How Did I Become a Grognard?

billd91 · Feb 21, 2019

AbdulAlhazred said:
Well, OK, but then what is the dividing line between 'mass' and 'regular' melee? I don't really see those terms used in any consistent way, the word 'mass' or 'mass combat' seems to crop up now and then, but I don't get the impression Gygax is saying there are clear categories of combats. Truthfully, in all my years of AD&D play (20+) I never saw a DM insist on attacks vs random opponents, unless there was some reason like they all looked identical. Even then such things were rare enough that I'm not sure it ever happened. Monster attacks were sometimes randomized by DMs, probably more out of a sense of running monsters with limited intellect in a fair way than anything else (IE the giant spiders are INT 1 and really don't know to target the wizard).

I suspect the wizard making an attack roll is an editorial thing. That or Gygax interpreted the description of Shocking Grasp to require a to-hit. Knowing how Gygax ran games that wouldn't surprise me at all!

Editorial? I don't think so. Magical touch attacks are mentioned under Melee Combat in the Player's Handbook on page 104. And the random target issue is under Who Attacks Whom on page 70 of the DMG.

Ilbranteloth · Feb 21, 2019

AbdulAlhazred said:
Well, OK, but then what is the dividing line between 'mass' and 'regular' melee? I don't really see those terms used in any consistent way, the word 'mass' or 'mass combat' seems to crop up now and then, but I don't get the impression Gygax is saying there are clear categories of combats. Truthfully, in all my years of AD&D play (20+) I never saw a DM insist on attacks vs random opponents, unless there was some reason like they all looked identical. Even then such things were rare enough that I'm not sure it ever happened. Monster attacks were sometimes randomized by DMs, probably more out of a sense of running monsters with limited intellect in a fair way than anything else (IE the giant spiders are INT 1 and really don't know to target the wizard).

I suspect the wizard making an attack roll is an editorial thing. That or Gygax interpreted the description of Shocking Grasp to require a to-hit. Knowing how Gygax ran games that wouldn't surprise me at all!

I think the definition of “mass” is up to the DM. He does clarify quite a bit, saying intelligent creatures can target others, etc. so I think it’s really a question of what a given DM is comfortable with/when it’s most expedient. I’d equate it to the later concepts of minions and swarms, both looking for different ways for handling large numbers of low level combatants.

For the touch spells, it does say elsewhere that you are required to touch the target, but it’s not described in a mechanical/combat manner. Editorial or not, the requirement greatly changes the way such a spell works, since touch spells generally don’t grant a saving throw. Without the attack roll, it would be an auto hit.

pemerton · Feb 21, 2019

Zardnaar said:
Hardcore grogs only 4 classes.

Why? Men & Magic has 3 classes (fighter, MU, cleric), and then Supplement 1 introduces both thief and paladin. I don't see what's especially grognard-y about adding the thief but not the paladin.

Zardnaar · Feb 21, 2019

pemerton said:
Why? Men & Magic has 3 classes (fighter, MU, cleric), and then Supplement 1 introduces both thief and paladin. I don't see what's especially grognard-y about adding the thief but not the paladin.

Some grogs like b/x more than OD&D or clones that have 4 classes. There is no strict Grognard yes/no checklist but Monks are generally the least popular AD&D class. They were removed in 2E and Gygax would have done it as well.

pemerton · Feb 21, 2019

Zardnaar said:
Some grogs like b/x more than OD&D or clones that have 4 classes. There is no strict Grognard yes/no checklist but Monks are generally the least popular AD&D class. They were removed in 2E and Gygax would have done it as well.

I don't see how a B/X player can claim to be a grognard - it was one of (is it still, or has 5e overtaken it?) popular D&D products of all time! That would make me a potential grognard.

I'm also not sure that Gygax gets to decide what counts as grognard-ism. Arneson's groggish credentials seem just as strong.

If I encountered someone who played OD&D + supplements 2 and 3 (so by my reckoning clerics, fighters, MUs, monks, druids and psionics - a reasonable mix of classes for a pulp-inspired sword-and-sorcery game) and grumbled about all this new-fangled, Greyhawk and post-Greyhawk inspired stuff, I would happily allow them to use the lable grognard!

Zardnaar · Feb 21, 2019

pemerton said:
I don't see how a B/X player can claim to be a grognard - it was one of (is it still, or has 5e overtaken it?) popular D&D products of all time! That would make me a potential grognard.

I'm also not sure that Gygax gets to decide what counts as grognard-ism. Arneson's groggish credentials seem just as strong.

If I encountered someone who played OD&D + supplements 2 and 3 (so by my reckoning clerics, fighters, MUs, monks, druids and psionics - a reasonable mix of classes for a pulp-inspired sword-and-sorcery game) and grumbled about all this new-fangled, Greyhawk and post-Greyhawk inspired stuff, I would happily allow them to use the lable grognard!

Grognard is usually anti 3E or 4E. OD&D isn't that popular it's usually 1E and B/X with the CMI and 2E being a maybe. OD&D does count though.
But yeah go to a grog forum or see what you can find from ten years ago they have mellowed a bit and might adapt stuff from modern D&D like ascending numbers. Not all grogs agree with each other dislike of with editions is the main uniting thing. Some like 5E others don't.

I'm not that hard core about it but I like older D&D with B/X and 2E being favorites but don't regard myself as a Grognard but will happily game with them. I also like 5E and liked 3E at the time.

lowkey13 · Feb 21, 2019

*Deleted by user*

Ralif Redhammer · Feb 21, 2019

I totally share your flabbergastation (not sure that’s a word, but I’m going with it), and would say that a grognard, at the latest, began with 1e.

Buuuuttt….

There will come a time (not in my lifetime, for obvious reasons), that there are no more of those folks. And a grognard would indeed be someone that started with 2e, maybe even 3e. Either that, or the term will just completely die out alongside the people.

Though, that does beg the question, is someone that began gaming with, say, Labyrinth Lord, entitled to the mantle of grognard?