Citizens of the Imperium

Citizens of the Imperium (http://www.travellerrpg.com/CotI/Discuss/index.php)
-   Random Static (http://www.travellerrpg.com/CotI/Discuss/forumdisplay.php?f=49)
-   -   AD&D 2E Combat Round (http://www.travellerrpg.com/CotI/Discuss/showthread.php?t=21269)

the angle December 25th, 2009 07:03 PM

You pack a lot of complexity into a few simple questions.

Quote:

I'm looking for where movement is meant to be done in the game, that's all. A turn sequence is provided with steps: GM secretly decides; then players declare; then initiative is rolled; then the round is played. In which of those steps does movement fall?

The end of the example comes when the DM calls for initiative throws. I read the example as the dwarf hasn't moved yet (he's not locked into melee yet with the orc he is trying to charge) because initiative hasn't yet been thrown. When the dwarf's turn comes around, on his initiative number, he'll complete his charge. So, I read it as movement comes after initiative is thrown.
That's correct. Everything that takes place in-game happens in step 4. The first three are player/DM activities setting up step 4.

Quote:

Why would you basically say that it doesn't matter when a character is moved?
I wouldn't say that. What I'm saying is that, using the standard initiative rules, the timing of a character's movement is determined by the situation as it's described, not by the initiative dice roll.

In the example, the dwarf's movement comes before the wizard's spell because the dwarf charged without giving the wizard time to cast. If the dwarf's player had said, "I take a defensive stance just long enough for the wizard to cast fireball, then I'm rushing forward to get a chop at those orcs," the round would have played out differently. The wizard would have cast fireball before the dwarf's movement, probably killing most of the orcs and badly injuring the trolls before the dwarf got at them. There would have been risk this way, too. If the monsters won initiative, they'd 'have the upper hand' for that round and as DM (and example writer), I'd have let the orcs form their defensive line and the trolls advance toward the heroes before the wizard could get her act together and cast the spell, meaning the trolls probably would be too close to be a safe target for a fireball. All of that is my (the DM's) interpretation of the unfolding events based on how the characters described their intent.

You've undoubtedly noticed that in both of those examples, the dwarf's movement happens before or after the monsters' according to the initiative roll. It's only whether the dwarf moves before or after the wizard's spell that depends wholly on narrative. When the heroes win 'nish (nice word), the dwarf gets to charge in amongst the orcs before they can organize their defense. When the monsters win it, they get to advance before the heroes can launch their offense. That will be true in most cases, but it's not a hard-and-fast rule; there are situational exceptions, one of which you raised ...

Quote:

The orc is charging the dwarf, and the dwarf is charging the orc. Who goes first? If it's simultaneous, then how would you handle this? Both orc and dwarf charge, meet in the middle? If so, who swings first? If you say that movement happens after initiative, then the problem is solved. Which ever character rolls the lowest init throw will decide if the dwarf or the orc charged first.
And there's the exception. You're right that nothing in the rules specifically deals with this; it's a case reserved for the DM. In the standard rules, the 'correct' way to handle it is for both creatures to move at the same time, meet somewhere in the middle, and whichever won 'nish to strike the first blow. It's handled that way because if you play the reel in your head, that's the way it would look. The narration described both sides charging, so both must move.

As you're experiencing first-hand, this type of play collides violently with miniatures on a gridded mat. When playing with figures on a mat, people want things to be cleanly defined and orderly, more like a boardgame. That's simply not the way the standard 2E rules function. Miniatures are still useful, but there's less 'moving' and more 'rearranging things' to reflect the situation at any given moment. That's a specific, intentional effect (more on that at the end).

Quote:

Only according to the rules does simultaneous actions happen when the initiative throw is tied.
Part of the confusion is arising because of intermixing the words "action" and "attack." The standard RAW never really talk about "actions" happening in initiative order; they only discuss attacks. Initiative determines when attacks take effect; the DM and the players determine when all other actions happen.

BUT ...

2E has multiple playing styles built into it through the optional and tournament rules. You noted that you're using the individual initiative optional rule. That rule is intended for exactly the types of players who want more definition in when things happen. Under those rules, pretty much everything happens in strict initiative order. In the last example, if the dwarf wins initiative, then he'll do his whole charge and attack before the troll does anything. All of it happens after the initiative dice are rolled.

Quote:

Fred the Mage is bee-boppin' along like Goldilocks and spots a Gnoll with a bow 50 yards away. Neither Fred or the Gnoll is surprised. This is on a forest trail, so we're using Outside movement (measured in tens of yards).

1. The DM decides that the Gnoll will fire his bow at the Mage.

2. Player: "Fred's got 9 hit points. I'm not playing around with a bow in anybody's hands. Fred will walk, as fast as he can, to increase range and make himself harder to hit."

Question: How do you run this per the book? Does Fred walk his full 120 yards, increasing range for the Gnoll to 170 yards before the Gnoll gets to fire the bow?

Or, does the Gnoll get to fire his bow at 50 yards, before the mage moves?

Is this based on Initiative? Meaning: The Gnoll fires at 50 yards if he wins initiative but fires at 170 yards if he loses initiative?

How would this scenario be run using the offical rules?
If you're using strict individual initiative, then the gnoll fires at 50 yards if it wins initiative and at 170 yards if it loses (or not at all, as some bows don't reach 170 yards, and it would seem that the gnoll's line of sight doesn't go beyond about 50 yards, based on how this situation arose). If you're using standard initiative, then the gnoll fires whenever the DM thinks it makes the most sense for him to fire, depending on the initiative roll. If the gnoll has its bow ready, the DM might let it fire almost immediately even if it loses initiative. If the gnoll had its bow unstrung and its quiver lashed shut for jogging, he might decide that the gnoll can't fire until the wizard is at long range even if the gnoll wins initiative. Alternatively (and probably ideally), the DM may decide which of those situations applies based on the initiative roll itself. The most important point is that you've constructed an intentionally odd situation here, and odd situations always call for a judgement by the DM. I'd be reluctant to play this one by a strict reading of any rule because it's not the situation that any of those rules were written to handle.

Getting back to the "more below" note from above: This topic was hotly contested while we were working on 2E. I played a lot of Melee/Wizard and was a big fan of its rigid definitions for what a character could do and how far he could move under various circumstances. Zeb favored the exact opposite view, that the less these things were defined, the more the DM and players could bring the scene to life and adapt to anything. We debated that more and longer than anything else. The standard rule is Zeb's; the individual initiative rule is mine. In the end, however, I came over to Zeb's way of thinking. For a game like AD&D, I now prefer the standard rule with its heavy dependence on narrative and interpretation. Which is not to say that I dislike or disavow the individual initiative approach. It serves very well for one, entirely valid style of play. I've simply come to appreciate a different style of play more.

Steve

Supplement Four December 26th, 2009 04:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by the angle (Post 339144)
Getting back to the "more below" note from above: This topic was hotly contested while we were working on 2E. I played a lot of Melee/Wizard and was a big fan of its rigid definitions for what a character could do and how far he could move under various circumstances. Zeb favored the exact opposite view, that the less these things were defined, the more the DM and players could bring the scene to life and adapt to anything. We debated that more and longer than anything else. The standard rule is Zeb's; the individual initiative rule is mine.

Thanks for your input, Steve. It has really helped my game.





Quote:

In the end, however, I came over to Zeb's way of thinking. For a game like AD&D, I now prefer the standard rule with its heavy dependence on narrative and interpretation. Which is not to say that I dislike or disavow the individual initiative approach. It serves very well for one, entirely valid style of play. I've simply come to appreciate a different style of play more.
I understand. I've got one foot on each boat. I like both styles of play.

The players that I'm playing with currently, though, are old time 1st Edition players from years back. They're used to grids and hard rules and that type of thing. They tend to scoff at the GM just making it up on the fly (which is one of the reasons I love Classic Traveller, BTW).

So, to appease them, I default to the more war-game-ish approach. If I had a different set of players, I might go the other way.

When I started this campaign, I was going to use just the 2E PHB and DMG only--no other books. But, again, this is the wrong crowd for that. I have one player in particular that pretty much demanded that we also use other books from the 2E era (like the Complete Fighter's Guide and stuff like that).

I resisted at first but realized how much this player really liked the hard rules. He's a war-gamer. I think the other players would play either way but prefer the more hard approach.

Thus, here I am, drawing combats on a grid, using individual initiative.

It's the job of the DM to run a smooth, fun game that everybody enjoys. Adding the extra books and playing this way I do for them.

BlackBat242 December 27th, 2009 11:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Supplement Four (Post 339163)
The players that I'm playing with currently, though, are old time 1st Edition players from years back. They're used to grids and hard rules and that type of thing. They tend to scoff at the GM just making it up on the fly (which is one of the reasons I love Classic Traveller, BTW).


Wow... I've been playing 1E since late 1982, and virtually everyone I played with preferred the "wing it" style over "hard rules & grids"... hence our rejection of ICE's Rolemaster (Rule-master/Roll-master) system when one of our group wanted to try it.


BTB, the "10 segments, D10 for init IS the way the 2E DMs I've been playing with do init... they keep segments, and apply the init roll to those segments.

YEs, you've shown me that that is indeed wrong... I had just not delved into the 2E rules that deeply, I just went with the DM's ruling.


I have always been strongly aware of most of the differences between 1E & 2E... more so than most of the people I've met on-line. It is why I delayed learning the game until 2001, and buying anything for it until 2003. I liked 1E and didn't like much of the differences I saw with 2E.

Since then, I've learned to appreciate some of the new things, but still prefer some of the things 2E got rid of.

I just play a "half&half" game now.



And Steve... glad to have you around... we can never get enough "insider" info... it helps us all understand things better.

the angle December 28th, 2009 02:55 PM

Quote:

They tend to scoff at the GM just making it up on the fly (which is one of the reasons I love Classic Traveller, BTW).
Same here. Reading CT alongside other games that were published in that period ('76-'78), it's amazing both how much RPGs advanced in just the few years since D&D's appearance and how far CT was ahead of its time in systems and presentation.

Steve

Supplement Four December 29th, 2009 11:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by the angle (Post 339336)
Same here. Reading CT alongside other games that were published in that period ('76-'78), it's amazing both how much RPGs advanced in just the few years since D&D's appearance and how far CT was ahead of its time in systems and presentation.

CT is THE game, as far as I'm concerned. It's got everything. It's super easy to run, yet the rules feel complete. As a GM, I am empowered to handle any situation quickly and smoothly, without having to look up something in a book, taking time away from the game.

CT is heaven.

Supplement Four January 2nd, 2010 12:44 AM

Steve,

Here's a quickie question for you, since you're the dude "in the know".

What's the "official" take on this: Natural Healing. A character gets 1 hp per day of rest and 3 hp per day of complete bed rest.

Do these numbers inflate when the non-weapon proficiency rules are used?

So, if a Healer cares for an injured character, does he receive 2 hp per day of rest (1 pt for nat healing + 1 pt for the healer's care); and 5 hp per day of complete bed rest (3 pts for nat healing + 2 pts for healer's care); to a max of 6 hp per day of complete bed rest if the healer is also a herbalist?

Or...

Are the rules trying to say that a healer is needed to obtain that 1 hp per day of rest and 3 hp per day of complete bed rest if the non-weapon proficiency rules are used?

Thus, the default rule (1 pt per day/3 pts per day of complete bed rest) assumes a healer is around, while the non-weap prof of Healing shows how those numbers are arrived at.



I guess to put this in one question that would answer this issue: Is it officially intended that a wounded character receive a max of 3 hp per day of compete bed rest, or is it intended that the wounded character receiving complete bed rest naturally heal a maximum of 6 hp per day (with healer/herbalist)?

Supplement Four January 2nd, 2010 12:53 AM

Or..maybe an even easier, yes-no, question would be: Is what I've written here how healing is officially intended in AD&D 2E?





NATURAL HEALING



If you engage in strenuous activity, you regain 0 hit points per day.

Jon, a 7th level fighter, has his hit points reduced from 54 to 19 during a battle with trolls. He travels the entire day on foot, through the mountains, to the tiny village that sits on the foothills. His journey is strenuous (the mountain travel on foot), so he receives no hit points from natural healing that day. He remains at 19 hp.



If you rest the entire day (riding a horse is considered non-strenuous), then you regain 1 hit point per day.

After staying the night in the village, Jon rises early and buys a mount. He rides from the village to the duke's keep, a day and a half journey by horseback into the valley. That night, Jon camps at the boundary of the duke's lands, hoping to reach the keep by noon the following day. Jon heals 1 hit point this day. His hp total is now 20.



If you do nothing for the entire day and receive complete bed rest, you regain 3 hit points per day.

Upon reaching the keep, Jon visits the local innkeep, a good friend for many years. Jon is given the finest feather bed in the inn, and the barmaids bring him food and beverage. After a long hour in the tub, Jon looks after his own wounds and retires to the comfortable bed. He stays with his friend for two nights. The first night is not considered complete bed rest because Jon traveled half the morning, therefore Jon receives 1 hit point for his first night at the inn and another 3 points for is second. His hp total heals from 20 to 24.



If you spend a complete week doing nothing, receiving complete bed rest, you regain the usual 3 hit points per day plus a number of points equal to your CON HP bonus.

The third morning, Jon intends to continue on his journey, but the innkeep will have none of it, insisting that Jon stay until fully healed and ready to ride. Jon agrees and spends the next seven days at the inn, receiving 3 hit points of natural recovery per day, but on the seventh day, Jon receives 5 hit points instead of three due to his +2 CON bonus. In all, Jon heals 23 hit points, taking his total of 24 to 47 (out of his 54 total).







NATURAL HEALING, nursed by a HEALER



If you engage in strenuous activity, you regain 0 hit points per day, even if you have a healer looking after you (a character with the healing proficiency).

Jon rises early the next morning to meet the innkeep's daughter who has returned from a pilgrimage to the local shrine. The innkeep's daughter is skilled with herb and root and salve and bandage, and now that she has returned, she turns her skills towards Jon's healing injuries. But, Jon has been at the inn for over a week, and he is grateful for his friend's hospitality. So, Jon spends the day collecting and chopping wood to fill the inn's store. That night, Jon sleeps in the same bed but he receives no hit points from natural healing due to the strenuous day's activity, in spite of the fact that the innkeep's daughter is now dressing his wounds. His hit points remain at 47.



If you are nursed by a healer and perform non-strenuous activity, you receive 2 hit points per day.

Jon, rising early the next day, insists he must continue his journey. The innkeep bids him to take his daughter, the healer, along with him, escorting her to the captial city where she will browse the large market for rare items not found at the inn's usual trader. Jon agrees, of course, and the two of them ride for the capital. This day, Jon receives 2 hit points, one for natural healing and one for the healer's care. Jon now has 48 hit points.



If you do nothing for the entire day and receive complete bed rest, and you are nursed by a healer, then you regain 5* hit points per day.

Jon and his traveling companion made the capital by nightfall the previous night (when he received 2 hit points above), and they spend the entire next day at the inn, venturing out to the market during the day (non-strenuous activity). Jon receives another 5 hit points under the care of his companion--3 points for complete bed rest and an additional 2* points for her healing care. His hit point total is now 53.

*Had the innkeep's daughter also had th herbalism proficiency as well as the healing proficiency, then Jon would have healed 6 points this day: 3 points for natural healing and 3 points from her care.

the angle January 2nd, 2010 04:46 PM

Your surmises are correct. The bonuses for Healing and Herbalism proficiencies stack with the standard nonmagical healing rates. A good doctor will cut your recovery time in half.

Steve

Supplement Four January 2nd, 2010 05:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by the angle (Post 339784)
Your surmises are correct. The bonuses for Healing and Herbalism proficiencies stack with the standard nonmagical healing rates. A good doctor will cut your recovery time in half.

Steve

That's awesome. Thanks.

Supplement Four January 10th, 2010 05:26 AM

Anybody know the answer to these questions?



I'm looking to play this by the book.

1 - Do sling bullets benefit from STR damage bonuses the way throwing a spear will?

For example, if I've got a 16 STR (+1 dmg), and I attack with my sling, hitting an Ogre, will I do damage of: 1d6+2 (1d6+1 for sling vs Large; +1 dmg for STR bonus).

The way it reads in Chapter Nine, unde Ability Modifiers in Missile Combat, it tends to make me thing that slings do benefit from STR.



2 - Does melee fighitng with a dagger and throwing a dagger require two proficiency slots? Or is it covered by a single proficiency?

It seems that melee fighting with a hand axe, and throwing a hand axe with any accuracy are two very different processes that should require separate proficiencies. But, the rules are not clear. The Dragonlance hints I get from the modules seems to point to two separate proficiencies.

So, how do you play it. Can a character in your group grab a dagger with with he's proficient with and throw it or weild it in combat using the same proficiency. Or, does it take two proficiences: Dagger; and Dagger (thrown)?


3 - Rings default to 12th level magic. Staves default to 8th level magic. Wands default to 6th level magic.

What about a sword?

I've got a sword in my game that can cause Light once per day and Protection From Evil on the weilder once per day. But, I've got to know what leve of magic these spells are cast in order to figure the duration of each spell effect.

Where do I look? (Don't see it in the DMG.)


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:47 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright (c) 2010-2013, Far Future Enterprises. All Rights Reserved.