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)

Supplement Four December 22nd, 2009 07:09 PM

AD&D 2E Combat Round
 
For those of you familiar with AD&D 2E, how do you read the combat round procedure. More specfically, where does movement take place?


AD&D Combat Round
1. DM decides secretly on NPC/Monster actions.

2. Players declare actions.

3. Initiative is rolled.

4. Round is resolved.


I would think that movement takes place after initiative is rolled when the round is resolved, but some of the examples in the rule book seem to hint towards a type of movement phase that happens during the Declaration step.

The example in the book has a dwarf fighter declarig that he's charging some Orc's, and the player playing the mage decides not to declare that the mage is starting to cast a fireball for fear of hitting the dwarf.

This would indicate that the dwarf moved, others moved after him, then initiative is rolled and attacks are resolved.

Of course, that example uses the game's default initiative rules were only one initiative throw is made for each side, allowing an entire side to go first or last.

I've tried to find some clarifcation on this on the net, but, so far, to no avail.



Your thoughts?

spinwardpirate December 23rd, 2009 10:47 AM

Sorry, I played the hell outta 2E back in the day, but that was long ago enough that today I just don't recall.

Queue the trip down memory lane music... I really, really liked 2E. My favorite character, and favorite group of characters, were all from 2E.

atpollard December 23rd, 2009 11:06 AM

I view games as attempting to simulate reality, so common sense prevails.

IMHO, one would decide on what action they intended to take (charge the bad guy and shove a spear through him before he can put an arrow through my heart) and THEN take the action (I run, I thrust vs. He Shoots) with initiative deciding which roughly simultaneous event happens first (I run, he shoots and hits, I fall down - no thrust). The rolls determine results, the narrative smothes out the actions.

In your opening example, initiative comes before movement and the spellcaster's party had either communicated their intended actions or the spellcaster gave up his intended action based on events unfolding before him or the spellcaster had intentionally delayed action to forfeit initative and react rather than act this round. All three options fall below the threshold of the rules mechanic and are to be resolved by DM fiat, if critical to the action (that is what the DM is there for).

the angle December 23rd, 2009 01:54 PM

I'd say atpollard has it exactly right.

Steve

Shadowfax December 23rd, 2009 02:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Supplement Four (Post 338856)
For those of you familiar with AD&D 2E, how do you read the combat round procedure. More specfically, where does movement take place?

AD&D Combat Round
1. DM decides secretly on NPC/Monster actions.

2. Players declare actions.

3. Initiative is rolled.

4. Round is resolved.


I would think that movement takes place after initiative is rolled when the round is resolved, but some of the examples in the rule book seem to hint towards a type of movement phase that happens during the Declaration step.

The example in the book has a dwarf fighter declarig that he's charging some Orc's, and the player playing the mage decides not to declare that the mage is starting to cast a fireball for fear of hitting the dwarf.

This would indicate that the dwarf moved, others moved after him, then initiative is rolled and attacks are resolved.

Of course, that example uses the game's default initiative rules were only one initiative throw is made for each side, allowing an entire side to go first or last.

I've tried to find some clarifcation on this on the net, but, so far, to no avail.
Your thoughts?

Melée (The Fantasy Trip) was better combat was resolved according to dexterity rounds. That means, that the characters with the highest adjusted dexterities (adjusted for armor and encumberance) went first. Characters, who had the same DX could either roll off or go simultaneously.

We added the rule that missilers (archers, wizards casting spells, knife and boomerang throwers and the like) went before people with Melee weapons and people with polearms always got to go before people with shorter weapons.

In AD&D 2E we played it so that everyone rolled a die for initiative ties went simultaniously, but if I recall there is some kind of a rule in the DMG or PHB about segments and when characters get to do what. I just can't remember for sure it was a very long time ago and I try to foget that I played that game at all.

the angle December 23rd, 2009 08:16 PM

2E was a narrative game. The combat sequence was kept vague intentionally so that DMs would have maximum leeway to interpret things for the best dramatic effect. In the example you cited, the key element is that the dwarf's player just shouted "Charge!" and rushed in. He could just as easily have said, "I pause a moment to give the wizard a chance to hit them with a fireball, then charge!" ... but he didn't. His narration indicated that he wanted to hit the enemy as fast as possible, without waiting for the wizard, so that's the way the DM ran it. That part of the sequence had nothing to do with the initiative roll itself.

Steve

Supplement Four December 23rd, 2009 08:30 PM

I'm trying to understand the rule before I change it. Too often GMs (I know I have in the past) change things before really getting to know RAW.

The problem with the AD&D 2E combat rules is that: it's not clear what is intended by RAW.

For example, a dwarf fighter and human mage round the bend of a sewer and see two trolls and three orcs. The rules can be interpreted two different ways:



Version 1

GM decides that the two trolls will charge into the party, one going after each character, because they regenerate. They're not scared. The orcs will enter the fray more cautiously, behind the trolls. The GM keeps this secret, though, of course, playing it out in the round.

So, the GM says, "You see the orcs and trolls, and they see YOU! The sound of steel against leather echos in the sewer as the orcs draw their choppers. The trolls begin to run, using their hands and feet, straight at you--one towards each of you. What are you going to do?"

Now, the players declare.

Dwarf says: Screw the troll, there's orcs out there! I'm charging them!

So the dwarf moves his movement, following the charge rules, placing the dwarf right next to the closest orc.

Mage says: Crap, I was going to fireball them. Sounds like I'm seeing the troll charge me. I have nothing to set against a charge. I'm throwing Mirrior Image.



Now, the GM has the monsters move. One troll moves to the orc, but he's not charging now because the orc basically came to him.

The second troll charges the mage.

Of the three orcs, one is now engaged in melee with the dwarf (as the dwarf charged him). His orc buddies move up to pound on the dwarf as well--the orcs like the safety in numbers.



Now we roll initiative (Individual Initiative) to see what happens when. The dwarf throws for his charge, and the three orcs throw for their swings, while the troll throws for his claw/claw/bite.

With the mage, she throws for her spell while the troll throws for his attack.





That's one way of reading the AD&D 2E rules: Movement happens before initiative as the players declare. An example in the book supports this interpretation.





Version 2

GM decides that the two trolls will charge into the party, one going after each character, because they regenerate. They're not scared. The orcs will enter the fray more cautiously, behind the trolls. The GM keeps this secret, though, of course, playing it out in the round.

So, the GM says, "You see the orcs and trolls, and they see YOU! The sound of steel against leather echos in the sewer as the orcs draw their choppers. The trolls begin to run, using their hands and feet, straight at you--one towards each of you. What are you going to do?"

Now, the players declare.

Dwarf says: Screw the troll, there's orcs out there! I'm charging them!

Dwarf does not actually move. He's only declaring what he'll do when it's his turn, decided by initiative.

Mage says: Crap, I was going to fireball them. Sounds like I'm seeing the troll charge me. I have nothing to set against a charge. I'm throwing Mirrior Image.



Now we roll initiative (Individual Initiative) to see what happens when.

Troll attacking mage moves first. Initiative 4.

Then Dwarf. Initiative 5.

Then Mage. Initiative 6.

Then Troll attacking Dwarf. Initiative 10.

Then the three orcs--all of them moving after the second troll. Initiatives 11, 12, and 14.


Troll charges the mage. If any of is attacks are succesful, the mage blows the Mirror Image spell.

Dwarf charges Orc.

Mage casts spell, if it wasn't interrupted by the troll's charge.

Troll moves to the dwarf and attacks.

Orc moves to dwarf and attacks.

Charged orc attacks dwarf, if that orc still lives after the charge.

Last orc moves to dwarf and attacks.

In this version, movement happens after initiaive.

Like I said, both versions seem to reflect the rules (thus my original question).

aramis December 23rd, 2009 08:43 PM

the problem with 2E basic initiative is that it was never intended to be used.

The default mode in practice was the "individual weapon speeds"...
1d10 + Reaction Adjustment + Weapon Speed is rolled after declaring actions, then done in ascending order.

Spells weapon speed is casting time in segments.

Supplement Four December 23rd, 2009 11:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aramis (Post 338987)
The default mode in practice was the "individual weapon speeds"...
1d10 + Reaction Adjustment + Weapon Speed is rolled after declaring actions, then done in ascending order.

Spells weapon speed is casting time in segments.

Couple of corrections, here, Wil.

"Segments" are from 1E AD&D. Segments are an actual measure of time--a "segment" of a combat round that represent 10 seconds of time.

That concept was thrown out with 2E AD&D.



Second, Reaction Adjustment in 2E is only used for Surprise, not initiative (although it was used for initiative in 1E).

BlackBat242 December 24th, 2009 01:08 AM

No, 2E kept segments... see spell casting times.

Supplement Four December 24th, 2009 02:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BlackBat242 (Post 339015)
No, 2E kept segments... see spell casting times.

No, they used to be Casting Segments in 1E, and segments in 1E represented a portion of actual time in the round (as stated above).

In 2E, what used to be Casting Segments became Casting Time, and Casting Time is a modifier to the Initiative Throw.

Just like Weapon Speed Factors, or a -1 mod for having higher ground.

BlackBat242 December 24th, 2009 02:27 AM

Huh... so it does. Go figure.

Everybody I played 2E with (I have only DM'ed 1E, not having learned {incompletely, apparently} 2E since 2001) seems to have kept the concept of segments, complete with carrying actions over to the next round if there are not enough segments left to do it in the current round (thanks to your bad initiative).

10 segments, a D10 for initiative... they are used just like that by all the 2E DMs I've played under (and they were from completely seperata and distinct groups).

aramis December 24th, 2009 07:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BlackBat242 (Post 339027)
Huh... so it does. Go figure.

Everybody I played 2E with (I have only DM'ed 1E, not having learned {incompletely, apparently} 2E since 2001) seems to have kept the concept of segments, complete with carrying actions over to the next round if there are not enough segments left to do it in the current round (thanks to your bad initiative).

10 segments, a D10 for initiative... they are used just like that by all the 2E DMs I've played under (and they were from completely seperata and distinct groups).

ANd in several late-2E era adventures, as well. Specifically retail play adventures.

The segments themselves went away, as did the 20 segment limit... but the initiative process was the same... see, S4, I never used AD&D 1E individual initiative/Weapon Speeds. I learned it from 2E.

Lycanorukke December 24th, 2009 09:03 AM

When I DM'd 2E I still used "segments" but not quite in the way 1st ed used them (10 lots of six seconds = 1 round) - to keep track of things which occured during the round.

Movement per "segment" was max speed divided by 10. So a human could walk 12 feet per segment, while a dwarf could move 6. Weapons speed, spells and the like were also used this way.

So say the dwarf charges the orcs who are 60 feet away. As he is running his movement is doubled - so 12 feet per segment. It will take him 5 segments (5 x 12 = 60) to get there. Weapon speed is not counted in a charge so we ignore it. A fireball has a time of 3 (3 segments). Initiative is rolled and they get a 6 on d10. The dwarf will hit the orcs at 11, the fireball will go off at 9.

The fireball has a radius of 20 feet, but the dwarf is still 2 segments away from the orcs (2 x 12' = 24 feet), so his beard get singed but he is not damaged. If the orcs were only 50 feet away he would have been fried, or if the orcs moved at initative 10 closer to the dwarf - the mage would either have to abort the spell (lose his round) or cook the dwarf.

If the dwarf then walks 10 feet and swings his axe his initative modifier would be +9 (7 for axe, 2 for moving).

While a mix of 1st ed, 2nd ed and house ruling, it was very useful to prevent PC's from "teleporting" around the battlefield at will.

Supplement Four December 24th, 2009 11:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BlackBat242 (Post 339027)
Huh... so it does. Go figure.

I'm currently playing the Dragonlance epic with my group. We're about to complete the first adventure.

Besides a romp with Conan recently (based on 3.5 E rules), I haven't played any form of d20 or D&D for mucho, mucho years. My Dragonlance modules are 1E AD&D while my rule books are 2E AD&D. So, I've been pouring over the rules to learn how to play the game RAW. It's been decades. My memory is hazy. And, I don't think we ever played RAW either. This time, I'm trying to keep the game as close to RAW as possible (which ain't easy to do with all the 2E Optional Rules).

What I have learned though, is that there are several differences between 1E and 2E AD&D. I used to think those differences were slight. Now, I know that there are some big differences.

For example, a PC will advance a heck of a lot faster in 2E rather than in 1E. 2E tries to get the PCs out of the lower levels faster than did 1E. (Much faster.)




Quote:

...seems to have kept the concept of segments, complete with carrying actions over to the next round if there are not enough segments left to do it in the current round (thanks to your bad initiative).
Yep, that's gone in 2E. Initiative modifiers, like Speed Factors and Casting Time are just that: modifiers. The initiative throw just indicates who goes when without detailing a specfic time in the combat round.



Quote:

10 segments, a D10 for initiative...
1E uses a d6 for Initiative. 2E uses a d10.





Man...1E AD&D is very, very complicated, if you want to play it RAW. Check this out: http://www.dragonsfoot.org/php4/arch...63&watchfile=0

This file is a flow chart/outline of a 1E AD&D combat round, complete with references where the rules come from.

Whew!





Quote:

Originally Posted by aramis (Post 339041)
... but the initiative process was the same...

No, sir, 1E Initiative and 2E Initiative are vastly different.

Click on that link above and check out how complicated 1E Initiative is. 2E Initiative is vastly simpler (although, by most accounts, still fairly complex--just no where near 1E rules).

spinwardpirate December 24th, 2009 05:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Supplement Four (Post 339065)
For example, a PC will advance a heck of a lot faster in 2E rather than in 1E. 2E tries to get the PCs out of the lower levels faster than did 1E. (Much faster.)

It does?!?!?
Wow, just goes to show you how memory fades. I thought the XP progression table stayed the same between 1E and 2E.

aramis December 24th, 2009 05:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spinwardpirate (Post 339078)
It does?!?!?
Wow, just goes to show you how memory fades. I thought the XP progression table stayed the same between 1E and 2E.

It did stay the same, for levels under 10....

2E, however, gives explicit RP bonuses, as well as bonuses for class ability uses. Since those don't go up with level, they speed up lower levels more than upper, and changed some numbers above 10th. Not much, but a little.

the angle December 24th, 2009 05:54 PM

S4 -- Open disclosure time.

If you check the credits page in your 2E rulebook, you'll see "Designer: David 'Zeb' Cook" and "Development: Steve Winter and Jon Pickens." I'm the Steve Winter leg of that tripod. I wrote the example of play in question, so I can state with fair authority that you're searching for more rigor than the turn sequence was meant to have.

The question of when things happen depends on the players' descriptions and the DM's interpretation of the situation more than on the initiative rolls. Within the one-minute combat round, a lot of things are happening more-or-less at the same time. The initiative roll doesn't determine exactly when any particular character does something, especially if you're using the basic one-roll-per-side rule. Initiative is not synonymous with turn sequence as it is in many other rules. It is simply "which side has the slight upper hand this round?" That side gets to log its damage before the other guys. But they're all in there swinging, dodging, maneuvering, and casting spells at the same time. It's significant that in the example, the wizard cancels her fireball before the initiative dice are rolled. The dwarf is charging into melee without hesitation, so he's bound to be in the target area before she can launch the spell. No particular rule dictates this; it's part of the scene that the dwarf's player created when he shouted "charge!"

The second part of the example paints a pretty clear picture (I like to think) of a lot of things happening simultaneously. The wizard's spell strikes while the dwarf is fighting with the orcs. An arrow hits an orc as it takes its position in line. The orcs don't finish forming their line until their turn comes around (because they lost initiative; the heroes "had the upper hand"), but they were trying to get into formation the whole time while simultaneously dodging the dwarf's ax and the archer's arrows. When the troll leader finally lands a blow on the dwarf, the others follow their leader's example and swarm around him.

It's meant to be chaotic; it's intended that everything is happening at the same time. The initiative roll is a tool to help the DM decide whether the dwarf or the troll lands a telling blow* first, but they're both hacking away and maneuvering the whole time according to the DM's and players' descriptions.

Steve

*It doesn't even need to be a single blow. 8 points of damage could come from one mighty buffet or from eight shallow cuts. The initiative roll determines nothing more than who feels the effects of their wounds first.

Supplement Four December 24th, 2009 07:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by the angle (Post 339080)
If you check the credits page in your 2E rulebook, you'll see "Designer: David 'Zeb' Cook" and "Development: Steve Winter and Jon Pickens." I'm the Steve Winter leg of that tripod.

Ya never know who you'll meet on the net, huh. Well, howdy. Glad you joined the discussion.



Quote:

I wrote the example of play in question, so I can state with fair authority that you're searching for more rigor than the turn sequence was meant to have.
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?

I think it's a fair question.





Quote:

It's significant that in the example, the wizard cancels her fireball before the initiative dice are rolled. The dwarf is charging into melee without hesitation, so he's bound to be in the target area before she can launch the spell. No particular rule dictates this; it's part of the scene that the dwarf's player created when he shouted "charge!"
Here's how I interpreted the example.

GM secretly decided on the orcs and trolls actions, as mentioned in the example.

In the next step, the players declare. Dwarf says he'll charge the orc. Mage says she'll cast a fireball. DM reminds the Mage that she'll have a charging dwarf possibly in front of her when the time comes to throw the spell, so she changes her mind--she doesn't know how the initiative dice will fall.

Note: I use individual initiative (so, it's not certain whether the dwarf will have completed his charge by the time the mage throws the fireball--but why take chances?), but your example is based on default inititiave. Under default initiative, it reads to me that the DM generally runs the players' side in the order that they declared actions. The orc spoke up first and said charge, so he'd certainly be in front of the mage when the fireball was thrown.

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.





Quote:

The second part of the example paints a pretty clear picture (I like to think) of a lot of things happening simultaneously. The wizard's spell strikes while the dwarf is fighting with the orcs. An arrow hits an orc as it takes its position in line. The orcs don't finish forming their line until their turn comes around (because they lost initiative; the heroes "had the upper hand"), but they were trying to get into formation the whole time while simultaneously dodging the dwarf's ax and the archer's arrows. When the troll leader finally lands a blow on the dwarf, the others follow their leader's example and swarm around him.

It's meant to be chaotic; it's intended that everything is happening at the same time. The initiative roll is a tool to help the DM decide whether the dwarf or the troll lands a telling blow* first, but they're both hacking away and maneuvering the whole time according to the DM's and players' descriptions.

I, like a lot of D&Ders, play out combats on a grid. Sometimes, I use pencil and graph paper. Many times, I use a large sheet of graph paper on a cork board with tacs used to represent the combatants. Scale is typically 10 feet per square on indoor locations and 10 yards per square on outdoor locations.

If I were playing your example, I'd describe the first part of the example, right as combat starts. I'd set up the scenario.

Then, I'd draw out the corridors and rooms--just what the characters can see. And, I'd place their starting positions on the grid.

Next, I'd follow the Combat Round Steps given in the book.

1. DM decides secretly what the bad guys do. Check. As explained in the example.

2. Player Declaration: Dwarf wants to charge orc. Mage starts casting spell. All per the example.

3. Initiative is thrown for all combatants per the individual initiative rule (but it works the same if the default initiative is used).

4. The round is resolved and played out in initiative order. The dwarf will charge on his initiative number. The mage will finish casting her spell on her initiative number. Etc.





Your example is fine if the DM is just describing things to players, not showing them it on a map. Players need to know when they can move.

What I don't understand is: The game is so structured in all the other combat areas. Spells effects are measured in hard ranges. We know how far a character can move in a round. There is a combat sequence given. The initiative rules state that ties indicated simultaneous actions. And, previous and future editions of the D&D game have movement happen at specific times during the combat.

Why would you basically say that it doesn't matter when a character is moved?








Quote:

*It doesn't even need to be a single blow. 8 points of damage could come from one mighty buffet or from eight shallow cuts. The initiative roll determines nothing more than who feels the effects of their wounds first.
This is understood. One minute is a long time, and hit points are an abstract measure of a character's health and physical condition. Damage sometimes doesn't even indicate that the character is actually wounded. It could represent the toon getting tired, fatigued during combat, less able to perform at his peak.

Still, we need to know when movement occurs in the round.

Why?

To have a standard for questions like this...



The dwarf and the mage from the example above stumble upon one orc and one troll a couple of days later during the adventure. This takes place in a wilderness setting.

Surprise is rolled, and neither side is surprised. Encounter distance is determined to be 20 yards.

The DM says, "You march up the steep hill, to find miles of grasslands in front of you. The grass is about five feet high. It sways in the wind. And, you can see trees pushing up past the grass, lightly dotting the landscape. A few large boulders can be seen as well.

"As you start down the slight incline of he hill you crested, you pass a large rock on your right. There's movement! You see a large, green thing, hop down out of a tree! It's a troll! It spurts something in a guttural tongue you can't understand, talking to an orc that has appeared from the other side of the tree. The troll points at the dwarf and grins, it's nasty teeth gleaming in the dying sunlight.

"What do you want to do?"

The DM has secretly decided that the troll has ordered the orc to charge the dwarf. The troll says that it will take care of the one in robes.

In response to the DM's question, the dwarf player says, "I'm charging the orc!"

The mage's player says, "Those two look mean. I'm casting mirror image!"



See the problem?

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.

Only according to the rules does simultaneous actions happen when the initiative throw is tied.

If the dwarf wins nish, then it will complete it's charge before the orc begins his. If the orc wins, the opposite is true.

Supplement Four December 24th, 2009 09:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by the angle (Post 339080)
If you check the credits page in your 2E rulebook, you'll see "Designer: David 'Zeb' Cook" and "Development: Steve Winter and Jon Pickens." I'm the Steve Winter leg of that tripod. I wrote the example of play in question, so I can state with fair authority....

Steve,

I've got a simpler question for you to answer. Not as many if/thens as I have in the more complicated example above.

What I want to know is how to run the scenario below between the mage and the gnoll, running it btb (by the book).

So, officially, how would this simple scenario be run by a DM?





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?

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.)

the angle January 10th, 2010 06:09 PM

Sling bullets: Str bonus applies to all missile weapon damage except: crossbows (never) and bows (unless they're specially made).

Dagger proficiency covers stabbing and throwing. The same goes for any weapon that can be wielded in melee or thrown, such as javelins, hammers, axes, and spears. The DM could make a case for splitting them, but it's not intended that way.

As to swords, you're right, there's no indication. I'd go with one of two things. The default would be level 12, because that's the minimum level needed to cast enchant an item. The rules, however, allow one wizard to cast enchant an item and another to cast the actual spells into the item. It's possible that both light and protection from evil could have been placed on the item by a 1st-level apprentice. That leaves you free to make them any level you want. I'd probably tie it to the weapon's bonus -- assume the caster had three levels for every plus the weapon has, assuming it has any, or something along those lines.

For no reason other than curiosity, which version of the books are you using?

Steve

atpollard January 11th, 2010 11:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Supplement Four (Post 340628)
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.

Quote:

Originally Posted by the angle (Post 340677)
As to swords, you're right, there's no indication. I'd go with one of two things. The default would be level 12, because that's the minimum level needed to cast enchant an item. The rules, however, allow one wizard to cast enchant an item and another to cast the actual spells into the item. It's possible that both light and protection from evil could have been placed on the item by a 1st-level apprentice. That leaves you free to make them any level you want. I'd probably tie it to the weapon's bonus -- assume the caster had three levels for every plus the weapon has, assuming it has any, or something along those lines.

I agree that it is a rules oversight. Although I can't offer an 'official' answer, I can offer another DMs perrogative ... Tie the level of the spell to the level of the swordsman wielding it. While less 'official' than the reasonable solutions from "the angle", I think that it might be more 'fun' (which was always my guiding star as a DM or Player).

the angle January 11th, 2010 01:22 PM

That works, too. An attractive aspect of atpollard's answer is that it leaves the door open for interesting developments down the road. Let's say you tie the sword's magical effectiveness to the character's level but don't tell the players that. They think they have a sword of low power. Then, after the characters have risen a few levels, suddenly the sword seems more powerful. Eventually, it turns out that the sword is a forgotten near-artifact whose power reflects the power of the wielder.

Steve

Supplement Four January 11th, 2010 06:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by atpollard (Post 340751)
I agree that it is a rules oversight. Although I can't offer an 'official' answer, I can offer another DMs perrogative ... Tie the level of the spell to the level of the swordsman wielding it.

This is how I'd pretty much decided to go (unless I'd found an "official" answer). Someone over at Dragonsfoot recomended doing it that way.



Quote:

Originally Posted by the angle (Post 340677)
For no reason other than curiosity, which version of the books are you using?

We're using Second Edition, and I have couple of the '89 printings plus a set of the 95 printings that you revised. I default to your '95 revision.

BlackBat242 January 11th, 2010 11:51 PM

Yes, WaterBob.
;)

Supplement Four January 17th, 2010 07:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by the angle (Post 340677)
Sling bullets: Str bonus applies to all missile weapon damage except: crossbows (never) and bows (unless they're specially made).

Here's one for you, Steve:

Here's a new question about hurled weapons.

-- Attack Bonus --

On page 14 of the PHB, under Missile Attack Adjustment, it says this: Missile Attack Adjustment is used to modify a character's die roll whenever he uses a missile weapon (a bow or thrown weapon). A positive number makes it easier for the character to hit with a missile, while a negative number makes it harder.

On page 90 of the PHB, under Modifiers to the Attack Roll, it says this: A character's Strength modifier can modify the die roll, altering both the chance to hit and the damage caused. This modifier is always applied to melees and attacks with hurled missile weapons (a spear or an axe).

On page 99 of the PHB, under Missile Weapons in Combat, it says this: Missile weapons are divided into two general categories. The first includes all standard, direct-fire, single-target missiles--slings, arrows, quarrels, spears, throwing axes and the like.


Given the rules above, is it correct to say that a character with STR 17 and 16, using a sling to cast a stone at a Medium sized target at Short Range, is +2 attack (+1 for STR and +1 for DEX), and if he hits will do 1d4+2 (1d4+1 normal bullet damage with +1 damage due to STR)?

In other words, if I'm reading the above correctly, when using a sling, the character gets to use his STR attack bonus AND his DEX missile adjustment.

This is correct, yes?

the angle January 17th, 2010 04:34 PM

The note on page 90 is wrong, and for some reason it was never corrected in subsequent printings. Only the Dex mod applies to the attack roll, and the Str mod applies to the damage roll.

Steve

Supplement Four January 18th, 2010 12:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by the angle (Post 341471)
The note on page 90 is wrong, and for some reason it was never corrected in subsequent printings. Only the Dex mod applies to the attack roll, and the Str mod applies to the damage roll.

Thanks for the insight, brother. I really appreciate it (and so do my players!)







EDIT: Steve, new question for you.

The rules allow for a character to move up to half movement and still make a melee attack or missile attack at half ROF.

Is that a single melee attack? Is that an attack routine? Or, is that the full attack?



Here's how I'm reading the rule. Please tell me if I've got it wrong.

If you are a cleric, and you get one attack per round, then you can move up to half your MOVE rate and then attack.

If you are a fighter using a longsword, and you normally get 2 attacks per round, then you can move up to half your MOVE rate and get a single attack.

If you are a fighter using a longsword and a dagger, then you can attack with both weapons.

If you are a monster,and you normally attack routine is claw/claw/bite, then you can move up to half your MOVE rating and still make all three attacks.



It seems to be that you are allowed to move 1/2 MOVE and attack using your normal attack routine (but extra attacks

Is this correct? I'm reading it similar to the notes on multiple attacks during the round.

Or, am I reading that wrong?





2nd EDIT: Another question:

If a character is weilding two weapons (say, a longsword and and a dagger), how do you figure initiative using the Speed Factor modifier?

Do you use both Speed Factors, almost forcing the character to go late in the round?

Example: Longsword is SF 5. Dagger is SF 2. So, a character weilding both weapons would go on an initiative of 1d10 + 7?

Is that correct?

the angle January 18th, 2010 01:23 PM

First, a minor clarification on the attack roll modifiers. Dex modifies the attack roll for ranged weapons only; Str modifies the attack roll for melee attacks, and the damage rolls for both. You probably got that, but it wasn't entirely clear in my note.

Multiple Attacks: I can see how this rule could be interpreted that way, but that's not correct. A character that moves up to half his normal distance retains his full melee capability. If he has multiple attacks, he still gets them all, regardless of whether they come from using two weapons or striking with the same weapon twice as a high-level fighter.

Speed Factors for Dual Weapons: Use the worst of the two speed factors. Don't add them together.

Steve

Supplement Four January 18th, 2010 02:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by the angle (Post 341557)
First, a minor clarification on the attack roll modifiers. Dex modifies the attack roll for ranged weapons only; Str modifies the attack roll for melee attacks, and the damage rolls for both. You probably got that, but it wasn't entirely clear in my note.

It was clear. If I'm using a sling, I use DEX to modify attack and STR to modify damage.

If I'm in melee, using a club, I use STR for both attack and damage.



Quote:

Multiple Attacks: I can see how this rule could be interpreted that way, but that's not correct. A character that moves up to half his normal distance retains his full melee capability. If he has multiple attacks, he still gets them all, regardless of whether they come from using two weapons or striking with the same weapon twice as a high-level fighter.
Cool. Thanks, man!


Quote:

Speed Factors for Dual Weapons: Use the worst of the two speed factors. Don't add them together.
That was going to be my house rule if I didn't hear back from you. Looks like we're on the same page. :)

Thanks again, for your answers!

the angle January 19th, 2010 12:44 PM

Hey, I'm just happy to know that people are still playing 2nd edition.

Steve

Supplement Four January 19th, 2010 07:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by the angle (Post 341703)
Hey, I'm just happy to know that people are still playing 2nd edition.

I was surprised to see how many people are still playing 2E. It's a got a pretty sizable following.

I've been hitting the used bookstores in town (me and my players), buying up 2E material. We have a large used bookstore chain here called Half-Price Book. I freakin' love the place. Huge selection. Everything half price the cover or less.

The 2E stuff is moving. What's there last week isn't there this week.

Over the last couple of months (and after hitting eight of these super-sized used book stores, multiple times, over the last couple of months), we've managed to find just about everything we need.

The 2E forum at Dragonsfoot is hopping with 2E-only players.



IMO, 2E is still the best edition of D&D. It's got the "feel" and "atmosphere" of 1E AD&D, but its much more streamlined and flexible. That last word, "flexible", is key to its continued popularity.

2E is not so far removed from 1E that 1E material can't be used, plug-n-play (mostly), in a 2E game. 3E's d20 system makes too many changes to make 1E/2E mechanics viable without a lot of work on the DM.

Plus, with all the additonal rules in the Complete Fighters Handbook (and others), players can engage in some pretty cool character building.

Character building is both a strength and a weakness of 3E+. The skills/Feat system is neat, but it's a bitch for the DM, having to assign all that stuff to NPCs.

With 2E, the DM's workload is lighter, not requiring all those feats and skills and powers, but still allowing a lot of choice with characters so that players can make individuals from their toons and not just "another fighter" or "another thief".

You guys walked the line between hard core sitting around a table, face-to-face, looking at minis or pencil marks on a sheet of graph paper but also allowing the game to be played, kicked back, on the couch, with the DM describing everything that happens and the action taking place inside the players minds, not a piece of graph paper in sight.

Coming from 1E, that was no easy feat.

Bravo.







EDIT: I feel silly even asking this question, but I will since I see people playing it two ways. With regards to the small shield--the PHB and the Arms & Equipment Guide both say that the shield can be used against two attacks in a round at the player's option.

In the Combat & Tactics book, it's clear that the small shield can be used against all blows from two different attacking enemies.

I think the small shield is used as that described in C&T--that if a character is attacked by three enemies, the player can pick which two will have the shielded AC, while the third ignores the AC on his victim. The shield would be used for all attacks of the two enemies, even if both were high level fighters using 2 attacks per round.

There are people who take the PHB and A&E Guide literally in that the small shield can only be used against two attacks, and that's it. Period. So, if fighting a ghoul, the defender picks to use the shield against both claws, leaving the bite attacking without the shield. Or, the defender could pick a claw and the bite, leaving the other claw attack against no shield.

I'm damn sure I'm correct on this one, despite how the description reads in the PHB and A&E Guide, but what is the "official" word from you on this?

aramis January 19th, 2010 08:18 PM

S4: if you know anybody looking to buy, I've got 2E core and PHBR's I want to offload... up here, no one is doin 2E. It's all 1E, 3E, 4E or OE.

Supplement Four January 20th, 2010 02:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aramis (Post 341750)
S4: if you know anybody looking to buy, I've got 2E core and PHBR's I want to offload... up here, no one is doin 2E. It's all 1E, 3E, 4E or OE.

I wish you'd have told me that a few weeks ago. I just picked up five PHBs and five DMGs for my game. We've got everything we need right now (unless you've got some Dragonlance specific stuff).

shadowdragon January 20th, 2010 08:26 AM

with regards to weapon speed factors, having been hit with polearms multiple times in half as many seconds, not to mention being hit with sword shaped and weighted objects at speeds quite remarkable, I dont use them and never will. Once you actually take the time to use a melee weapon even inexpertly, you grow a healthy respect for those who can and do use them quite expertly.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D5JaQq2Dakg

and just in case you dont think we hit hard, wait for the "OH.....OWW!" at the end of that....

FYI that particular combat is evidently the result of someone not wanting to stay within the bounds of honor we use for calling shots. The guy in all the color demonstrated that he was willing and able to hit as hard as necessary for them to accept the shot as "good"- it was an escalation from normal to excessive.

this is next is one of our smaller events a while back....:D

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q-Cpc...eature=related

aramis January 20th, 2010 08:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Supplement Four (Post 341775)
I wish you'd have told me that a few weeks ago. I just picked up five PHBs and five DMGs for my game. We've got everything we need right now (unless you've got some Dragonlance specific stuff).

Some. PM me a list of what you want and I'll see what I have. I inherited from a former roommate a LOT of duplicates, and moreover, a lot of stuff I never wanted.

ANd I have a nearly complete PHBR (Complete ___ Handbook) set available, too...

the angle January 20th, 2010 01:14 PM

Quote:

With regards to the small shield--the PHB and the Arms & Equipment Guide both say that the shield can be used against two attacks in a round at the player's option.

In the Combat & Tactics book, it's clear that the small shield can be used against all blows from two different attacking enemies.

I think the small shield is used as that described in C&T--that if a character is attacked by three enemies, the player can pick which two will have the shielded AC, while the third ignores the AC on his victim. The shield would be used for all attacks of the two enemies, even if both were high level fighters using 2 attacks per round.
That's right. We weren't quite as rigorous with jargon as we probably should have been. Can be used against two attackers would be correct.

Steve

Supplement Four January 20th, 2010 01:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aramis (Post 341801)
Some. PM me a list of what you want and I'll see what I have. I inherited from a former roommate a LOT of duplicates, and moreover, a lot of stuff I never wanted.

ANd I have a nearly complete PHBR (Complete ___ Handbook) set available, too...

As far as I know, we've got all the stuff we need. I was just checking to see if there's something I didn't know about. We've got all the Complete books we want, plus the revised core rules.

For Dragonlance, the Dragonlance Tales boxed set was a boon to find at the used book store. Excellent resource for this campaign. I've got all the original DL modules (missing two of the non-module ones), and I am interested in finding DL 15 (but not in a hurry--I figure it will take a year or more to go through all 12 modules of the epic, and by then, we may be sick of D&D, looking to play Traveller or something else).

Supplement Four January 20th, 2010 01:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by the angle (Post 341471)
The note on page 90 is wrong, and for some reason it was never corrected in subsequent printings. Only the Dex mod applies to the attack roll, and the Str mod applies to the damage roll.

Steve

Because the rule in the PHB is stated so strongly (as on pg. 90 of the PHB) and in multiple parts of the book, there are a couple 2E players that aren't quite "buying" it.

I default to you because I think, since you're one of the three leads on 2E, you know what you're talking about. A couple of other 2E people wonder if your recollection is incorrect.

For example, one person said:

It is certainly possible that Winters advised that strength bonuses not be added to attacks with missile weapons, and that was clearly standard by the time of D20/3e, but it looks to me like Cook decided to keep the first edition rule in this case. The fact that it was the rule in first edition and that the PHB/DMG do not seem to have included it as a typing error, but rather clearly stated and reiterated it several times, suggests that Winters is wrong on this issue.

If you say there's no chance that the book is correct, and it is, indeed, a piece of erratta that didn't make it onto the errata sheets, then I believe you. And, your call is what I'm going to run in my game (since I want to run it as close to the "official" rules as possible).

BlackBat242 January 20th, 2010 11:15 PM

Ummm... that guy is wrong, I think.

1E specifically states that str hit & damage adjustments "are for melee combat", and that dex adjustment is "for missile combat"... and NO mention is made of any cross-use of either!

The ONLY place where str is allowed for missile combat in 1E is when you have magic gauntlets and girdle, and are using a magic hammer.

2E added the use of str for missile combat, it was not in 1E.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:11 PM.

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