Chainmail,OD&D and tactics..

[bestialwarlust]

So the big complaint everyone in modern D&D games has is that because there's no menu list of "sk1llz" to pick from all fighters are the same( which I find is b.s anyway since almost all players in these games pick nearly the same feats. So they're all the same anyway).

Fighters in early versions were really more varied in how they were played. Without the restriction of feats, yes I see them as restrictions, fighters could be more varied.

So this leads me to some questions for those that played OD&D and chainmail. It seems to me that since a lot were already wargamers thier play style transitioned smoothly in regards to any combat that came about. They used the same tactics that many others (myself included having never played a war game) would have over looked in those early days.

What did you carry over from chainmail tactic wise? since we're working with a one minute abstract combat round. I know the attacking from second rank with a long weapon has been mentioned (so maybe a +2 to attack) what else was there?

I see this as a way for a fighter to differentiate himself. Do I go armored heavy and make running away and evastion harder? do I go in lighter armored to give myself an edge if I need to run?

I see browsing CM rules things such as if your weapon class is lower you get parry and first strike bonues against bigger weapons (I can see where first edition weapon speeds comes from )

So just dealing with integrating chainmail ideas into OD&D combat what would you point out to someone that's never played a wargame and all they had was OD&D and CM rules?

[cooper]

Dec 28, 2012 12:37:59 GMT -6 bestialwarlust said:

What did you carry over from chainmail tactic wise? since we're working with a one minute abstract combat round. I know the attacking from second rank with a long weapon has been mentioned (so maybe a +2 to attack) what else was there?

This will probably be a very interested thread, I look forward to it developing. That being said, the 1 minute combat round only came into effect with gygax's article in the Strategic Review. If using only the text of the LBB and CHAINMAIL, the combat round is 6 seconds (in Eldritch Wizardry this is modifed to 10 seconds), the combat turn is 1 minute, the exploration turn is 10 minutes indoors and 1 day out doors. As Gygax explained in strategic review, he revised his game because it was difficult to disengage from combat with 6 second rounds (because movement was only refreshed on the 1 minute turn) which in turn led to bloodbaths. So the "abstract" combat only came into effect post Men and Magic and was codified officially in Ad&d.

Strategically, The benefit of the 6 second round however, is that wizard spells are probably limited to the 1 minute turn, which balances a wizards ranged attack of 5d6 fireball or sleep spell, with a close quarters melee fighter able to land roughly 5d6 damage worth of blows during the combat "turn" as well (assuming half of his attacks land during the turn). Further strategic benefit from the original round length is that movement rates during combat above and below ground are realistic.

Feats actually predate 0d&d. The hero had an "inspiring presence" and "dragonslayer" special ability with a bow and the superhero had the ability to create a fear effect when charging foes. So, It's simple enough to grant 2 special abilities at 4th and another at 8th level.

[Deleted]

I have much to say on this. It will be a full chapter in my book, "We Made Up Some Sh*t We Thought Would Be Fun," coming soon to Kickstarter.

[Deleted]

Dec 28, 2012 16:50:31 GMT -6 cooper said:

If using only the text of the LBB and CHAINMAIL, the combat round is 6 seconds

Citation, please. On page 8 of MY copy of Chainmail it says "one turn is roughly equivalent to one minute."

[bestialwarlust]

Dec 28, 2012 16:50:31 GMT -6 cooper said:

Dec 28, 2012 12:37:59 GMT -6 bestialwarlust said:

What did you carry over from chainmail tactic wise? since we're working with a one minute abstract combat round. I know the attacking from second rank with a long weapon has been mentioned (so maybe a +2 to attack) what else was there?

This will probably be a very interested thread, I look forward to it developing. That being said, the 1 minute combat round only came into effect with gygax's article in the Strategic Review. If using only the text of the LBB and CHAINMAIL, the combat round is 6 seconds (in Eldritch Wizardry this is modifed to 10 seconds), the combat turn is 1 minute, the exploration turn is 10 minutes indoors and 1 day out doors. As Gygax explained in strategic review, he revised his game because it was difficult to disengage from combat with 6 second rounds (because movement was only refreshed on the 1 minute turn) which in turn led to bloodbaths. So the "abstract" combat only came into effect post Men and Magic and was codified officially in Ad&d.

Strategically, The benefit of the 6 second round however, is that wizard spells are probably limited to the 1 minute turn, which balances a wizards ranged attack of 5d6 fireball or sleep spell, with a close quarters melee fighter able to land roughly 5d6 damage worth of blows during the combat "turn" as well (assuming half of his attacks land during the turn). Further strategic benefit from the original round length is that movement rates during combat above and below ground are realistic.

Feats actually predate 0d&d. The hero had an "inspiring presence" and "dragonslayer" special ability with a bow and the superhero had the ability to create a fear effect when charging foes. So, It's simple enough to grant 2 special abilities at 4th and another at 8th level.

True but at this point I'm not looking to grant feats. This is more of a how did your wargaming roots carry over with tactics/strategy and then how did they affect the combat round.

As for me when I started back in 81 I started with the moldvay/cook then moved on to AD&D. Honestly we never used a lot of the tactics and modifiers in the game. None of the people I gamed with had a wargaming background.

And Until the 90's I always thought od&d was the redbox it wasn't until later I discovered the LBB's. Thanks to the internet.

[cooper]

Dec 28, 2012 18:13:10 GMT -6 @gronanofsimmerya said:

Dec 28, 2012 16:50:31 GMT -6 cooper said:

If using only the text of the LBB and CHAINMAIL, the combat round is 6 seconds

Citation, please. On page 8 of MY copy of Chainmail it says "one turn is roughly equivalent to one minute."

There are numerous mentions of multiple rounds of melee per combat turn in CHAINMAIL, the melee turn is of course 1 minute long, but CM never mentions how long a melee round is; only saying that there are multiple rounds. Men and Magic is the first place that explains how many and how long a round is (ten to the combat turn...not the exploration turn).

the rules on pg. 11 state that 3 rounds of melee produce a fatigue effect. To the morale rules on pg. 15&16 where the victorious HH continue to melee that turn if they have sufficient moves remaining to contact the HF. there have been many posts on this in the CHAINMAIL sub forum.

Gygax in Dragon issue #15 changed the rules for d&d, but that doesn't have any bearing on how the rules were initially written. I use 1 minute rounds for D&D like everyone else, because it's cinematic and I don't use miniatures, not because the rules say that.

If you're interested in a play by play of page 15+16 of CM with pictures, See my post here.

[bestialwarlust]

Dec 28, 2012 19:44:00 GMT -6 cooper said:

Dec 28, 2012 18:13:10 GMT -6 @gronanofsimmerya said:

Citation, please. On page 8 of MY copy of Chainmail it says "one turn is roughly equivalent to one minute."

There are numerous mentions of multiple rounds of melee per combat turn in CHAINMAIL, the melee turn is of course 1 minute long, but CM never mentions how long a melee round is; only saying that there are multiple rounds. Men and Magic is the first place that explains how many and how long a round is (ten to the combat turn...not the exploration turn).

the rules on pg. 11 state that 3 rounds of melee produce a fatigue effect. To the morale rules on pg. 15&16 where the victorious HH continue to melee that turn if they have sufficient moves remaining to contact the HF. there have been many posts on this in the CHAINMAIL sub forum.

Gygax in Dragon issue #15 changed the rules for d&d, but that doesn't have any bearing on how the rules were initially written. I use 1 minute rounds for D&D like everyone else, because it's cinematic and I don't use miniatures, not because the rules say that.

If you're interested in a play by play of page 15+16 of CM with pictures, See my post here.

Thanks I'll check that out

[Finarvyn]

Our group didn't do much with fancy tactics from Chainmail. Indeed, we dropped most of the rules such as weapon type in favor of a simplistic combat system. The advantage that fighters held was basically the additional hit points, better armor, and often better choice of magical weaponry.

[Deleted]

Dec 28, 2012 19:44:00 GMT -6 cooper said:

Dec 28, 2012 18:13:10 GMT -6 @gronanofsimmerya said:

Citation, please. On page 8 of MY copy of Chainmail it says "one turn is roughly equivalent to one minute."

There are numerous mentions of multiple rounds of melee per combat turn in CHAINMAIL, the melee turn is of course 1 minute long, but CM never mentions how long a melee round is; only saying that there are multiple rounds. Men and Magic is the first place that explains how many and how long a round is (ten to the combat turn...not the exploration turn).

the rules on pg. 11 state that 3 rounds of melee produce a fatigue effect. To the morale rules on pg. 15&16 where the victorious HH continue to melee that turn if they have sufficient moves remaining to contact the HF. there have been many posts on this in the CHAINMAIL sub forum.

Gygax in Dragon issue #15 changed the rules for d&d, but that doesn't have any bearing on how the rules were initially written. I use 1 minute rounds for D&D like everyone else, because it's cinematic and I don't use miniatures, not because the rules say that.

If you're interested in a play by play of page 15+16 of CM with pictures, See my post here.

IN other words, CHAINMAIL does not actually say a melee round is six seconds. Which was my point. You don't have a citation because it does not exist; your statement is simply not true.


And I don't need to read a play by play, I've played so many games of CHAINMAIL I've lost count.

[Stormcrow]

Cooper's been trying to prove that the books use a six- or ten-second combat turn, a one-minute movement turn, and a ten-minute exploration turn. He likes to state this as fact.

I don't buy it for a minute-long combat turn.

[cooper]

Listen, I'm not going to go back and forth with you two on this issue, especially since you have no interest in reading important threads on the matter. Doubly so since this thread has been derailed. You play your way and I'll play my way.

Peace.

[Deleted]

"Reading important threads?" How about "reading the game as written?"

CHAINMAIL does NOT have six second melee rounds. Period. And no amount of flouncing your blonde curls about "no interest in reading important threads" will change the words that have actually been WRITTEN.

[runequester]

D&D has always been tactical, but those tactics are less about dice modifiers than circumstances:

Retreat and fight the enemy at a chokepoint
Attack from both sides
Fighters hold them up, while the thief tries to gank the enemy leader
You guys will move around here, while we shoot arrows from here
Cut the ropes to the bridge when the orcs come over

etc etc

[cooper]

Dec 28, 2012 23:21:54 GMT -6 @gronanofsimmerya said:

"Reading important threads?" How about "reading the game as written?"

CHAINMAIL does NOT have six second melee rounds. Period. And no amount of flouncing your blonde curls about "no interest in reading important threads" will change the words that have actually been WRITTEN.

Jeebus Crist! How many times do I have to write it down that the exact length of the round was first codified in men and magic...I'm pretty sure I'm at #4 in this thread now. Wether you want to or don't want to back-date it to apply CHAINMAIL is your own business, but you are tilting at windmills Lord Grumpy.

Merry Christmas.

[Finarvyn]

[booming Admin voice]
C'mon, lads. Let's play nice. Please?
[/booming Admin voice]

[bestialwarlust]

Dec 29, 2012 9:24:10 GMT -6 runequester said:

D&D has always been tactical, but those tactics are less about dice modifiers than circumstances:

Retreat and fight the enemy at a chokepoint
Attack from both sides
Fighters hold them up, while the thief tries to gank the enemy leader
You guys will move around here, while we shoot arrows from here
Cut the ropes to the bridge when the orcs come over

etc etc

I think this is what is missed then. The thought seems to be unless you get a die modifer it's not a tactic/strategy. At least that's the way I'm seeing the discussions go now. players trying to stack die modifers, which isn't a bad thing. But it's more of "let's interact with the rules and less with the world" instead of imagining what's going on and more digging through rules for modifiers.

[runequester]

Dec 29, 2012 13:49:17 GMT -6 bestialwarlust said:

I think this is what is missed then. The thought seems to be unless you get a die modifer it's not a tactic/strategy. At least that's the way I'm seeing the discussions go now. players trying to stack die modifers, which isn't a bad thing. But it's more of "let's interact with the rules and less with the world" instead of imagining what's going on and more digging through rules for modifiers.

I think so yeah. I remember having this exact conversation with a friend of mine who was really big into 3.5 D&D, while I ran an original AD&D campaign. He was at a loss as to how the combat could be "tactical" without rules for it, while I felt that almost every battle was tactical, since positioning and planning was paramount.


And sometimes, its just fun, like the party getting a minotaur to roar, and hurling a potion of poison into its maw

[apparition13]

Other than ambushes, tactics were always things like maneuvering into positions where the party outnumbered the monsters at that point. If you were outnumbered 20-6 by the goblins, you got into a position where you outnumber them 6-3 (say at a flank). Or find a choke point where you can hold them off 2v2 while the casters and archers can attack with impunity.

Dice bonuses could still come into play, say for throwing oil under the giant's feet, but they are situational and up to DM's discretion.