|
|
Post by Necropraxis on Jul 11, 2012 14:14:08 GMT -6
I was just looking through Greyhawk, and I can't find what track the thief is intended to use for attack progression using the alternative combat system. Am I missing something?
My inclination is to give them the magic-user advancement schedule. How do other people do it?
Also, I'm looking at the fighting capability rating for the classes for the standard (Chainmail) combat system. Fighters start at "Man + 1" but both magic-users and clerics start and "Man". However, the alternative combat system example level groupings seem to indicate that first through fifth level magic-users are on par with first through third level fighters. I kind of like the simplicity of this, but I'm wondering if some people make up a "Man" tier that is slightly weaker than the first level fighter in attack strength.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mushgnome on Jul 11, 2012 14:25:12 GMT -6
I've always had thieves use the cleric advancement rate, but I couldn't give you a citation for this off the top of my head. I'm fine with fighters getting a flat +1 to hit compared with the other classes; I don't think it breaks the game.  |
|
|
|
Post by noffham on Jul 11, 2012 14:30:25 GMT -6
Greyhawk pg. 13 under Alternative Combat System:
"Treat Thieves as Clerics for purposes of advance in steps - four levels/group (1-4, 5-8, 9-12, etc.) With regard to saving throws treat Thieves as Magic-Users."
|
|
|
|
Post by Necropraxis on Jul 11, 2012 14:43:33 GMT -6
Thanks noffham! I suspected I was missing it.
|
|
|
|
Post by waysoftheearth on Jul 11, 2012 23:41:24 GMT -6
Also, I'm looking at the fighting capability rating for the classes for the standard (Chainmail) combat system. Fighters start at "Man + 1" but both magic-users and clerics start and "Man". However, the alternative combat system example level groupings seem to indicate that first through fifth level magic-users are on par with first through third level fighters. I kind of like the simplicity of this, but I'm wondering if some people make up a "Man" tier that is slightly weaker than the first level fighter in attack strength. I'm pretty sure that most players (including me) overlook, overrule, or ignore it, but if you play strictly "by the book" a 1st level fighter does attack at +1 to hit versus enemy with 1 (or fewer) HD*, because he has "1+1" HD himself. The trailing "+1" is added to his attack rolls against 1 HD enemy. At 2nd level and beyond, they instead have multiple attacks per round against such enemy. That aside, you may (or may not) be interested in the adjusted attack matrix that I posted a while back... Enjoy * There have been some interesting discussions around exactly what the "1 HD" limit for fighter attacks actually is. I believe the ultimate conclusion to this was that fighters get adjusted and/or multiple attacks per round versus "normals", which are any non-levelled man-like and man-sized creatures, including men (some with 1+1 HD), dwarves, halflings, elves (with 1+1 HD), cavemen (with 2HD), and so on. |
|
|
|
Post by Finarvyn on Jul 12, 2012 4:29:58 GMT -6
Greyhawk pg. 13 under Alternative Combat System: "Treat Thieves as Clerics for purposes of advance in steps - four levels/group (1-4, 5-8, 9-12, etc.) With regard to saving throws treat Thieves as Magic-Users." The other thing of interest is that on p.11 of Greyhawk the "Fighting Capability" chart for the thief essentially mirrors that of the Magic-user from Men & Magic. That would seem to support using the Magic-user chart. In the 1970's, my group always assumed that the thief fought like a cleric. It wasn't until I did a "Fighting Capabillity" revival campaign a few years ago that I noticed the parallel. |
|
|
|
Post by Necropraxis on Jul 12, 2012 8:18:19 GMT -6
My reading is that the attack matrix is supposed to supersede and replace the fighting capability rating (which is used for Chainmail combat), though it is interesting to integrate them.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mushgnome on Jul 12, 2012 8:32:02 GMT -6
Also remember that Chainmail Man-to-Man uses 2d6 instead of d20, so that "Man+1" bonus is weightier. For example let's look at dagger/hand axe/spear vs plate & shield. In Chainmail a Man needs 12 on 2d6 to hit, so Man+1 is 300% more likely to hit (3 in 36 rather than 1 in 36). In D&D any 1st level PC needs 17 on 1d20 to hit AC2. Hypothetically granting +1 to the Fighting Man increases his odds from 4 in 20 to 5 in 20, only a 25% increase.
If you are using the 1d6-based troop tables then the +1 is even more of a game-changer. It is unclear to many readers which of the 3 combat systems in Chainmail (troop, man-to-man, fantasy) the D&D authors had in mind when they created the Fighting Capability tables.
|
|
|
|
Post by Necropraxis on Jul 12, 2012 9:14:25 GMT -6
In D&D any 1st level PC needs 17 on 1d20 to hit AC2. Hypothetically granting +1 to the Fighting Man increases his odds from 4 in 20 to 5 in 20, only a 25% increase. The table on page 19 of Men & Magic seems to be intended for fighters, so I think you would need to give other classes a -1 (or add another weaker tier for normal men, which would include first level PCs of non-fighter classes). |
|
|
|
Post by Mushgnome on Jul 12, 2012 9:22:19 GMT -6
In D&D any 1st level PC needs 17 on 1d20 to hit AC2. Hypothetically granting +1 to the Fighting Man increases his odds from 4 in 20 to 5 in 20, only a 25% increase. The table on page 19 of Men & Magic seems to be intended for fighters, so I think you would need to give other classes a -1 (or add another weaker tier for normal men, which would include first level PCs of non-fighter classes). Page 19 is explicit that "Normal men equal 1st level fighters" so are you arguing that cleric/MU/thief are worse at fighting than normal men? (edit) I think I understand what you meant to say. It's 6 of one, half dozen of another, but personally my preference would be to give the fighter +1 so they are equivalent to a 1+1HD monster, rather than penalize the other classes (and normal men). |
|
|
|
Post by Necropraxis on Jul 12, 2012 10:09:55 GMT -6
Page 19 is explicit that "Normal men equal 1st level fighters" so are you arguing that cleric/MU/thief are worse at fighting than normal men? Well, I'm looking at page 17 and it says that Veterans have a fighting capability of "Man + 1" which seems to contradict the idea that first level fighters are equal to normal men. Magic-users and clerics are given the fighting capability of "Man". Thus, it seems to me that there is no column on Attack Matrix 1 for normal men. So, clerics and magic-users fight as normal men, but fighters are better than normal men, even at first level. No? |
|
|
|
Post by Mushgnome on Jul 12, 2012 10:17:32 GMT -6
Page 19 is explicit that "Normal men equal 1st level fighters" so are you arguing that cleric/MU/thief are worse at fighting than normal men? Well, I'm looking at page 17 and it says that Veterans have a fighting capability of "Man + 1" which seems to contradict the idea that first level fighters are equal to normal men. Magic-users and clerics are given the fighting capability of "Man". Thus, it seems to me that there is no column on Attack Matrix 1 for normal men. So, clerics and magic-users fight as normal men, but fighters are better than normal men, even at first level. No? My interpretation has always been that the "Fighting Capability" column has no meaning or relevance unless you are using Chainmail to resolve combat (instead of the Alternative Combat System that became the standard for all future editions of the game). Certainly the text below the table on p. 19 is explicit that fighting men have no bonus to hit over normal men until they achieve 4th level and the rank of Hero. While this is counter-intuitive to me from a game design perspective, it makes perfect sense from a literary/storytelling point-of-view: there is "something special" that distinguishes a Hero from a Man, and fighting-men reach this threshold before their peers. |
|
