Reminiscing, Re:AD&D (Games 1 & 2 in progress in Playing the Game Forum....)

[Leif]

I am really enjoying both of the AD&D games that I'm now running here! The game is simple, fast, and enjoyable. The characters have as much capability as any 3.5/Pathfinder or 4E characters, but judicial use of 'on-the-fly saving throws' and imagination is required to replicate certain skill checks. Personally, I think I like this better than having more 'carved in stone rules' like the later editions because it is easier to preserve the DM's control of the game's details. All in all, I'm loving it, and I'm sorry that I waited so long to return to my D&D roots.

 

[Leif]

There is a surprising amount of detailed combat rule information in both AD&D PH and DMG if one bothers to look for it. I don't recall us ever doing so 'back in the day,' but it is quite usedful to me now. Evidently, the only rule permitting movement and a melee attack to occur in the same round is the 'CHARGE' rule. If anyone can shed more light on this, please do so, only note that I am only interested in the rules as written, not house rules.

 

[MerricB]

There is a surprising amount of detailed combat rule information in both AD&D PH and DMG if one bothers to look for it. I don't recall us ever doing so 'back in the day,' but it is quite usedful to me now. Evidently, the only rule permitting movement and a melee attack to occur in the same round is the 'CHARGE' rule. If anyone can shed more light on this, please do so, only note that I am only interested in the rules as written, not house rules.

Unfortunately, the combat rules are often more of a collection of ad-hoc rulings than a system as such. There are "rules" in the PHB that really should be in the DMG but didn't make it in. And the PHB has references to rules which don't appear in the DMG at all!

Anyway...

Movement in combat is quite interesting. To a large extent, it doesn't happen.

* A character may move up to its movement speed if not in melee.
* A character may attack in melee if within 10' of the combat.
* A character may charge into melee, moving at 200% rate (if indoors) or 133% rate (if outdoors), with a +2 attack, no Dex mod to AC (and a 1 penalty to AC if no Dex).
* Once in melee, the character may not move, except by
...fighting withdrawal. The character makes a retrograde movement (possibly of up to 50% speed, but not defined in PH or DMG) which can be combined with a parry. If his foe follows, the foe may attack (and possibly also the character).
...disengage. The character moves at full speed away from the combat, allowing engage enemies to get a free swing against his back (no Dex, +2 to hit).

Parrying adds the character's Strength modifier "to hit" to the AC and no attack from the character. Yeah, really not worth it. I suggest the Basic D&D rules of a 2 bonus to AC.

A cleric can both attack and turn undead in the same turn, but may not turn undead and cast a spell.

For those who want to really enjoy morale rules, the "retreat" result can be interpreted as a disengage plus a 50% chance of the combatants dropping held objects...

Cheers!

 

[Leif]

Movement in combat is quite interesting. To a large extent, it doesn't happen.

* A character may move up to its movement speed if not in melee.
* A character may attack in melee if within 10' of the combat.
* A character may charge into melee, moving at 200% rate (if indoors) or 133% rate (if outdoors), with a +2 attack, no Dex mod to AC (and a 1 penalty to AC if no Dex).
* Once in melee, the character may not move, except by
...fighting withdrawal. The character makes a retrograde movement (possibly of up to 50% speed, but not defined in PH or DMG) which can be combined with a parry. If his foe follows, the foe may attack (and possibly also the character).
...disengage. The character moves at full speed away from the combat, allowing engage enemies to get a free swing against his back (no Dex, +2 to hit).

Parrying adds the character's Strength modifier "to hit" to the AC and no attack from the character. Yeah, really not worth it. I suggest the Basic D&D rules of a 2 bonus to AC.

Thanks! That's a very helpful summary.

 

[Leif]

Just in case any of the players in eiter of my current AD&D 1E games wonders or cares ..... I don't so much subscribe to the notion that AD&D combatants can't move, except by fighting withdrawal from combat or downright fleeing. Movement in combat can be accomplished gradually, say by oving one or two squares at a time while still remaining adjacent to you opponent. He/She will either follow or perhaps move into the square vacated by you, or perhaps something else, but a gradual square-by-square progression is eminently possible and plausible without doing violence to the AD&D 1E rules as written. There may or may not be a reaon for your opponent to move at all, so it's possible that the PC will just wind up playing 'ring around the rosie' with the rabid orc stick-in-the-mud (or whatever). That's where RP comes in to see whether you can give the foe a reason to move, I guess.

 

[kingius]

Not AD&D, but I recently revived the Cyclopedia with my gaming group and we've been having a blast in a megadungeon that I created a few years ago. Race as class and all that. Retroroleplaying for the world

 

[Leif]

I was also looking through the first D&D rulebook that I ever owned last night -- the light blue blook from the Blue Box Basic Set, and I noticed the race-as-class thing in there. Funny thing is, I don't have a specific memory of ever playing that way back in the day. Elves = fighter/magic-users, Dwarves = fighters with racial special stuff, and halflings = fighter/thieves?

Maybe I'd better check that again....

 

[kingius]

hehe yes that's right, or close enough. The Elf is particularly good because a lot of people house rule around the mage's restrictions; in basic/Cyclopedia, you just go, here, play an Elf, he's good at combat and good at magic (although not the best at either).

 

[Leif]

I remember that one of my biggest hang-ups to figuring out D&D was that I had no concept of what the phrase "Fire any missile at +1" meant. I remember trying to figure it out and being totally befuddled -- "Missile? Like an ICBM?" and, "What's this '+1' thing that I'm supposed to be firing my ICBM at?" Of course, I was like 11 years old at the time.

But, honestly, Gary G. could have written that remark in english instead of 'gamerese' and said: "Fire any missile weapon with a +1 bonus to the chance 'to hit.' "