Bryce said...

EOTB

So ... slow work day? Every day?
Re: dumping segments

In 2E every init roll gets a modifier and the base die was changed to 1d10, which takes the total over "10" much more often. So they disassociated the count to six-second spans of time, because keeping it would mean the new system would push routine actions out of a round and into the next. While if a total of "13" is simply an abstract "after everything up to 12 but before everything 14 or higher", this isn't a problem.
 

The1True

My my my, we just loooove to hear ourselves don't we?
We definitely used segments back in the day (That's how we ended up with a cheezy bard specializing in darts). I still have my nifty little home-made combat/campaign clock somewhere that I used to keep track of actions in combat and resource use outside of combat. It mostly worked but didn't mix well with the amount of weed we were smoking in our 20's lol. :rolleyes:
 

squeen

8, 8, I forget what is for
Hey @EOTB ! I forgot to mention something to you. I was going to put it in a play report, but I got distracted. The party is two rounds into fighting with a Beholder they freed from a column of ice that had been frozen while half-way emerged from one (of the three remaining in the world) bags of holding . After seeing what a terror the thing was, they decided to try and stuff it back INTO the bag...that means I FINALLY GOT TO USE AD&D BtB GRAPPLING RULES (when they tried to grab it)!! TWICE (two fails)!!

Honestly, it looks cumbersome, but at-the-table it just took half a minute to calculate the probability and roll the percentile dice. No fuss!

Afterwards, I gave myself a 1e DM's gold-star.:)
 
Last edited:

The1True

My my my, we just loooove to hear ourselves don't we?
Tell me you didn't use WvAC without telling me you didn't use WvAC :ROFLMAO:
Yeah yeah, but honestly who uses those rules. They went out the window with spell components under 500 gp.
Weapon speed is pretty cool. Gives you a real reason to choose a shortsword over a two-hander etc.
 

EOTB

So ... slow work day? Every day?
Double ahem

It gives me a chuckle whenever I see the conventional wisdom that WvAC is a uniquely burdensome conditional modifier, unlike spells, magic items, etc.

 

EOTB

So ... slow work day? Every day?
Hey @EOTB ! I forgot to mention something to you. I was going to put it in a play report, but I got distracted. The party is two rounds into fighting with a Beholder they freed from a column of ice that had been frozen while half-way emerged from one (of the three remaining in the world) bags of holding . After seeing what a terror the thing was, they decided to try and stuff it back INTO the bag...that means I FINALLY GOT TO USE AD&D BtB GRAPPLING RULES (when they tried to grab it)!! TWICE (two fails)!!

Honestly, it looks cumbersome, but at-the-table it just took half a minute to calculate the probability and roll the percentile dice. No fuss!

Afterwards, I gave myself a 1e DM's gold-star.:)
That sounds like a fun game :cool:

Glad you found grappling playable at the table!
 

PrinceofNothing

High Executarch
Staff member
It gives me a chuckle whenever I see the conventional wisdom that WvAC is a uniquely burdensome conditional modifier, unlike spells, magic items, etc.
Too many variables for too little gain I think. It feels finnicky. Attack rolls, saving throws, spells, that's all abstracted and smooooth. WvAC by contrast appears cumbersome and oddly specific. I am not gainsaying years of play experience with my subjective impressions, but there you have it.

By contrast segments are actually an elegant way of partitioning a round and add resolution to the game. They tie in beautifully with surprise (you had pointed out how much deadlier suprise was in AD&D). It is fine work.
 

EOTB

So ... slow work day? Every day?
Too many variables for too little gain I think. It feels finnicky. Attack rolls, saving throws, spells, that's all abstracted and smooooth. WvAC by contrast appears cumbersome and oddly specific. I am not gainsaying years of play experience with my subjective impressions, but there you have it.

By contrast segments are actually an elegant way of partitioning a round and add resolution to the game. They tie in beautifully with surprise (you had pointed out how much deadlier suprise was in AD&D). It is fine work.
I would disagree with the too little gain part - nobody wants to munchkin darts when WvAC is used - but I agree with the perception part. If I make a long sword +1, +3 vs water spiders it's a cool magic item. If I make a long sword +1, +3 vs leather armor, it's a cool magic item.

If I say a long sword is +2 to hit leather armor

 

The Heretic

Should be playing D&D instead
Double ahem

It gives me a chuckle whenever I see the conventional wisdom that WvAC is a uniquely burdensome conditional modifier, unlike spells, magic items, etc.
One of the players in my group got very excited about the new version of Descent that was coming out. Apparently you input the state of the board at the end of the player turn and the AI will send you detailed instructions on how to move the monsters and decide their actions.

<blink>

I told him that that sounded awful. Nice idea but godawful in practice. I always felt WvAC was probably the same way, if you wanted to do something like that you were better off implementing it in a video game. If you use it at the table, more power to you. I am awed by your dedication.

On a related note I was very excited, back in the day, to implement the speed factor rules in 2e. Aha! How awesome is this! They are a penalty to your initiative roll to take in account how unwieldy the weapon is. Of course, having the book open to the weapons chart was rather, *ahem* unwieldy, so I excitedly bought the 2e DM Screen, only to discover that weapon speeds WEREN'T ON THE DAMN THING.
 

squeen

8, 8, I forget what is for
Recall EOTB's method (and mine now) is a WvsAC redux the eliminates the shield increments to make it smaller. The result is a tidy table (on the PC's sheet) like this for each weapon they are proficient. It's easy to use, or ignore. Just because you couldn't handle juggling it in your game once, doesn't mean you haven't grown in capacity as a DM over the years.

________________vs. flesh-like | leather-like | chain-like | plate-like
sword, long............+2............-.............-...........-2
bow, long..............+3...........+2.............-...........-1
dart...................+1...........-1............-3...........-5
staff, quarter.........+1............-............-3...........-7
sword, two-handed.......-...........+3............+2...........+2
flail, footman's.......-1...........+1............+1...........+2


How can you not love the notion of a druid tap-tap-tapping away at a fighter in plate mail with his quarter-staff? (or on a dragon's hide?)

Also, Guy Fullerton put out a very nice Equipment summary sheet with all the WvsAC modifiers. PM me (or him) if you want a copy.
 
Last edited:

EOTB

So ... slow work day? Every day?
I do think shrinking it down is a good idea, mainly so the list of modifiers doesn't appear so big.

But the reality is, most people never take more than five different weapon proficiencies in their entire playing career, plus a couple of wild cards*. (Granted, saying this often compels every contrarian out of the woodwork who insists they do in fact randomly select a new polearm type to specialize in with every new fighter character they play). In my time behind the screen, I see over and over:

My favorite sword allowed by this character type
My favorite missile weapon allowed by this character type
My favorite blunt weapon allowed by this character type
My favorite small weapon allowed by this character type
*Random magical weapon I found that I want to use, times however many WP I've earned since level 1

(incidentally, I always get excited when I see a new player pick "spear", presuming it's an option for them, because I might be dealing with a pro)

Only the last one varies from character to character. But Ready Player One will reliably select the same sword type with the same character type over and over and over and over and over...you get the point. 70% of the weapons list is in practicality almost exclusively the province of the DM.

In play, the modifier they apply when using their favorite sword type - chosen for the 9th consecutive character - against a bandit never changes. Or an orc. Or some dude in plate mail. After one campaign, no one's looking at their sheet wondering what they add/subtract from their roll. Just like that big table of Strength modifiers against six different mechanics isn't constantly re-referenced by anyone who plays the game (and their character) for any length of time, that puts any effort at all into absorbing their character sheet.

And stat modifiers change far more often for players from campaign to campaign than weapon modifiers too. Because they don't get to pick their stats.

I will however concede that the WvAC table would present an annoyance to game system flirters, who play 10 sessions with a game system, and then switch to another game system for their next 10 sessions, and a third game system after that.

But then I firmly believe that half of this bullshit extolling of "elegance" in rule design is really just a thinly-veiled plea from system-flirters to keep game systems simple enough that cycling through games like a college freshman on a bender doesn't make it obvious they're only passingly familiar with the game being played.
 

Malrex

So ... slow work day? Every day?
We don't use the WvsAC...but we did homebrew Armor absorption and armor hp. Same sort of principle--but different. A guy with a dagger going against a guy in platemail might hit, but the armor will probably absorb all the damage. Once your armor hp is used up, you still get the AC of the armor type, but it can no longer absorb damage.
We like it...it makes sense to us (and makes someone who has the Armorer nonweapon proficiency important to repair armor hp)...but it does involve more dice rolling which can slightly slow down the game.
 

Beoric

8, 8, I forget what is for
It gives me a chuckle whenever I see the conventional wisdom that WvAC is a uniquely burdensome conditional modifier, unlike spells, magic items, etc.
My issue is with the execution, not the concept. I don't like the way shields are treated, or not treated, depending on the interpretation; and assuming I was interpreting shields correctly, I think I didn't like the numbers assigned. I expect I would like the numbers even less now that there is so much information as to how armor actually worked.
 

Beek Gwenders

*eyeroll*
Yeah seriously, WvsAT is not a big deal at all (as EOTB has illustrated). The key point for me is getting the players to remember the adjustments; this is easy, I make sure I track the penalties (I know the ones for common weapons by heart) when they attack monsters and tell them: ‘You aren’t getting those WvAT bonuses unless YOU remember to calculate them yourself’. I soon find that players have no problem at all remembering them and calculating them on the fly.

WvsAT has to seen as an additional tool for the DM. It just adds something more to my hand to make things more challenging for players. If I’ve got a bunch of PCs running around with plate mail and great ACs, I can give my goblins and orcs lucerne hammers or halberds etc. and suddenly they’ve got +1 or +2 to hit the PCs without me having to give out magic weapons, or other bonuses. It increases my options and the challenge level of low-HD monsters. The same sort of things can be said for weapon length, space required, the ability to disarm or dismount riders. These are all tools that make combat more tactical and raise weapon choice above just ‘which weapon does the best damage’.
 

Beoric

8, 8, I forget what is for
On reflection, I think the 1e WvAC is a bit fiddly and a poor simulation, which makes it not worth it. The fixes I can think of to make it a good simulation are quite fiddly, and probably not worth it. So I end up preferring the solution which is not at all fiddly and doesn't try to simulate it at all.

The shield is the biggest problem. Shields are already way undervalued in every edition, so whether you have a shield or not should make a big difference. But then you need to simulate both armor type without shield. Maybe you could have a separate column for shields and sum the armor type adjustment and the shield adjustment, but the existing AC 9 column is the opposite of what I would want to see for that.

It would help to shorten the categories to hacking, slashing, crushing and piercing weapons, but you would still have the shield + armor issue. In that case it might be simpler to place it in the monster stat block (different AC for hack/slash/crush/pierce) then to have players track the adjustments for shields plus 9 different armor types (since padded would be different from leather, and studded leather might be different from ring).

How can you not love the notion of a druid tap-tap-tapping away at a fighter in plate mail with his quarter-staff? (or on a dragon's hide?)
See, this is part of my issue. Staves are greatly underestimated, and two-hand swords are greatly overestimated. A quarterstaff is not a broom handle, it is long, heavy, fast, accurate, and wielded in a manner that takes full advantage of using the muscle in both your arms and the weight of your body behind them. And unlike steel it doesn't bend. It won't cut through plate, but neither will a sword, it is all blunt force trauma.

A two-handed sword, on the other hand, is lighter than you think, and while it employs leverage in the same way as a quarterstaff it is quite flexible and transfers energy less efficiently. The edge won't cut plate but will cut flesh very nicely. Having a staff be better than a two-handed sword against an unarmoured opponent but 7 points worse against plate is ass-backwards to a phenomenal degree. Also, they should probably have similar speed factors.

It is particularly stupid for a staff to have a penalty against chain. The rigidity of plate will spread the force of a blow over an area, but the flexibility of chain doesn't do it at all. The compression of links might soften a blow somewhat, but I doubt it would be enough to be noticed in a system that measures AC in 5% increments. Basically, chain (which is assumed to be worn over padding) ought to be the same as padded armor; if we accept that a staff is +1 against padded armor (which is also debatable, but leave it be for now), then it should be +4 (or +3 if we are generous in our assessment of ring compression) against chain, not -1.
 

robertsconley

*eyeroll*
On reflection, I think the 1e WvAC is a bit fiddly and a poor simulation, which makes it not worth it. The fixes I can think of to make it a good simulation are quite fiddly, and probably not worth it. So I end up preferring the solution which is not at all fiddly and doesn't try to simulate it at all.
For my Majestic Fantasy rules, I went back to first principles and just gave each weapons a short description along with something they can do based on my research and experience with reenactments. I kept it low key.


For example

Axe, battle 50d/ea. 8.0/lbs.
Damage: 1-Hand, 1d8
This is a single head axe between 24 to 36 inches long. Like the throwing axe, the head is shaped longer from the blade to the butt of the axe. At the attacker’s option you can use this to pin an opponent’s weapon or shield. After making a successful to hit roll, the opponent needs to make a saving throw or the weapon or shield is pinned. The attacker can’t use the axe to attack with while pinning their opponent's weapon.

Mace, small 9d/ea. 3.0/lbs.
Damage: 1d4+1
Used since the beginning of recorded history, maces became a popular battlefield weapon when chainmail became common a millennia ago. It is still a popular choice despite the spread of plate armor and war hammers. This weapon is between 18 to 24 inches long and has a ball of metal affixed to the end. It gets +1 to hit versus opponents wearing chainmail or gelatinous creatures like ochre jellies or black puddings. It is usable in the off-hand when dual wielding*

*dual wielding in my rules just gets you +1 to AC and the choice of which weapon to attack with.

The shield is the biggest problem. Shields are already way undervalued in every edition, so whether you have a shield or not should make a big difference. But then you need to simulate both armor type without shield. Maybe you could have a separate column for shields and sum the armor type adjustment and the shield adjustment, but the existing AC 9 column is the opposite of what I would want to see for that.
Well at some point D&D is what it is. So for my take, I added to what the shield can do.

SHIELDS
Shield Slam:
After making a successful attack, the target needs to make a saving throw at an advantage** or be knocked prone to the ground. The target has to spend a full round getting up. Anybody hitting a prone character has advantage for their attack roll. Fighting from a prone position result in a disadvantaged attack roll for all weapons except a crossbow.

Shield Parry: A shield may be sacrificed to negate one hit. The shield is destroyed but no damage is suffered by the user. A magical shield will lose one +1 bonus per sacrifice. (i.e. a +1 shield can negate two hits before being destroyed).

Opponents: The shield bonus is only usable against this number of attackers. For example a defender using a buckler will only gain it's +1 AC bonus against one attacker.***

**I will probably drop this to a normal save in the final version.
***and this proved too fiddly to point where I wasn't remembering to use it. So out it goes for the final version.

Also you can attack with the shield if need be.

Shield, small 42d/ea. 5.0/lbs.
+1 AC, Opponents: 2, Damage: 1d6, Spike +5d; +1 damage
This round shield is strapped to the off weapon arm. It is made of wood and leather along with a metal rim. The shield covers the character’s torso. The character may opt to attack or slam with the shield. A metal spike may be affixed to the shield to increase its damage.

The problem with weapon characteristics to date is that they been unwieldy to use. For AD&D require a large chart lookup as well as judgment call if the target is a monster not wearing armor.

My solution is to treat it like a magic items. Weapons are designed as tools of war. Find out what the tools do and write it up while keeping mind that D&D isn't that detailed of a system.
 
Top