CM needs translation for OD&D

[derv]

Let me start by saying, I've never played Chainmail. I read through the rules and tried to make sense of discussion on the forum here. It seems some have attempted to, or actually do, use the Chainmail system to resolve combat in their OD&D games beyond using it for mass combat.

The conversations get convoluted for me when terminology from the different systems get used interchangeably with no attempt to explain how the mechanics are actually being used. Basically, there seems to be four systems that are used, discussed, and confused in conversation interchangeably. They are Chainmail Mass Combat, CM Man-to-Man, CM Fantasy Combat, and the M&M Alternative Combat System (also possibly M&M Fighting Capability per class).

What I'd like is clarification on how people use Chainmail's d6 combat resolutions for man-to-man situations, including "fantastic" encounters, with Player Characters. I just can not seem to surmise all the different rules and piece them together into what would be a concise workable system. It seems that the different rules could be combined and maybe that's how the ACS came to be. The different troop types in CM (LF, HF, AF, LH, MH, HH) could possibly be translated into HD for attack purposes. Light Foot would equal <1 HD, Heavy Foot would be equal to 1 HD, so as per the Appendix D Fantasy Ref Table, a Troll = 6 HF and a Hero= 4 HF. Every fantastic creature could be defined in this way for attacks. Dragons, Demons, and such, might be given equivalents of Hero to SuperHero Fighting Capabilities.

The number of attacks, in my opinion, should be relative to the HD of the attacker and the defender similiar to what is found in Appendix A of CM. I'm not really clear why the Fantasy Combat Table of Appendix E was even necessary? On the FRT, Giants are clearly listed as equal to 12 men (HF). Why couldn't the other fantastic creatures be similarly described? Even the Appendix B Man-to-Man Melee table does not seem to be the best blend. Here they take part of the CM system for defense, but then use weapons for the attack value. Why did they not stick with Troop Type, HD, or Fighting Capability?

I've been scouring threads on here for clarity to these questions. For those that are old hands, please excuse my ignorance. What I'm looking for is an explanation to what was meant on page 18 of M&M, when it says that "Fighting Capability" is a key to use in conjunction with Chainmail......then goes on to say, "an alternative system will be given later for those who prefer a different method." In other words this is an alternative combat resolution system to Chainmail. How were they just using Chainmail with OD&D?

[Stormcrow]

How were they just using Chainmail with OD&D?

They weren't.

D&D was conceived of as an expansion of Chainmail's Fantasy Supplement, not as a separate game. When you read Men & Magic and Monsters & Treasure, constantly remind yourself, "This is a miniatures wargame. This is a miniatures wargame." Forget everything you know about D&D. Don't stop doing that until you get to The Underworld & Wilderness Adventures.

In Chainmail, a Hero fights as four men in Mass Combat and as a Hero in Fantasy Combat. A Superhero fights as eight men in Mass Combat and as a Superhero in Fantasy Combat. D&D expands this to a whole class of fighting-men: Veterans, Warriors, Swordsmen, Heroes, Swashbucklers, Myrmidons, Champions, Superheroes, and Lords. Each is given a Fighting Capability for Mass and/or Fantasy Combat. In a Chainmail battle, you can now use any of these figures.

Wizards are expanded into a whole class of magic-users: Mediums, Seers, Conjurers, Theurgists, Thaumaturgists, Magicians, Enchanters, Warlocks, Sorcerers, Necromancers, and Wizards. These are likewise given a Fighting Capability for Mass and/or Fantasy Combat.

A third class of figures, clerics, is introduced, and each is given its Fighting Capability in Mass and/or Fantasy Combat.

Another concept added to the game is that of hit points. Each figure type is given a number of dice to determine its hit points, and each successful hit on that figure reduces one die's worth of hit points. Unlike standard Chainmail, a figure is not killed until its hit points reach zero.

D&D then goes on to give you a new method of resolving combat that pits the skill level of the attacker against the armor of the defender. This method of combat is for use with a 1:1 figure ratio, so it isn't for use in Mass Combat. The other 1:1 combat system is Man-to-Man Combat, but that doesn't take into account the skill level of the attacker, so it's really only for use by normal men—though some suggest that you give an attacker one attack roll per round for each man the figure counts as in Mass Combat (monsters count as one man per hit die).

The D&D Combat system, including Saving Throws, is designed to handle the unique situations found in D&D, which aren't explained until Volume 3. D&D isn't anything but an expanded wargame until you read The Underworld & Wilderness Adventures.

So the original players didn't just use Chainmail rules while wandering around in dungeons. D&D doesn't have a Chainmail-shaped hole you can just plug it into. You could squeeze the rules into doing this, but the creators just made up a new table that better accounted for the kinds of battles and hazards found on adventures. They kept backward-compatibility with Chainmail, because D&D wasn't played in a vacuum: adventures took place in the context of a campaign, in which their characters would eventually get involved in rulership and armies, and Chainmail battles would be staged. If your Champion leads a unit in an army, you know that he fights in Mass Combat as eight men -1 and in Fantasy Combat as a Superhero -1. If he is challenged to a joust by a knight in a castle, he can use the Jousting Matrix to resolve the fight. If he is fighting a dragon in a dungeon he can use D&D Combat. If he is the target of a spell, he can make a Saving Throw. If he is fighting against soldiers on a battlement, and the players want to take into account the weapons and armor of the fighters, he can make eight rolls on the Man-to-Man Tables for every one roll each soldier gets. Alternatively, if the exact arms of the fighters is not important, he can use D&D Combat to resolve the fight with much less dice-rolling.

[derv]

Thanks Stormcrow for your perspective on this subject. I know my OP may be an exercise in futility. But I'm certain I've read discussions to the effect that others have used the CM rules for all their combat resolutions in OD&D. The other thing that comes to mind, as far as I understand it, is that Gary first developed Chainmail. Then, Dave took those rules and adapted them to his fantasy campaign. Gary caught wind of this, took Daves notes and further developed them, eventually publishing them as the 3LBB's. I'm not a person heavily invested in the details of the games development history. Though, it seems there must have been a step between Chainmail and the Alternative Combat System found in M&M. I gather that when you say "D&D Combat System" that you are referring to the Alternative Combat System? Why did they call it that? Are you suggesting that people bought OD&D to expand their Chainmail campaigns only (basically ignoring The Underworld & Wilderness Adventures book) and that is why we find the language in M&M that says, "an alternative system will be given later for those who prefer a different method." I find that word "prefer" odd language if there wasn't another option or if the option was that you can play this game of D&D, then take your Hero back to Chainmail if you like.

Some of the other things you pointed out seem to possibly add granularity to Chainmail. I may be barking up the wrong tree here though. Hit points based on HD offers a better survivability for characters and a hit will not necessarily lower a defenders HD or equal a kill. Additionally, the idea of Hero, Superhero, Wizard becomes linked to HD as detailed under classes in M&M (btw- I edited the OP to reflect that Hero = 4 HF/HD). Finally, the introduction of AC has 8 levels that seem to correlate to Chainmail's Man-to-Man Table, but is instead based on d20. I'm curious if Saving Throws was an entirely new idea to the 3 LBB's or if it was used in Chainmail with the Fantasy Combat Suppliment too?

Thanks again for the explanations. I guess the best exercise to understanding would be to try playing Chainmail.

[Stormcrow]

Oct 12, 2013 15:43:44 GMT -6 derv said:

But I'm certain I've read discussions to the effect that others have used the CM rules for all their combat resolutions in OD&D.

Some here have undertaken this effort, yes.

The other thing that comes to mind, as far as I understand it, is that Gary first developed Chainmail. Then, Dave took those rules and adapted them to his fantasy campaign. Gary caught wind of this, took Daves notes and further developed them, eventually publishing them as the 3LBB's. I'm not a person heavily invested in the details of the games development history. Though, it seems there must have been a step between Chainmail and the Alternative Combat System found in M&M.

I've heard it told that when Dave first started letting players invest personality into their figures they were still using Chainmail. But I would also assume that Dave's rules were not enough like published D&D that you could just copy over the combat rules into D&D. Gronan might be able to tell you more.

I gather that when you say "D&D Combat System" that you are referring to the Alternative Combat System? Why did they call it that?

Because Chainmail already had several combat systems, and here's this new supplement called D&D that adds yet another one to your campaign.

Are you suggesting that people bought OD&D to expand their Chainmail campaigns only (basically ignoring The Underworld & Wilderness Adventures book)

No. The game was written for a target audience of people who played wargames campaigns, and especially Chainmail. Gary and company were surprised when questions upon questions were mailed in from people who didn't play wargames and didn't have the necessary background to understand the rules.

and that is why we find the language in M&M that says, "an alternative system will be given later for those who prefer a different method." I find that word "prefer" odd language if there wasn't another option or if the option was that you can play this game of D&D, then take your Hero back to Chainmail if you like.

This hearkens back to the "do it yourself" mantra of D&D and wargamers of the period. It means, here's a system you may find better suited to heroic adventuring than the systems already in Chainmail. They're not telling you what to do; they're offering an alternative.

D&D wasn't a separate game from Chainmail; both were elements of a wargaming campaign. If your Hero was wandering around dungeons, you used the D&D tables. If he was leading a unit into battle, you used the Chainmail tables. You also changed ground and time scales for the different situations. It was all part of one big game.

Some of the other things you pointed out seem to possibly add granularity to Chainmail.

That's exactly what they were trying to do.

Additionally, the idea of Hero, Superhero, Wizard becomes linked to HD as detailed under classes in M&M

Well, they're actually "linked" to levels. "Hit dice" for characters only means "how many six-sided dice you roll to determine how many hit points you have." Monster levels are (kinda-sorta) equal to their hit dice.

(btw- I edited the OP to reflect that Hero = 4 HF/HD). Finally, the introduction of AC has 8 levels that seem to correlate to Chainmail's Man-to-Man Table, but is instead based on d20.

I am given to understand that an earlier, unpublished version of the combat tables used percentage dice. The important part is not what kind of dice you use to determine values, but that D&D combat compares level to armor class, while Chainmail's Man-to-Man tables compare weapon class to armor class.

I'm curious if Saving Throws was an entirely new idea to the 3 LBB's or if it was used in Chainmail with the Fantasy Combat Suppliment too?

Saving throws first appeared in wargames in the '60s. Chainmail had saving throws too: for instance, Heroes, Superheroes, and Wraiths get saving throws versus lightning bolts.

[derv]

Believe it or not, your comments have been very helpful in allowing me to unpack Chainmail in relation to OD&D.

D&D wasn't a separate game from Chainmail; both were elements of a wargaming campaign. If your Hero was wandering around dungeons, you used the D&D tables. If he was leading a unit into battle, you used the Chainmail tables. You also changed ground and time scales for the different situations. It was all part of one big game.

I started playing D&D with the Moldvay/Cook/Marsh boxed sets. Even though the White Box and Chainmail were still on the shelf at my local game store, I never gave them much thought at the time and did not come from a wargaming background. That being said, it can be difficult to try and wrap your head around what the original players and creators were doing at the time OD&D first came out by simply looking back and speculating. I think I was looking at OD&D as an expansion to Chainmail, but what you are saying is that OD&D was an expansion to a Campaign (whether Chainmail or not). It was another rules system to include in your toolkit for an ongoing campaign.

I also uncovered a thread that pointed me to Jason Vey's "Forbidden Lore" supplement. It goes down the road of only using Chainmails Combat Resolution for your OD&D game. It seemed to answer many of my questions, but he takes a slightly different approach in certain areas than I would.

Anyway, I've learned alot recently and I think I can now decipher what others are talking about when they are discussing Chainmail.

[strangebrew]

I was under the impression that Gary and co. pretty much used the alternate combat table (which soon became the D&D standard) pretty exclusively early on, basically once the books were printed and the game was somewhat formalized. Chainmail was of course compatible, but the game really became its own beast pretty quickly. I'm not really sure if this is accurate, so someone please correct me if I'm wrong.

[cooper]

Oct 12, 2013 22:06:34 GMT -6 strangebrew said:

I was under the impression that Gary and co. pretty much used the alternate combat table (which soon became the D&D standard) pretty exclusively early on, basically once the books were printed and the game was somewhat formalized. Chainmail was of course compatible, but the game really became its own beast pretty quickly. I'm not really sure if this is accurate, so someone please correct me if I'm wrong.

Stormcrow says everything I was thinking.

Gary published articles about mass battles using well known characters (undoubtably run with CHAINMAIL and not the alternate combat system) and Arneson built his entire campaign before d&d was published. Yes they used the alternate combat system once they invented it, but they were playing d&d long before they published d&d. D&D wasn't a combat system, there were lots of those already. D&D was how to build a character from 1-10th level instead of just 4th and 8th, d&d was about reaction rolls, chasses in the dungeon, mapping, loot distribution, magic items, hex-crawling, etc. People get hung up on the combat systems for some reason. The combat resolution system doesn't matter. D&D was a unified system of war-game/diplomacy/arial combat/ship combat/wilderness survival /exploration all wrapped into one Tolkien inspired (later pulp author) game. Nobody had done that before. People played diplomacy and people played wargames, people played the wilderness survival game, but they didn't do it all with a single avatar known as a, "player character" that transcended all the games.

Which combat resolution system a group decided upon was only one small mini-game in a large game of mini-games known collectively as, Dungeons and Dragons.

[derv]

Which combat resolution system a group decided upon was only one small mini-game in a large game of mini-games known collectively as, Dungeons and Dragons.

The thing is, if you never read Chainmail and come from a D&D roleplaying background, then you read Chainmail after the fact, there are all kinds of elements that jump out at you in D&D that are a direct result of wargaming and possibly, Chainmail uniquely. Some of these elements include movement rates, hex crawls, grappling, Hit Dice, turns and rounds, morale, areas of effect for spells, and missile ranges. It becomes even more interesting when you compare the mechanics of Chainmail to more modern games, that may have been trying to bridge the gap, whether knowingly or unknowingly, such as TFT and Pathfinder (and possibly D&DNext?).

edit: Another interesting piece of content found in Chainmail is located under the heading called, "General Line-Up". It is essentially the early "alignment" system. Now I know where the term came from and why.

[jacar]

Check out Spellcraft and Swordplay. It was designed as an RPG from Chainmail using the original combat systems. Basic game here. rpg.drivethrustuff.com/product_info.php?products_id=94115&filters=0_0_0_0&manufacturers_id=3869&affiliate_id=1762&src=CommunityForum1

[derv]

thanks jacar! I'll have to look that one over. Truthfully, I think I may have DL it a while ago on Lulu and forgotten about it. But now that you brought it up, I see it is produced by Jason Vey. So, I'm curious how Spellcraft & Swordplay keeps to or strays from his Forbidden Lore material. BTW- I've also taken a look at your Chainmail Reforged, but I havn't had a chance to compare/contrast it with Chainmail. I do like how concise it is and I think you could condense it even further to fewer pages, unless you're leaving space in the doc for future additional material. But, since I havn't even played Chainmail yet, I'm not really qualified to comment.

[Deleted]

Yeah, the CHAINMAIL references in OD&D were pretty much for mass combat and a nod to Dave's original BLACKMOOR. He'd already stopped using CHAINMAIL long before he showed the game to Gary.

But they both thought they were writing a strange new type of wargame for CHAINMAIL players.

[derv]

gronan, I just spent some time over on BoardGameGeek looking at original publishing dates and your comment about the references being a nod to Daves Blackmoor raises some questions for me. On BGG they have a notation in the description of Chainmail that states Dave Arneson disputed that Chainmail was the basis for the earliest D&D game and campaigns (I'm guessing they're talking about Blackmoor). I never heard this before and I always assumed people agreed that Chainmail was, at the very least, an inspiration for D&D.

The other thing that sparked my interest was the fact that Chainmail was first published in 1971, D&D came out in 1974, TSR got the rights to publish Chainmail in 1975, then they turned around and published Swords & Spells in 1976. You rarely hear anything about S&S, yet it seems they were still trying to maintain a semblance of wargaming with D&D through the publication of this suppliment (a revised Chainmail?) which was developed by Dave Arneson and Rob Kuntz. Were they still unaware what D&D was becoming or was S&S just a failed attempt to make a miniature rules that more easily transitioned to/from D&D?

[Deleted]

i) If you dig around a bit you can find Greg Swenson's account of the first BLACKMOOR adventure, complete with his stating that they used straight-up CHAINMAIL. I'll take the word of somebody who was there.

ii) Swords and Spells was an attempt to be able to use ANYTHING in D&D in a wargame.

[kesher]

But they both thought they were writing a strange new type of wargame for CHAINMAIL players.

Awesome, and does an end-run around thousands of words of exegetical hypothesis.

[derv]

Oct 16, 2013 7:30:21 GMT -6 @gronanofsimmerya said:

i) If you dig around a bit you can find Greg Swenson's account of the first BLACKMOOR adventure, complete with his stating that they used straight-up CHAINMAIL. I'll take the word of somebody who was there.

ii) Swords and Spells was an attempt to be able to use ANYTHING in D&D in a wargame.

I'm not sure why Chainmail has me so intrigued after all these years. I don't even like puzzles or riddles, but that's what it feels like as I look into this stuff. I'll take your suggestion and look for the Swenson thread

greyharp said:
On the single character issue, it's interesting reading Greg Svenson's "The First Dungeon Adventure" in Fight On! Issue #2 where he said "The rules we used were based on Chainmail..." and then reading in the Chainmail Rules on page 25, in the section entitled "Man-to-Man Combat", which starts "Instead of using one figure to represent numerous men, a single figure represents a single man."

Wheels within wheels.

This quote found in a thread over on the Blackmoor sub forum is exactly what I'm talking about.

[Deleted]

CHAINMAIL is a fun game. I don't play fantasy miniatures any more, but I still use CM for historical medieval battles.

[jacar]

Oct 15, 2013 16:19:04 GMT -6 derv said:

thanks jacar! I'll have to look that one over. Truthfully, I think I may have DL it a while ago on Lulu and forgotten about it. But now that you brought it up, I see it is produced by Jason Vey. So, I'm curious how Spellcraft & Swordplay keeps to or strays from his Forbidden Lore material. BTW- I've also taken a look at your Chainmail Reforged, but I havn't had a chance to compare/contrast it with Chainmail. I do like how concise it is and I think you could condense it even further to fewer pages, unless you're leaving space in the doc for future additional material. But, since I havn't even played Chainmail yet, I'm not really qualified to comment.

Thanks Derv!

I am slowly streamlining the game even further. I am looking at the post melee resolution as that was the most fiddly bit of the game. If you look at Chainmail as three separate game systems and one add on, then it really is a "rules lite" game.

[thegreyelf]

Oct 15, 2013 16:19:04 GMT -6 derv said:

thanks jacar! I'll have to look that one over. Truthfully, I think I may have DL it a while ago on Lulu and forgotten about it. But now that you brought it up, I see it is produced by Jason Vey. So, I'm curious how Spellcraft & Swordplay keeps to or strays from his Forbidden Lore material. BTW- I've also taken a look at your Chainmail Reforged, but I havn't had a chance to compare/contrast it with Chainmail. I do like how concise it is and I think you could condense it even further to fewer pages, unless you're leaving space in the doc for future additional material. But, since I havn't even played Chainmail yet, I'm not really qualified to comment.

Sorry if I'm late to the party, here.

S&S came out of my Forbidden Lore notes (which incidentally were later expanded upon and combined with a few other ideas here by Aldarron in his *amazing* "Using Chainmail to Resolve D&D Combats," pamphlet, which I think is still floating around the web somewhere. I consider that to be The Compleat OD&D Chainmail Combat System.

In any case, the core system in Spellcraft & Swordplay is entirely based upon the Man to Man combat in Chainmail--2D6 rolled on resolution tables. I give characters multiple attacks as they go up in level (representing the idea of "2 Men," "4 Men," etc.) I then extrapolated the system, using the Fantasy Supplement as a guideline, to apply to Saving Throws and even task resolution. I borrowed the ability bonuses from B/X D&D and tasks are resolved with ability checks rolled on 2d6.

Hope that answers your question--if you're curious I have a free PDF ($7 print) streamlined version of the game (Spellcraft & Swordplay Basic) on DriveThruRpg.