, I was very careful to state "at times".

Peace, fellow gamer. I'm EOT on this discussion.

Heh, Cameron I was actually refering to Simons statement "That is true, but as I argued above I believe this to be an unfortunate faux pas on behalf of the author."

Sorry for being oblique.

[Deleted]

May 19, 2012 8:35:54 GMT -6 aldarron said:

Sorry for being oblique.

No apologies necessary. I'm enjoying the discussion. It is kind of fun to dissect the rules and attempt to get at exactly what he meant. I'm just going into lurker mode here because I'm getting out of my depth!

[waysoftheearth]

May 19, 2012 8:10:28 GMT -6 aldarron said:

I'm also a bit confused by the switch in discussion to what "a reader with fresh eyes would conclude from the 3LBBs".

This discussion began life as a question about whether multiple attacks should be applied.

Some folks argued "Yes, if you use chainmail".

I argued that multiple attacks should also be applied with the alternative combat system.

That led to the FAQ.

That led to a discussion about whether the alternative combat system recognises any distinction between "fantastic" and "normal" combat.

I have attempted to argue that it doesn't.

Others have argued that it does.

We delved deeper into whether the 3LBBs distinguishes "fantastic" monsters at all.

I have attempted to argue that it doesn't.

Others have argued that it does.

I introduced the "fresh eyes" concept into the argument in an attempt to have folks focus on what is actually in print in the 3LBBs.

In the context of the discussion, it seemed like a useful direction.

May 19, 2012 8:10:28 GMT -6 aldarron said:

I'm also a bit confused by the switch in discussion to what "a reader with fresh eyes would conclude from the 3LBBs". In such a scenerio there's no point in discussing the FAQ and the 1 HD rule at all.

Whether multiple attacks should be applied was the root of the whole discussion.

The FAQ supposedly clarifies what appears in the 3LBBs, and in particular it provides a detailed example of the alternative combat system, including multiple attacks.

Therefore, it is relevant.

May 19, 2012 8:10:28 GMT -6 aldarron said:

So a person with "fresh eyes" should certainly apply it to multiple attacks when fighting "normals" in the using the alternate system. By extension, single attacks are implied when fighting supernormals, since multiple attacks only apply against "normal men". The only difference the FAQ introduces is the clarification that normal combat involves any creature of 1HD or less whether "man-type" or not, presumably, and that can be read as meaning only 1HD or less creatures if that's your preference.

That is what I have been arguing all along. Multiple attacks do apply under the ACS.

The part of your statement (directly above) which I don't grok is the introduction of the Chainmail distinction between "normal combat" and by implication "fantastical" combat.

I agree that the 3LBBs recognise "normal men" and "supernormal men". More specifically, they qualify these as 1 (or perhaps even 1+1) HD man-types, and man-types with PC levels, respectively.

May 19, 2012 8:10:28 GMT -6 aldarron said:

insisting that Gygax was mistaken the multiple times he referred to fantastic combat or "normal (non-fantastic) melee." stretches the imagination a lot farther than I'd be willing to go.

Just for the record; I don't "insist", I'm pretty sure I wrote "I believe". It's all conjecture.

FWIW -- I have every regard for the original authors and certainly mean no disrespect to them or their works. Even so it is quite obvious that The Strategic Review was produced at "the hobbyist level". I'm sure it wouldn't take much digging at all to identify numerous minor errors here and there. Why should the FAQ in particular be immune?


A purely logical representation of the "faux pas" argument is:

OD&D is played with:
The Chainmail Combat System
OR
The Alternative Combat System

The Chainmail Combat System has:
Normal combat
AND
Fantastic combat

The Alternative Combat System has:
Alternative combat


The phrase in question from the FAQ is:

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.

It is beyond doubt that the above pertains to the alternate combat system, because d20s are being rolled.

It is illogical to then distinguish between "normal combat" and "fantastic combat" in the context of the Alternative combat system, as those concepts belong to the Chainmail combat system.


I see three possible explanations for this apparent logical impasse;

1) The above assertions are incorrect,
2) The insertion of "(non-fantastic)" above was a slip up,
or
3) (which has only just occurred to me...)
The insertion of "(non-fantastic)" above was intended as an explanatory note to those readers who WERE using Chainmail at the time, and were trying to understand the ACS. It would then read "this is treated as normal ACS combat, which is equivilent to non-fanstastic CM melee".


While 3) is possible, it seems unlikely to me.

THerefore it is 2) or 3). Which is the crux of this whole debate, isn't it?

May 19, 2012 8:10:28 GMT -6 aldarron said:

insisting that Gygax was mistaken the multiple times he referred to fantastic combat or "normal (non-fantastic) melee.

Where are these other cases where I have insisted EGG has mistakenly referenced fantastical combat, Aldaron?

I've listed all three references to the term that appear in the 3 LBBs, above. I don't believe I said any of them were mistakes.

I do believe I conjectured that two of them were relevant to mass battles, and hence chainmail, and that the third has been ignored by virtually all players of the ACS.

Please correct me if you see it otherwise.

[aldarron]

May 19, 2012 10:07:29 GMT -6 waysoftheearth said:

The phrase in question from the FAQ is:



It is beyond doubt that the above pertains to the alternate combat system, because d20s are being rolled.

It is illogical to then distinguish between "normal combat" and "fantastic combat" in the context of the Alternative combat system, as those concepts belong to the Chainmail combat system.

Honeslty Simon you're a stubborn son of a gun. Yes, completely agree that the above pertains to the alternate combat system and that is why it is completely illogical to ignore the sentences following that explains the difference between normal and fantastic combat:

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.

It's right there in Black and white print. A normal combat allows multiple hits; contrasted with the earlier statement

When fantastic combat is taking place there is normally only one
exchange of attacks per round.

Again, I don't see how it can be credibly argued that Gygax doesn't realize what he is saying here when he calls one fantastic and the other non-fantastic.

You've readily admitted that the 3lbbs recognize multiple attacks against normals.

That means the 3lbb's ALSO distinguish between TWO types of alternate comabat, one with multiple attacks and one with single exchanges, depending on whether "normals" are on one side or both.

How is that any different from the distinction CHAINMAIL makes, or the distinction the FAQ makes, and why wouldn't Gygax use the same terminology for the same game principle?

Think about this: Why is there a multiple attack rule against in the 3lbb's at all? Because that's how it works in CHAINMAIL. Each game carries the identical identical design philosophy from the same designer - fantasy creatures getting multile attacks vs normal men but not each other.

At times, in both CM and the FAQ Gygax uses the term fantastic and normal to distinguish these two kinds of combat. The 3lbb's use normal, supernormal, and fantastic for similar or identical meanings to that of CM and FAQ.

Mechanically, there is little to no difference to what each of us is saying occurs in alternate combat. The difference lies in whether you accept the label "fantastic" as a definable category. The only way to dismiss the fantastic category is to explain away the references to fantastic and normal creatures and combat in the 3lbb as peculiar outliers referring only to CHAINMAIL or as some kind of slip of the tongue, but even if you can convince yourself of that you are left with two "unlabeled" mystery kinds of 3lbb alternate combat that resemble CM and FAQ Normal and Fantastic in all pertinent details but name.

May 19, 2012 10:07:29 GMT -6 waysoftheearth said:

May 19, 2012 8:10:28 GMT -6 aldarron said:

insisting that Gygax was mistaken the multiple times he referred to fantastic combat or "normal (non-fantastic) melee.

Where are these other cases where I have insisted EGG has mistakenly referenced fantastical combat, Aldaron?

I've listed all three references to the term that appear in the 3 LBBs, above. I don't believe I said any of them were mistakes.

I do believe I conjectured that two of them were relevant to mass battles, and hence chainmail, and that the third has been ignored by virtually all players of the ACS.

Please correct me if you see it otherwise.

Your arguing that Gygax, despite his creation of the distinction in CHAINMAIL, wasn't conscious of it when he used the terms normal and fantastic and supernormal when the appear in combat contexts in the 3lbb's, and that in the unequivocal case in the FAQ he must simply have been mistaken. I say he was very much aware or the distinction between fantasy, (one attack each) combat and normal man, (multi-attack per HD) combat, throughout the combat related references in the 3lbb's and there is meaning to be found in their use.

[waysoftheearth]

May 19, 2012 16:08:28 GMT -6 aldarron said:

Honeslty Simon you're a stubborn son of a gun.

Well, these boards would be far less interesting if everyone agreed on everything

May 19, 2012 16:08:28 GMT -6 aldarron said:

Yes, completely agree that the above pertains to the alternate combat system and that is why it is completely illogical to ignore the sentences following that explains the difference between normal and fantastic combat:

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.

It's right there in Black and white print. A normal combat allows multiple hits; contrasted with the earlier statement

When fantastic combat is taking place there is normally only one
exchange of attacks per round.

Again, I don't see how it can be credibly argued that Gygax doesn't realize what he is saying here when he calls one fantastic and the other non-fantastic.

That is very well put Aldaron, thanks.

I can see exactly what you are saying, and it makes perfect sense.

However, given that there are EXACTLY ZERO occurrences of "fantastic combat", "fantastic melee", "normal combat" or "normal melee" in the 3LBBs I have always read the earlier statement "When fantastic combat is taking place there is normally only one exchange of attacks per round" as a reference to fantastic combat in Chainmail. Nowhere else is the concept of "fantastic combat" mentioned.

Perhaps, in that light, you might see why it is at least plausible that the later statement "this is treated as normal (non-fantastic) melee" could also refer to non-fantastic melee in Chainmail. Nowhere else is the concept of "non-fantastic melee" mentioned.

I'll concede that the so called "faux pas" probably wasn't one; EGG most likely did know what he was writing. More conjecture: I now think it plausible that the FAQ was an explanation of the ACS aimed at an audience already familiar with Chainmail. Thus it was sensible to use Chainmail terminology because it was meaningful to the audience of the time. This also explains why it is now so difficult for a new audience (including me), unfamiliar with Chainmail, to reconcile that same terminology.

May 19, 2012 16:08:28 GMT -6 aldarron said:

You've readily admitted that the 3lbbs recognize multiple attacks against normals.

I isn't like I grudgingly "admitted" it, Aldaron. It is plain for all to see.

In fact, it was I who first suggested (very early in this thread) that the ACS allows for multiple attacks.

May 19, 2012 16:08:28 GMT -6 aldarron said:

That means the 3lbb's ALSO distinguish between TWO types of alternate comabat, one with multiple attacks and one with single exchanges, depending on whether "normals" are on one side or both.

How is that any different from the distinction CHAINMAIL makes, or the distinction the FAQ makes

That is the view through Chainmail coloured lenses, yes.

Another view is that the ONE alternative combat system allows for one or more attacks per round, depending on whether the targets are or are not "normals".

The chief distinction for me is that Chainmail has various different systems of combat resolution; it has a normal(?) combat system based on troop type vs troop type, 1d6, and the outcome tables in appendix A. It has a man-to-man combat system based on weapon type vs armour type, 2d6, and the outcome tables in appendix B. And it has the fantasy supplement system based on monster type vs monster type, 2d6, and the outcome tables in appendix E. Three different systems of combat resolution.

Meanwhile, the ACS has exactly one system of combat resolution; HD/level versus AC, 1d20, and a damage roll.

Yes, Chainmail and the ACS both support single or multiple attacks. It doesn't make them the same thing, does it?

May 19, 2012 16:08:28 GMT -6 aldarron said:

why wouldn't Gygax use the same terminology for the same game principle?

I suspect that he would.

But the undeniable fact is that EGG did not use the phrases "normal combat", "fantastic combat", "normal melee" or "fantastic melee" anywhere in the 3LBBs.

May 19, 2012 16:08:28 GMT -6 aldarron said:

Think about this: Why is there a multiple attack rule against in the 3lbb's at all? Because that's how it works in CHAINMAIL. Each game carries the identical identical design philosophy from the same designer - fantasy creatures getting multile attacks vs normal men but not each other.

Why is there a multiple attack rule in the 3LBBs at all?

Not because there was such a rule in Chainmail. Rather, because it is a sound game design principle that monsters be threatening to men.

It was a sound game design principle when it went into Chainmail, and it continued to be a sound game design principle when it went into the 3LBBs.

May 19, 2012 16:08:28 GMT -6 aldarron said:

At times, in both CM and the FAQ Gygax uses the term fantastic and normal to distinguish these two kinds of combat. The 3lbb's use normal, supernormal, and fantastic for similar or identical meanings to that of CM and FAQ.

Your psychic powers must be greater than mine, Aldaron. We've enumerated every occurrence of the terms "normal" and "fantastic" that appear in the 3LBBs, above.

That list demonstrates plainly that the 3LBBs distinguish between "normal" and "supernormal" men; Normal men being those without PC levels, and supernormal men being those with PC levels (always above level 1).

Nowhere in the 3LBBs are the terms "normal" or "supernormal" used to distinguish two kinds of combat.

Only a prior knowledge of Chainmail would cause anyone to associate the distinction between normal and supernormal men given in the 3LBBs, with the distinction between normal and fantastical combat given in Chainmail.

May 19, 2012 16:08:28 GMT -6 aldarron said:

Mechanically, there is little to no difference to what each of us is saying occurs in alternate combat.

True indeed. I wonder then why we do persist so around the academic edges?

May 19, 2012 16:08:28 GMT -6 aldarron said:

The difference lies in whether you accept the label "fantastic" as a definable category.

That is it. Although I would qualify it as whether or not you accept the label "fantastic combat" as a definable category.

Apparently you do, and I don't. <shrug> In the end it hardly matters.

May 19, 2012 16:08:28 GMT -6 aldarron said:

The only way to dismiss the fantastic category is to explain away the references to fantastic and normal creatures and combat in the 3lbb as peculiar outliers

As I have stated repeatedly;

* There are no references to fantastic combat in the 3LBBs. You are imagining them.

* The distinction between "normal" and "supernormal" men given in the 3LBBs is completely distinct from any notion of "types" of combat. That is an association you bring from Chainmail.

* Of the three references to "fantastic creatures" in the 3LBBs:
** One is for mass battles with chainmail.
** Another is for a magic item specifically for use in mass battles, and thus also with chainmail.
** The third and final reference indeed belays the fact that there are some "fantastic creatures" about and that Elves are better at killing them. Once again, the distinction between "fantastic" and "non-fantastic" creatures (which itself doesn't exist in the 3LBBs if you read "fantastic creatures" simply as "monsters") is completely distinct from any notion of "types" of combat. You bring that association with you from Chainmail.

May 19, 2012 16:08:28 GMT -6 aldarron said:

you are left with two "unlabeled" mystery kinds of 3lbb alternate combat that resemble CM and FAQ Normal and Fantastic in all pertinent details but name.

It will be very illuminating to see where these "two kinds of alternative combat" are described in the 3LBBs Aldaron.

Perhaps it would have better been called the "Alternative Combat Systems"?





edit: spelling

[aldarron]

May 19, 2012 21:51:14 GMT -6 waysoftheearth said:

....Only a prior knowledge of Chainmail would cause anyone to associate the distinction between normal and supernormal men given in the 3LBBs, with the distinction between normal and fantastical combat given in Chainmail.

Quiet true. It's just that I'm interested more in author intent and less in reader (1974) perception. So my perspective is to look at 3lbb's in the context in which they were written rather than an an isolated artifact. Studying them for reader perception has it's own interest too, of course.

May 19, 2012 21:51:14 GMT -6 waysoftheearth said:

True indeed. I wonder then why we do persist so around the academic edges?

For the thrill of exploration and discovery, yes?

May 19, 2012 21:51:14 GMT -6 waysoftheearth said:

.....

* There are no references to fantastic combat in the 3LBBs. You are imagining them.

* The distinction between "normal" and "supernormal" men given in the 3LBBs is completely distinct from any notion of "types" of combat. That is an association you bring from Chainmail.

* Of the three references to "fantastic creatures" in the 3LBBs:
** One is for mass battles with chainmail.
** Another is for a magic item specifically for use in mass battles, and thus also with chainmail.
** The third and final reference indeed belays the fact that there are some "fantastic creatures" about and that Elves are better at killing them. Once again, the distinction between "fantastic" and "non-fantastic" creatures (which itself doesn't exist in the 3LBBs if you read "fantastic creatures" simply as "monsters") is completely distinct from any notion of "types" of combat. You bring that association with you from Chainmail.

Very true again, I bring that association to combat from CHAINMAIL; as did Gygax assuredly, as is evidenced by the FAQ. So it isn't simply a figment of my imagination, even if the 3lbb's alone are ambiguous about the idea.

May 19, 2012 21:51:14 GMT -6 waysoftheearth said:

May 19, 2012 16:08:28 GMT -6 aldarron said:

you are left with two "unlabeled" mystery kinds of 3lbb alternate combat that resemble CM and FAQ Normal and Fantastic in all pertinent details but name.

It will be very illuminating to see where these "two kinds of alternative combat" are described in the 3LBBs Aldaron.

Perhaps it would have better been called the "Alternative Combat Systems"?

Now now, never did imply there were two systems, I said there were two kinds of alternative combat. They are described in the Attack/Defense capabilities on page 5. of M&T as one kind involving "normal men" where non-normal, supernormal, fantastic, (call t what you will) are given multiple attacks by Hit Dice. The other kind of combat - fantastic combat as Gygax calls it in the FAQ and in CHAINMAIL - allows only one attack roll each as can be dudeuced from the same entry and is also evident in the wyvern fight on page 10 of UW&A.

[waysoftheearth]

May 20, 2012 6:18:35 GMT -6 aldarron said:

May 19, 2012 21:51:14 GMT -6 waysoftheearth said:

....Only a prior knowledge of Chainmail would cause anyone to associate the distinction between normal and supernormal men given in the 3LBBs, with the distinction between normal and fantastical combat given in Chainmail.

Quiet true. It's just that I'm interested more in author intent and less in reader (1974) perception.

Whereas I am more interested in reader (2012) perception. Clearly, that difference is at the root of many of our "discussions" Aldaron

May 20, 2012 6:18:35 GMT -6 aldarron said:

Very true again, I bring that association to combat from CHAINMAIL; as did Gygax assuredly, as is evidenced by the FAQ. So it isn't simply a figment of my imagination, even if the 3lbb's alone are ambiguous about the idea.

It's plausible that when considering Chainmail+3LBBs together the 3LBBs are "ambiguous" about the idea.

Taking the 3LBBs exactly as they are, they are more accurately "devoid" of the idea.


I guess I'm done now. Thanks for the discussion All, and Aldaron in particular.

[aldarron]

Been nagging me since we started the thread that I'd become aware of the Fantastic/non-fantastic concept from something somebody had posted somewhere but couldn't remember who. Stumbled on it today and thought I ought to mention it just to give the man his due.

swordsofminaria.blogspot.com/2010/03/understanding-man-to-man-combat.html?showComment=1338141336982#c4306156506543145013

[Deleted]

May 10, 2012 20:56:10 GMT -6 @austrodavicus said:

May 10, 2012 17:27:32 GMT -6 cooper said:

You are absolutely correct, the game you are describing is one Dr. Holmes wrote!

Wrong cooper, the game I am describing is the 3LBB reformatted into a single volume to better understand the ruleset. Having done so I am 100% convinced that neither of the other two games are necessary. They can be used to supplement the game, but are not needed to play it - and the original game of D&D loses nothing by playing it without them.

What is this reformatted LBB you speak of? Sounds like it would help me out a lot getting my feet off the ground with OD&D (house rules light). Sorry to ask, but I cant seem to track it down.

[philotomy]

I think there's enough uncertainty involved to require every referee to make up their own mind about how to handle this question. I like the idea of fantastic vs. non-fantastic/normal combat using the alternative system in D&D. Consequently, I consider any melee where one side has greater than 1HD to be "fantastic" and melee between 1HD (or less) combatants to be normal/non-fantastic. Wrote up my approach a long time ago, here; it's still the approach I'm using.