Me and the DMG

[squeen]

Wait, are you suggesting that the answer to high-powered characters is to have the 1 HD monsters use the weaponless combat tables?

I haven't looked those pages up yet, but it has been said elsewhere (K&K?) that when large groups of low HD monster attack a high-level fighter, that overwhelming him with numbers via a grapple attack is probably their best bet.

Holy Cow! --- page 3 of this thread already, and I haven't even cracked the 2nd DMG topic!

 

[squeen]

Squeen: Just out of curiousity, you're not talking about brand new, 1st level characters with AC less than zero, are you?

No way! New PCs can't afford plate mail anyway (unless you gift it to them).

 

[Beoric]

I haven't looked those pages up yet, but it has been said elsewhere (K&K?) that when large groups of low HD monster attack a high-level fighter, that overwhelming him with numbers via a grapple attack is probably their best bet.

I can't imagine doing a horde of attacks using the grapping rules. Gygax didn't use the grappling rules. I would change editions first - oh, wait, I did!

 

[EOTB]

Wait, are you suggesting that the answer to high-powered characters is to have the 1 HD monsters use the weaponless combat tables?

1st Edition Players Handbook, pg. 105

A party of 5 characters - a magic-user, a cleric, a thief, a human fighter,
and a dwarf fighter surprise an illusionist with 20 arcs. The opponents are
30' distant, and the magic-user immediately begins casting a sleep spell.
The cleric also prepares to cast a spell, silence, 15'radius. Meanwhile, the
thief darts to the rear of the party to attempt to hide in the shadows and
attack from behind when opportunity presents itself; the human fighter
nocks an arrow and shoots it at the illusionist; and the dwarf hurls an axe.
The surprise segment is over, and initiative is determined. The
illusionist/orcs win initiative, and while the former begins a spell of his
own, the latter rush to attack, hurling spears as they come. A spear hits the
magic-user, so the sleep spell is spoiled. The orcs are attacked by the
fighters, the cleric casts his spell upon the illusionist, and the magical
silence both spoils his prismatic spray spell and enhances the chances for
the thief's attack, for he is successfully slinking and sliding around in the
shadows. Thus, after surprise and 1 melee round, the party has inflicted 2
hits upon the illusionist, spoiled his spell attack, and felled one orc and
wounded another. They have taken 3 spear hits and had one of their spell
attacks ruined.

Initiative is now checked for the second round. The illusionist/orcs again
win initiative and attack first, 5 orcs going after each fighter to grapple, 6
rushing the magic-user, and 3 heading for the cleric. The fighters are
pulled down, as is the magic-user, but the cleric avoids their grasp. The
illusionist begins casting another spell, one which requires no verbal
component; he does not hear the thief behind him. It is now the party's
turn in the round. The cleric smites 1 of the onrushing orcs and kills it, and
the thief stabs the illusionist from behind with his sword, killing him; the
fighters and magic-user are held fast by orcs, so they can do nothing.
Round 2 is over.

The initiative roll in the third round goes to the party. The cleric kills
another orc, while the thief rushes at the orcs holding the nearest fighter. It
is now the orcs' turn, and as their leader is dead and they still face 2
powerful opponents, they will check morale. It is probable that they will
kill the pinned characters with dagger thrusts if their morale does not
break, or that they will release the pinned characters and run away if their
morale is bad.

This is written before the final DMG rules were created, so it doesn't mention fending off strikes, and the like.

But it's still true that for monsters, quantity has a quality all its own. For player characters, they may break up or turn back overbearing/grappling attempts that find them out of position, true.

But if the dice ever fail them once, they're dead. Dagger to the throat bypasses hit points, armor class, and all the gemgaws they accumulate. Just dead.

If unarmed combat rules are in play, even high level characters must engage greater numbers of weak opponents seriously and cautiously, at risk of their lives. Reckless high level characters will be eaten.

 

[EOTB]

I can't imagine doing a horde of attacks using the grapping rules. Gygax didn't use the grappling rules. I would change editions first - oh, wait, I did!

Most DMs don't have a problem rolling hordes of d20s that can only hit on a 19 or 20 out of 20. An attack roll is an attack roll is an attack roll.

 

[Beoric]

Most DMs don't have a problem rolling hordes of d20s that can only hit on a 19 or 20 out of 20. An attack roll is an attack roll is an attack roll.

It's all the situational modifiers that make it so miserable (how much taller and heavier is an orc than a dwarf, anyway?), and using a different system for each of pummeling, grappling and overbearing. Plus you still have to refer to the attack matrixes, a d6 and a d4 roll for attacker and defender to determine the two variable modifiers, which variable modifiers are determined for each attacker. It is not clear whether the variable modifier is rerolled for each attack, but even if it isn't, each orc gets a difference variable modifier. Plus, pummeling allows 2 attacks per round, and overbearing can result in additional attacks. Also, 50% of damage from these rules is not actual, which is something else to track. Yes, I know it is not hard math, but every additional subsystem adds to the load. Gygax never used these rules for a reason. IIRC he claimed to instead use the rules on UA p. 106, which are somewhat simpler.

And as I read the rules, they are not dead if they are ever grappled or overborne. "Dagger to throat" never applies, because under these rules the PCs are never truly helpless; the best result is over 95 on a grapple or over 00 on a pummel, both of which stun, so that (per p. 70) there is an attack bonus of +4. The grappling rules expressly allow the grappled PC to try to grapple their attacker, so clearly the PC is not entirely defenceless. Unconsciousness only occurs at 0 hp. I note the UA rules at least allow a chance of someone being knocked out on a second pummel, and the orc at least doesn't have to drop his sword to do it.

Now it is possible that you will argue that there is some part of the rules that I have misunderstood or misinterpreted, and it is actually simpler/easier than all that. But if the rules need careful parsing to understand, or are capable of multiple interpretations, that does not make them any less of a mess (which I hold to be true when it occurs in any edition).

 

[EOTB]

Those are some fair criticisms, although I disagree with the assertion that an overborne and helpless person can't be slain outright. The later UA systems are more akin to the "standard" d20 combat system, and lose a lot of flavor. It's just the same attrition procedure as normal combat...so everybody uses normal combat. let's not pretend making them the same meant the revised system was ever frequently used. It has no payoff, no pizazz. At least in normal combat you kill something after slowly attriting down its HP.

There are two questions: does the result justify the use of the 2nd system, and, does the DMG system have to be used as fiddly as it is written?

I do shave it down.

- I don't see the d6 and d4 roll as worth the time and decision-indecision. getting an extra 2.5%/3.5% to one of the rolls of your choice isn't moving the needle most times

- Just because something gets down to 1% granulation doesn't mean you have to keep it there. I eyeball. This usually gets within 10% of what fastidiously tabulating every possible % modifier would get you. You get the effect without much less time overhead.

- Like anything, after using it a few times you get a feel for it and the eyeballing takes very little time and becomes very accurate. 80% of the combatants have the same rough "variable(s) profile".

- I just don't believe that DMs worthy of the title are completely lost eyeballing STR and DEX scores, or rough height/mass, for most monsters. If you truly have an oddball, you can think about it ahead of time. No monster goes on a diet over the course of an adventure.

- The different charts for the 3 systems is what makes it so effective. Thieves, monks, and lightly armored zorro-type fighters excel at pummeling (and have around a 85% chance to interrupt most spellcasters they can close with, by throwing a right hook - why bother trying to stick a sword in them?). Combatants in heavy armor get boned trying to defend against a grapple. Overbearing actually uses the same attack chart as grappling and only has its own results chart, but once again, combatants in heavy armor are likewise boned. Suddenly the use of light skirmishers out in front of heavy troops once again makes tactical sense.

- This is all level-independent, so 1st level characters are as good as 20th level characters, who gain little from their levels (outside of HP/staying power) if someone closes with them. But the %KO chance means they're not as "safe" even with that advantage.

- Players have fun rolling those damage/KO charts when the punches are landing. The table is rocking. And since there are so many attacks that have a good chance of hitting, someone gets incapacitated reaaaallll fast. This isn't the long-time dice shoot out between a couple of low/mid level combatants with good ACs, it goes quick.

- Since non-intelligent monsters/predators attack to overbear, if they do knock someone down to the ground (just like we see in "nature is dangerous" vids) and start ripping at them, real fear hits a players eyes.

- There are multiple references scattered around the books from OD&D forward that immobile characters can be slain so long as no one is otherwise engaging their would-be-slayers in melee. You see that again in the orc example above. I don't see how it can be reasonably interpreted any other way.

Grapple And Hold: See NON-LETHAL AND WEAPONLESS COMBAT PROCEDURES.

Special "To Hit" Bonuses:

The following general rules will be of assistance when you must adjudicate melee combat or missile fire:

Opponent encumbered, held by one leg, off balance, etc./+2
Opponent stunned, held by both legs, slowed, partially bound, etc./+4
Opponent magically asleep, held, paralyzed, or totally immobile/Automatic

(Cf. MELEE, magically Sleeping or Held Opponents.)
Apply bonuses to the chance of the opponent being struck. The opponent will gain no dexterity bonus, of course. In totally immobilized and powerless situations, the opponent can be fully trussed, slain, or whatever in 1 round, so no bonus need be given.

See also MELEE, Flank And Rear Attacks.

DMG pg 67

- Yes, its fiddly. But manageable. And the effects on how players approach groups are material.

Again (and most importantly) it's fun! Bar brawls are a hoot. Unarmed combat can be tolerated in cities and such in a way that pulling out swords isn't. The expectation is you put up your fists (or rassle) and settle things without the loss of life. Taking everything to mortal combat at the drop of a hat earns a certain reputation. This gives thieves an edge in urban/"civilized" areas.

EDIT -

the best result is over 95 on a grapple or over 00 on a pummel, both of which stun, so that (per p. 70) there is an attack bonus of +4.

Test out a few white room combats. Once one person gets stunned, it's a quick descent into unconsciousness - a bunch of free shots at bonus to hit (that +4 on a d20 is +20% on the percentile scale), all of which themselves can stun with bonuses to push those results rolls over the stun threshold. The victim goes to 0 HP real fast. Do you not allow unconscious enemies to be slain?

 

[squeen]

But if the dice ever fail them once, they're dead. Dagger to the throat bypasses hit points, armor class, and all the gemgaws they accumulate. Just dead.

If unarmed combat rules are in play, even high level characters must engage greater numbers of weak opponents seriously and cautiously, at risk of their lives. Reckless high level characters will be eaten.

This brings a lump to my throat. Seriously. Lethal danger, at all levels, puts an edge into the game that maintains the mystery and terror of the Deep Corners of the World. Going into goblin caves, ancient crypts, and the like, should produce the same edge-of-your-seat, heart-pounding, excitement of a good horror flick.

Ignore these rules for drowning in a sea of orcs, or hand-wave away the terrifying veil that is Darkness (with ubiquitous infravision or infinite torches, etc.)---I am telling you people: YOU WILL LOSE SOMETHING!

I know. I did. (...but I'm gettin' it back.)

There are tons of other RPG games out there.
Let another be the one where you can play "fantasy super-hero dress up" in a safe-space---but, man,...THAT AIN'T D&D!

My game's got teeth!

Forget the dagger...

The orc pounces on your hapless pinned companion, flings his helmet aside, and bites down hard---ripping his throat out with its teeth.
It then looks up, face bloody, to see who's next.

Please...use that instead, with my compliments.

...and that will be probably the last time someone boredly proclaims, "I charge the orcs, and hit them with my sword."

 

[Beoric]

@EOTB Two things:

1. A defense of the rules in which you state that you ignore or handwave part of the rules is not a particularly good defence of said rules.

2. My point was that I didn't see these rules as fun, not because of their intent but because of their functionality. You have not convinced me of the error of my ways.

@squeen: my game is pretty lethal, I just use more streamlined mechanics. But strictly using the grapping rules does not give you the results you think it gives you, with the result that you are killing the PCs through narration, not adjudication. In RL being knocked down and grappled does not render you helpless without a lot more, and even if you are pinned you are not necessarily so immobilized that you throat becomes an easy target for throat slitting, although I suppose with a one minute round there would be a reasonable chance. Since we are making up rules perhaps a save would be in order?

 

[DangerousPuhson]

Tricky topic.

A move that insta-kills anything has potential to imbalance the game something fierce and be abused severely. I mean, if you have a hard time with insta-kill traps being somewhat unfair, imagine if you transform every encounter into a potential insta-kill. It goes both ways too... what happens when the players walk up to a sleeping dragon and declare "I grapple it then slit it's throat"? (or if your argument then becomes "well it won't work on dragons because the size difference is too big", then what happens when they try it on a lich?)

Seems dicey, but if you're looking for a good guide, the coup-de-grace rules from 3e were pretty balanced and still maintained the desired effect.

 

[squeen]

@Beoric : If we can just get past the notion that we are arguing about editions, and instead see what we can learn from 1st Revision --- i.e. what did it try to fix/clarify, then we don't have to get too deep in the particular mechanics, and just make sure we preserve the intent. Why did Gygax think it was important enough to amend the 0e unarmed combat rules?

The point here is that you (and I) has eschewed unarmed combat as a confusing PITA --- and EOTB brilliantly points out it's in that pesky 1e DGM for a very good reason---one you've already admitted that we both had missed! Being outnumbered, at any XP level, should make your players panic a bit (possibly reaching for that fireball spell).

For me, the goal is to either take the "high road" and get proficient with the 1e grappling (as written) --- or find something a bit simpler that works for me until I feel like I'm ready (as a DM) to take the training-wheels off.

It's the same thing I'm doing with Weapons vs. AC---a half-step between nothing and the full PHB table, that looks a bit like the LotFP approach.

That type of "fiddling" is really a whole other topic/thread called "Matt Finch, Swords & Wizardry, and Me". S&W is very close to the 0e/1e hybrid I played in my youth, so it was easy for me to be drawn to it. Finch created it AFTER he did OSRIC (1e). Why? My guess---Rules Light (it was a trendy thing, 4e reactionary?). It's easier for the DM and players to get going with it. It's not "Advanced".

The goal (for me) is just to keep hammering away at up-ing my game and see what it brings to the table. EOTB has his Jeep (when prodded, even he'll admit it's got some custom mods)...I'm still tinkering with mine. The whole 0e mind-set has always been DIY (quoting Finch: "Imagine the Hell Out of It!"), so I'm not afraid to experiment. But what I'm learning (and the topic of this thread) is that the answer is frequently sitting in a (inscrutable) book that's been right in front of me for decades. It's not perfect, but its just plain stupid to toss aside the hard-won lessons written down inside---so I'm doing my homework, learning the "why" of things. Many friendly folk here (and other places on-line too) have been exceptional teachers.

I wish that the progression of editions HAD been a continuous, unbroken rise to perfection---and while I don't doubt that there are some gems in the later stuff---I know for a fact that something got lost too. Too many stupid "market research polls to see what players want". I ask you: When, in the history of mankind, has that kind of crass commerical thinking ever produced anything of great quality? The true spirit of the OSR = Recover What Was Lost! (...and not that everything written past 1979 is junk, as it's detractor attempt to paint it.) I don't think anyone would argue against the notion that 5e dialed back the clock a bit and is better for it.

 

[The Heretic]

Speaking of Rube Goldbergesque....

 

[squeen]

Speaking of Rube Goldbergesque....

Assuming you are referring to 1e unarmed combat --- if you're not ready for it, then that's totally cool. Find something that does makes you comfortable --- but do find something. It has a place in the Great Clockworks of D&D.

 

[squeen]

@squeen: my game is pretty lethal, I just use more streamlined mechanics.

Are your high-level PC's afraid of a large mob of orcs? If so, then I'd say you're golden.
(DP would say "Stay gold"...which I suspect doesn't quite mean the same thing...)

(EDIT: Mine previously were too...but that's because I gave them poisoned arrows. My players HATE poison, precisely because it's the other Great Equalizer.)

 

[squeen]

..what happens when they try it on a lich?)

hold person, wall of fire, telekinesis, etc. I think a lich would fight tactically to prevent being approached, if nothing else, so it's spells weren't disrupted. Also, I'm not sure throat slitting bothers the undead so much. Details.

Botton-line: Try it! See what works! You can be skeptical, but there is ample anecdotal evidence that 1e-ish unarmed combat works and addresses an issue.

 

[The Heretic]

Assuming you are referring to 1e unarmed combat --- if you're not ready for it, then that's totally cool. Find something that does makes you comfortable --- but do find something. It has a place in the Great Clockworks of D&D.

Lol yes, that was a bit of snark, mainly in reference to an earlier comment in this thread.

 

[EOTB]

@EOTB Two things:

1. A defense of the rules in which you state that you ignore or handwave part of the rules is not a particularly good defence of said rules.

2. My point was that I didn't see these rules as fun, not because of their intent but because of their functionality. You have not convinced me of the error of my ways.

...

In RL being knocked down and grappled does not render you helpless without a lot more, and even if you are pinned you are not necessarily so immobilized that you throat becomes an easy target for throat slitting, although I suppose with a one minute round there would be a reasonable chance. Since we are making up rules perhaps a save would be in order?

1. People who debate against you want to take away the ability to modify the system; when debating for themselves, a common response to why a criticism of their system should be discarded is because you can modify the system they're defending. That's a people-thing.

2. I never am attempting to change the mind of a someone on the other side of a debate. That's a fools errand. You play to the crowd or don't bother playing

I suspect if most people tried to out-grapple six burly men at the same time, they could be completely restrained in short order. We're talking about groups. If one person is wrestling with another, then yes it probably must be taken to 0 HP/unconsciousness to get a coup.

Tricky topic.

A move that insta-kills anything has potential to imbalance the game something fierce and be abused severely. I mean, if you have a hard time with insta-kill traps being somewhat unfair, imagine if you transform every encounter into a potential insta-kill. It goes both ways too... what happens when the players walk up to a sleeping dragon and declare "I grapple it then slit it's throat"? (or if your argument then becomes "well it won't work on dragons because the size difference is too big", then what happens when they try it on a lich?)

Seems dicey, but if you're looking for a good guide, the coup-de-grace rules from 3e were pretty balanced and still maintained the desired effect.

People who have a hard time with insta-kills of any sort should be playing a gentler RPG. AD&D is unashamedly unconcerned with their hard time.

Grapple with a lich and automatically take damage from its cold-touch (which also paralyzes); also it isn't biological but instead negative planar energy so can only be damaged by magic. So "couping" doesn't really apply but you could disrupt its spells that way at a likely terrible personal cost. Grapple with a dragon? Sure, knock yourself out. Maybe you'll roll 00 and the dragon roll 01. But if the dragon rolls a 10 or higher you're screwed, and you still need to roll an 00. But I have no problems with an enlarged group of characters grappling an ogre or hill giant, and cutting its throat, as one possible example. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

This also gets back to the subtle balance subject. There are numerous ways to defend/insure yourself against being taken down by six orcs and couped. It requires thinking like a wargamer, which a lot of RPGers aren't interested in. Defense in depth, having a spear line in the 2nd rank with spears poking past the front line, awareness of flanking in both attack and defense, using ground obstacles to prevent easy closing, etc.

All of this is extra effort to present and consider by both the players and the DM. It can be skipped, but then there are bubbles - such as "high level characters rarely are threatened by low-level creatures". Nothing wrong with going a different route, such as bounded accuracy, to keep low level stuff viable. But that means high-level characters are mathematically prevented from ever setting up a total enemy ass-kicking with good planning; they're precluded from the joy of wrecking absolute havoc on lesser foes. I want the full spectrum of possibility, from ignominious death to casual dominance, available to high level characters. So bounded accuracy isn't good for the game I'm running.

Speaking of Rube Goldbergesque....

Of course! Combat in AD&D is unrepentantly Goldbergesque. Early D&D kept characters vanilla and applied variety/complexity situationally. Later D&D tends more towards making characters complex and simplifying the situational math. The latter requires less of the DM, so it's a design choice. But this leads into why characters need so many different customization rules over time, to keep a feeling of freshness and variety in the game.

 

[squeen]

Nothing wrong with going a different route, such as bounded accuracy, to keep low level stuff viable.

Can you explain "bonded accuracy" via an example?

 

[EOTB]

The 5E experts could do that with more precision than I. The thrust of it is that It’s a 5E mechanic that handles the scaling so that levels don’t create too large of a power disparity with monsters as PC levels increase.

 

[Beoric]

For me, the goal is to either take the "high road" and get proficient with the 1e grappling (as written) --- or find something a bit simpler that works for me until I feel like I'm ready (as a DM) to take the training-wheels off.

Ok, lets look at this logically. You already have a "to hit" mechanic in place, which other than changing the direction of AC has remained essentially the same across every edition. It seems like that would be a good place to start.

Your purpose is to give minions a fighting chance to take someone down, so you presumably want it to be easier to hit with a grapple or overbear (I will talk about pummeling later) so team monster doesn't need a nat 20. Wearing heavier armor doesn't make you any more dextrous, so let's not let armor improve your AC. A shield probably does help, so let's still include that. Magical bonuses to armor may or may not help, so let's consider that a maybe. So a case could be made for the orcs hitting against AC 10 less shield bonus less magical bonuses. That is much easier to hit. I note that in 4e it would be an attack against reflex, which is more or less armorless AC, so this tracks.

So there is a hit, now what? By the 4e rules, this would result in a grab, which is more or less the equivalent of grabbing someone by the hockey jersey. If you wanted to improvise something more than a grab (which improvisation is also allowable by the rules), you could either have an improvised attack to knock prone next round, or try an improvised attack to knock prone in this round with an ad hoc penalty. With the possibility of 8 orcs surrounding a single PC, you could easily do something like this:

1. Orc 1 charges and goes for a tackle. Attack vs armorless AC, with no penalty. On a hit, both orc and PC are knocked prone. There is no penalty because this is a tackle; the orc is accepting the disadvantage of also being prone in order to have a better chance at succeeding.

2. Orc 2 grabs PC. Attack vs armorless AC, with bonus because PC is prone. On a hit, PC is held in place. Note steps 1 and 2 could probably be reversed with minor changes.

3. Orc 3 restrains PC. Attack vs armorless AC, with bonus because PC is prone. On a hit, PC is restrained. In 4e, the main difference between restrained and grabbed + prone is that a restrained character has penalties to hit.

4. Orc 4 renders PC helpless. Attack vs armorless AC, with bonus because prone and restrained; also, no shield bonus anymore. In 4e, helpless means the PC can be the subject of a coup de gras. The 4e coup de gras rules are weaksauce, but they don't have to be (and there are other things I would do here, but it would diverge from my illustration).

5. Orc 5 administers coup de gras. Attack vs armorless AV, with bonuses for prone etc. and no shield bonus. PC is still squirming and has a gorget on, so it is no guarantee, but if you hit the PC dies.

There you go, murder in five acts. Use it or don't.

I said I would discuss pummeling. I can't see why punching or kicking someone in armor is easier than hitting them with a sword. I also can't see why hitting someone with the hilt of a dagger is easier than hitting them with a sword. I don't know why this isn't just an ordinary attack against AC, doing 1d4x2 damage, only half of which is real damage. Just sayin'.

EDIT: One more thing. I assume orcs are proficient at unarmed combat since they have a damage die if they are not carrying a weapon. I would make no such assumption regarding PCs. So PCs would get a non-proficiency penalty when making unarmed attacks.