|
Post by Jason Vey on Apr 25, 2009 22:48:31 GMT -5
This is a topic that's come up a lot on the OD&D boards, and is what originally inspired me to write S&S to begin with. But while S&S is a sharp system, it's nowhere near the answer to this question. So I thought I'd hash it out here now that my understanding of the whole thing is coming along. Here's what I'm thinking now. Blocks of text in italics, offset with the word "Note," are options culled from reading, interpretation, or common sense, but not spelled out in the rules. They can be used or ignored at will. Reconciling AC and Chainmail Attack and Defense RatingsIn Chainmail there are the following classifications of troops (excluding arquibusiers, or primitive riflemen, and culture-specific troops): - Light Foot
- Heavy Foot
- Armored Foot
- Archers
- Crossbowmen
- Long bowmen
- Heavy Crossbowmen
- Light Horse
- Medium Horse
- Heavy Horse
In OD&D, there are eight classes of armor, ranging from AC 9 (no armor or shield) to AC 2 (Plate armor AND shield) ( Men and Magic, page 19). In Men and Magic, characters attack as x number of "Men," or "Heroes" or "Superheroes". Page 24 of Underworld and Wilderness Adventures reads as follows: Okay, seems simple enough, but here's where we run into problems. Problem 1: What constitutes a "Man"? This is unclear by the rules on their face. Problem 2: Which system is meant to be used? The 20:1 combat system, the Man to Man system, or the Fantasy Supplement system? The answer to Problem 2 is tied up in Problem 1. What constitutes a "Man" is clarified in Chainmail, though you have to dig for it--it's not obvious. On the Fantasy Reference Table (page 43 in the 3rd edition), the asterisked footnote defining what a "Hero" is clarifies that a "Man" is equivalent to "Either Heavy Foot, Armored Foot, Light Horse, etc., depending on arms and situations..." Okay, so "depending on arms and situations" now becomes the crux of our problem. But not really, as DM fiat is common, accepted, and expected in OD&D. The trick is dividing up armor and arms into the categories we looked at above. Infantry / FootmenCHAINMAIL isn't much help in this area as it doesn't clarify what exactly constitutes Light, Heavy and Armored foot, just what statistics they use in game. So we're back to our 8 AC ratings. At the two farthest ends of the spectrum--no armor and plate + shield--we clearly have Light Foot and Armored Foot. Probably safe to call Chain Mail and Chain + Shield Heavy Foot. We can divvy it up this way: Light Foot: AC 9-6 (No Armor through Leather & Shield) Heavy Foot: AC 5-4 (Chain through Chain & Shield) Armored Foot: AC 3-2 (Plate and Plate & Shield) OR...even better, if we want shields to make a difference, this way: Light Foot: AC 9-7 (No Armor through Leather) Heavy Foot: AC 6-5 (Leather + Shield and Chain) Armored Foot: AC 4-2 (Chain + Shield through Plate + Shield) Note: If we really want to keep pushing it, Plate and Shield could subtract one from the opponent's dice for defense; there's precedent for that sort of thing in Chainmail, though an opponent should never have fewer than 1 die. But we'll leave that as an "optional rule" for now.Let's further state that, looking at the Man-to-Man table, weapons with a class of 1 reduce the rank of the wearer by 1, to a minimum of Light foot, for purposes of attacking. Thus, a character with Chainmail, but wielding only two hand axes, still defends as Heavy Foot, but attacks as Light Foot. Similarly, a character clad in only leather armor but wielding a heavy, 2-handed claymore in grand Braveheart style, might attack as heavy or even armored foot, while still defending as light. The above are general suggestions and guidelines from careful reading and interpretation. Every DM will have to make their own call. After the DM rules on the issue, players should note their attack and defense classes on their character sheet. Cavalry and ArchersCavalry works the same way, but is dependent upon the size of the horse (light, medium or heavy), the type of barding it wears, and the armor worn by the rider. Archery is determined by the type of bow being used, but an archer's defense is dependent upon its armor. Note: Optionally, unless he drops the bow and draws a melee weapon, no archer except a crossbowman or heavy crossbowman can defend as anything better than Light Foot, and plate armor makes it impossible to fire anything besides a crossbow.
Likewise, at the DM's option, if a crossbowman opts to defend as Armored Foot without drawing a melee weapon, his crossbow may be destroyed, having been used to defend against attacks. Another few "optional" rules culled from interpretation and common sense.Choosing a SystemOkay, so how does this all come together? What system do we use? The answer: We use All Three. The big mistake often made when trying to work this out is deciding on a single system. What they forget is that D&D in the early days was a mishmash of sub-systems designed in a toolkit, "whatever works for the situation" philosophy. There's nothing wrong with combining the three subsystems in Chainmail, and my suspicion is that's exactly what Gygax and Arneson intended.
|
|
|
Post by Jason Vey on Apr 25, 2009 22:49:14 GMT -5
The Standard Chainmail System
In the standard system, characters throw dice based upon their attacker rating vs. a defender's defense rating as shown on page 40 of Chainmail. Round dice up, so that all characters throw at least one die. Bonuses are pips added to or subtracted from all dice thrown, always using the more advantageous rating in normal combat.
Missile fire is always resolved first in this system. Consult the Missile Fire table on page 11, and throw a number of dice appropriate to the character's "Man" ratings in Men and Magic. The listed casualty numbers instead become the number of dice of damage dealt to the foe. Thus, a first level Fighting Man firing a bow at an unarmored foe rolls a die; on a result of 3-6 he deals a die of damage. The same character at level 5 will always inflict at least 2 dice of damage to an unarmored opponent, but may inflict 3 dice if he gains a result of 3-6. This fact makes missile weapons quite deadly and attractive for use by player characters; the main difference between types of missile weapons is their range. For this reason, DMs may wish to opt for the Man to Man missile fire system (see below), while maintaining the standard system for melee.
Note: I am of the opinion that "Number Firing" on the "1/2 Armor or Shield" column should read 1 under 1-3 and 2 under 4-6 instead of being 2 and 2; not having seen errata for Chainmail, I can't be 100% certain of this, but it seems to match the other progressions, and I suspect it's a typo on its face.
Now, the bonuses (a second level fighter attacks as 2 Men+1, for example) are added to any one of the dice thrown. This extrapolated from the following passage in Monsters & Treasure:
Thus, a first level Fighting Man fighting as Light Foot (Man +1), attacking an orc which defends as Heavy Foot, throws a single die and adds one to the total, even though the table lists Lt. vs. Hvy as "1 die per two men." As per the combat table, if he gets a result of 6, he scores a hit and deals 1d6 damage to his foe as in Men and Magic, page 19.
The same character at third level, attacking as "3 Men or Hero -1" would in this case throw two dice, with no bonus to either, as this is more advantageous than the Hero -1 which would see two dice thrown, subtracting one from presumably the highest. If one comes up 6, he deals 1 die of damage. If both come up 6, he deals 2 dice of damage.
However, when moving to the Fantasy Combat Table, which we'll get to later, the character would attack as a Hero, subtracting 1 from his 2d6 roll.
It's just that simple: consult the Combat Tables on page 40, roll an appropriate number of dice, and count "hits."
|
|
|
Post by Jason Vey on Apr 25, 2009 22:51:36 GMT -5
The Man to Man System
For epic, heroic, one-on-one battles, use the Man to Man System. It's straightforward and easy, and completely ignores the "Heavy foot, light foot," etc. designations, focusing only on the exact weapons and armor of the combatants. In this system, "Man" as defined on the Level Progression Charts in Men and Magic, simply refers to the number of attacks granted in a round. Thus, a third level Fighting Man, a Swordsman, gains three attacks. Since a "Hero" is defined in Chainmail as having "the fighting ability of four figures," (p. 30), we can count "Hero" as "4 Men."
Using the Man to Man system, any time the progression reads "x Men," that trumps a "Hero" or "Superhero" designation. Thus, "5 Men," or 5 attacks, trumps "Hero + 1," which would be four attacks adding +1 to one of the four.
However, if the progression does NOT list a "Men" designation, go with what's there. Thus, the seventh-level Champion, which doesn't say "7 Men," must fight as a Superhero -1. Superheroes are, according to Chainmail, "about twice as powerful" as Heroes (p. 30), which means that they grant eight attacks (in the case of a Champion, one of these suffers a -1 penalty).
For ease of play, it is suggested any penalties are applied to the last attack in the sequence. This keeps things fair and equal, and prevents combat min/maxing.
Like the Standard System, missile fire is resolved first. To resolve this, see the "Individual Fires with Missiles" table; target numbers for each AC at three range increments are listed. For game balance purposes, this is preferable to the Standard System, if slower when rolling multiple attacks, as it allows for even higher level characters (and missile-firing monsters) to miss.
Monsters such as Halflings, Sprites, Dwarves, Gnomes, Kobolds, Orcs, Goblins, Elves, Heroes, Super Heroes, Trolls, Ogres, and even Giants can be engaged, with the DM improvising arms and armor based on their "Men" rating. Of course, all of these figures should gain hit dice as Fighting Men equivalent to said rating. A Giant, for example, fights as 12 Men, and thus should have 12 Hit Dice! Generally speaking, the hit dice totals listed in Monsters & Treasure will suffice. The DM will need to entirely improvise the "Man" ratings of monsters not listed in Chainmail.
Certain monsters--those very powerful creatures with Supernatural bents such as Dragons, Elementals, Treants, Wraiths, Wights, Ghouls, etc., may not--at the DM's option--be engaged by characters of below Hero status, these young adventurers having no chance to damage such monsters. We will deal with such creatures when we get to the Fantasy Combat Table.
That's basically it. Figure the weapons and armor of the combatants, calculate the number of attacks each has, and use the Man to Man system as written.
|
|
|
Post by Jason Vey on Apr 25, 2009 23:03:10 GMT -5
The Fantasy Supplement The Fantasy Reference Table and Fantasy Combat Table (Chainmail, pp. 43-44) come into play only when fighting specific, high-fantasy creatures. As it stands, only those creatures listed upon the Fantasy Combat Table use this system, though the DM can add others from Monsters & Treasure if he feels the need and they seem equivalent to those already present.
No character with a rating below "Hero" can attempt combat on the Fantasy Table (though characters with "Hero -1" status can try, excepting creatures that require a Hero to roll 12 to hit, such as Dragons).
The Fantasy Combat Table works on a single (not multiple) roll of 2d6, with a target number gained by cross referencing the character with the defending creature. To repeat: characters battling on the Fantasy Combat Table do NOT gain multiple attacks.
Note: This makes Fantasy Combat somewhat drawn out--DMs may wish to offset this by allowing multiple dice of damage equivalent to the character's rating, or half that to limit massive damage--i.e. a Hero will do 4d6 damage instead of just 1d6, or 2d6 damage if the DM opts for half rating (a Hero is worth 4 men).
Unless specified in the creature's description (a Hero must use a bow to attack a dragon, for example), ranged vs. melee attacks make no difference in the Fantasy Supplement combat rules.
Combat progresses in this manner until one side retreats, surrenders, or dies. In many ways, the Fantasy Table is the simplest form of combat; it just doesn't work for more "Mundane" creatures, who have to use the Standard or Man to Man rules.
|
|
|
Post by islestrike on May 5, 2009 22:18:25 GMT -5
The Man to Man SystemIn this system, "Man" as defined on the Level Progression Charts in Men and Magic, simply refers to the number of attacks granted in a round. Thus, a third level Fighting Man, a Swordsman, gains three attacks. Since a "Hero" is defined in Chainmail as having "the fighting ability of four figures," (p. 30), we can count "Hero" as "4 Men." .... That's basically it. Figure the weapons and armor of the combatants, calculate the number of attacks each has, and use the Man to Man system as written. Hi Jason, Can you clarify the Man-to-Man system with a worked example? I'm having trouble understanding the intent. I know in OD&D fighting men engaged in combat with opponents 1HD or less may make a number of attacks equal to their level. i.e. a Hero (lvl.4) could simultaneously attack 4 orcs. But once you get even one opponent in there of greater than 1HD the advantage is over ...it is one attack only for everyone. In the Man-to-Man Melee Table (pg.41) it says roll 2d6 cross referenced for Weapon vs Armor. Are you saying the Hero would roll 2d6 4 times, and any hit results in 1d6 damage? This is regardless of who the Hero is facing. So if the Hero is fighting a Giant (12 men), the hero rolls 4 attacks, the Giant will roll 12? Is this so the combat will move along more quickly and not get dragged out? I notice flail needs to hit 7 or better on most armour, so roughly 50% chance. Presumably then our hero should score 1 or 2 hits out of his 4 attacks if he is using a flail. If he only had 1 attack then it might take him 2-3 rounds to score a hit? I'm interested in this system because I like the simplicity of 1d6 damage in the game and I won't change it. At the same time I think weapons need some differentiator, and this is a good way to do it. i.e. certain weapons will be better at defeating certain armour. Cheers!
|
|
|
Post by Jason Vey on May 6, 2009 7:52:44 GMT -5
Hi, islestrike.
Your reading is correct to a point in that a Hero fighting Man-to-Man with a 12 HD creature would attack 4 times and be attacked 12 times in return. However, a Hero fighting a Giant (or indeed any such creature, presumably) would take place on the Fantasy Combat Table, not in Man-to-Man terms, so each would gain one hit back and forth until victory was achieved.
When using Chainmail combat with OD&D, the Man-to-Man system should be reserved for certain unique situations (one such situation that is clarified in Book 3 is combat on ships). Generally you're going to use either what I call the "Fistful of d6's" system or the Fantasy Combat table. To put an example, let's say you have a 6th level Fighting Man wielding a long sword and wearing chainmail. He is rated as Heavy Foot in both attacking and defense.
He's fighting 10 orcs, also rated as Heavy Foot in both attack and defense.
Heavy Foot vs. Heavy Foot, as indicated on page 40 of Chainmail, yields 1 die per man with a 6 equaling a "kill"--but note in Book 3 of OD&D, page 25, where it says "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 [sic] a drive back or kill equal only to a hit."
The orcs, as 1 HD creatures, each count as a single Heavy Foot. The Fighting Man at sixth level counts as 6 men. Iinitiative is determined (as standard, 1d6, higher goes first), and the Fighting Man goes first. He rolls 6d6. He gets three 6's--3 hits. He then rolls 3d6 for damage and can assign it as he likes amongst the group of orcs, though he should assign damage by full dice results rather than points (i.e. if his results are 3, 4, and 2, he can do 9 damage to one creature, or 3 to one, 4 to a second, and 2 to a third, or 7 to one and 2 to a second, etc).
The orcs, in return, attack 10 times and count hits. They get five 6's, or five hits on the beleaguered fighter. They roll 5d6 damage against him, and he could be in trouble, as he's only got 6 (+2 for two prior +1 bonuses) hit dice!
It's my opinion (and it's been held up by statements from Old Geezer, who was in the original playtest and involved with every edition from OD&D through AD&D first and BECMI) that the ability for Fighting Men to have more than one attack vs. 1 HD creatures was intended for use with the "alternate" combat system (the d20-based one) and not Chainmail-based combat. OG has said that even Gygax never used Chainmail as the combat system, so this is really just an academic exercise.
Hope that helps.
|
|
|
Post by islestrike on May 11, 2009 12:13:49 GMT -5
Hi, Thanks for that reply Jason. I've really been pondering this system for the last week. i.e. OD&D with 2d6 combat and/or Chainmail. I see some good potential here to spice up the game while a) sticking to the game's roots and b) not introducing any power inflation. When using Chainmail combat with OD&D, the Man-to-Man system should be reserved for certain unique situations (one such situation that is clarified in Book 3 is combat on ships). Generally you're going to use either what I call the "Fistful of d6's" system or the Fantasy Combat table. . Just to clarify which system are you refering to as the "Fistful of d6's", the Standard Chainmail System or the Man-to-Man system? Both are going to allow multiple throws. It seems to me one or the other is redundant, and the Man-to-Man combat table is perhaps more appropriate in an OD&D game, whereas the standard was originally meant for mass combat, and we're adapting it to single melee with the combatant's attack rating. Although I think I better understand now when to use the Fantasy Table instead. But getting back to the Standard Combat example: "The same character at third level, attacking as "3 Men or Hero -1" would in this case throw two dice, with no bonus to either, as this is more advantageous than the Hero -1 which would see two dice thrown, subtracting one from each. If one comes up 6, he deals 1 die of damage. If both come up 6, he deals 2 dice of damage" Can you clarify why the 3rd lvl fighter gets two dice? Which designation is used, "3Men" or "Hero -1". 3Men only yields one dice, or do we still round up? i.e. 3/2=1.5 -->2. The way you phrased rounding up I read it as applying only if the normal result would have resulted in no dice being thrown, then round up to at least one dice. Cheers!
|
|
|
Post by islestrike on May 11, 2009 23:01:21 GMT -5
When using Chainmail combat with OD&D, the Man-to-Man system should be reserved for certain unique situations (one such situation that is clarified in Book 3 is combat on ships). Generally you're going to use either what I call the "Fistful of d6's" system or the Fantasy Combat table. My reading then would be to use the "Fistful of d6's" when dealing with humanoid and demi-human types. Makes sense that you can have orc, gnoll, & hobgoblin champions and superheroes, and any in between. They fight and are similarly equipped to their human counterparts. Anything that doesn't fit the humanoid form can get slotted into the Fantasy table. Is this a good reading of what you meant in the above? If this is what S&S is about I am more curious than ever for my Lulu order to arrive. Cheers!
|
|
|
Post by islestrike on May 11, 2009 23:03:54 GMT -5
It's my opinion (and it's been held up by statements from Old Geezer, who was in the original playtest and involved with every edition from OD&D through AD&D first and BECMI) that the ability for Fighting Men to have more than one attack vs. 1 HD creatures was intended for use with the "alternate" combat system (the d20-based one) and not Chainmail-based combat. OG has said that even Gygax never used Chainmail as the combat system, so this is really just an academic exercise. So I am always interested in the history of the game ...who is Old Geezer? Cheers!
|
|
|
Post by drsamsara on May 12, 2009 2:40:30 GMT -5
"Old Geezer" is the name used by Mike Mornard when posting to boards, such as rpg.net (actually, I've never seen him post eslewhere, but he might). Go open your Holmes and look for the acknowledgements: there's Mike. He's an all-too-rare source of info on the Golden Age, since he was a youngster when he started playing with Gary. He's probably the youngest member of the 1st gen of D&Der's and his insights are increasingly valuable as we lose the others.
|
|
|
Post by Jason Vey on May 12, 2009 11:43:35 GMT -5
He posts on the OD&D forums, too.
|
|
|
Post by Jason Vey on May 19, 2009 8:13:59 GMT -5
Islestrike, you're correct. I am rounding up in general. So the table can be read in this case as "1 die per two men (or fraction thereof)."
Your reading as to when to use the "Fistful o' d6's system" is also generally correct.
Though S&S never uses fistfulls of d6's. It's entirely built up from a 2d6 man-to-man ideal inspired by Chainmail's.
I've just made an adjustment to the rules above, btw. In reverting my OD&D PDFs to contain references to Hobbits and Balrogs, and Ents (oh, my!) I discovered the following passage in Monsters & Treasure:
"Attack/Defense capabilities versus normal men are simply a matter of allowing one 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 now we've got the answer to that puzzle. A second-level fighter, attacking as 2 Men+1, would add the +1 to a single die, or to one of his two attacks using the Man to Man system.
Thus, if he is heavy foot fighting against heavy foot (1 die per man), he rolls 2 dice, adding 1 to one of the two dice, and looking for 6's.
|
|
|
Post by islestrike on May 20, 2009 0:39:44 GMT -5
... I discovered the following passage in Monsters & Treasure: "Attack/Defense capabilities versus normal men are simply a matter of allowing one 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 now we've got the answer to that puzzle. A second-level fighter, attacking as 2 Men+1, would add the +1 to a single die, or to one of his two attacks using the Man to Man system. Thus, if he is heavy foot fighting against heavy foot (1 die per man), he rolls 2 dice, adding 1 to one of the two dice, and looking for 6's. Hmmm ...I'm not sure about this interpretation on a number of fronts. If you look at the class progression charts in Vol. I, there is no such correspondence or relation between hit dice and fighting capability. Why do monsters get this simple formula but PCs don't? The answer is probably they are two different things and therefore different rules govern them. Or another way to say it is the fact that pips are applied to only one monster attack does not necessarily mean that is the way they work for the fighting capability of the human classes. Second looking at the HD and Fighting Capability columns in the class tables, it seems the intention is to obviously finely differentiate one level from the next, as well as one class from the next. Which interpretation best does that? A Superhero (lvl 8) gets 8 attacks. If we go with applying the pips to just one attack, then the Champion (Superhero - 1) effectively gets the same 8 attacks with one attack coming at -1. Since it is very likely that at least one attack will fail anyway, just apply the -1 to the failed attack, keeping the successes. In this interpretation the -1 has little meaning. On the other hand if all 8 attacks are at -1, that is very different - some attacks may now turn into misses. That -1 now has some meaning to differentiate over the Superhero's 8 attacks at the next level. Superhero - 1 now also has more meaning over the level below it as well. i.e. Myrmidon / Hero + 1 or 6 Men. Having 8 attacks with only one attack at -1 is going up by quite a lot when the best you could do previously as Myrmidon is roll 6 attacks, or 4 attacks with one at +1. Indeed 4 attacks with only one at +1 is inferior to choosing just 6 attacks. It seems to make better sense the other way, that the pips are applied to each attack. Just as an aside, in Vol I pg. 17, why do some pips appear as "+1", and some appear as "+ 1". Is this just typo or significant to what we're talking about here? Cheers!
|
|
|
Post by Jason Vey on May 20, 2009 7:37:38 GMT -5
Personally, as a DM, I'd require that either the -1 (or +1, as the case may be) be either applied to the same attack every time (say, the first or last in the sequence), or be declared before the attack is rolled. That solves that problem neatly. With the Troop Type (fistful o' d6's) version, add or subtract the bonus or penalty from the highest die rolled. The thing you're forgetting is that not everything is accounted for in OD&D--it's not a thick and robust rules system, but rather a set of guidelines. That being said, I believe you're overthinking this as far as different systems applying to PCs and monsters. That makes it far more complicated than it needs to be--and OD&D's not a complicated game. As for the pg. 17 thing, it's a formatting gaffe, nothing more. I've put all these rules together in a pamphlet version that matches OD&D trade dress for anyone who wants to add it to their box.
|
|
|
Post by islestrike on May 20, 2009 9:10:39 GMT -5
Yes even before you suggested those alternatives to +/- the pips, I was thinking along similar lines. Namely +1 is applied to an attack that would otherwise fail to make it succeed, and likewise (to have balance) -1 is applied to a successful attack to make it fail. That can solve the problem too. The thing is none of these are mentioned specifically in the rules, it just says apply the bonus to one attack as you cited. Perhaps then it was just assumed as people playing Chainmail / OD&D were wargamers that is was obvious how to apply the +/- pips. In the end this is rules archeology, trying to figure out what was intended, or figure out what the optimal interpretation is that makes the game play more fun, so I won't belabor the point further. The link you posted does not work yet. Cheers!
|
|