Beating a Dead Horse (or Help me resolve a 1st ed Rules Debate)

[Fenris]

Ok all this talk about 1st ed got me thinking about my experiances. But there was one huge nasty arguement that my group had. While it doesn't matter now as the group is gone and the protagonist is dead, I still would like to hear what the esteemed minds of EN World have to say on this matter.

So the debate revolved around the weapon specialization rules in 1st ed Unearthed Arcana. Specifically about attack rates. Now a 1st level fighter who specialized could get a 3/2 attack rate. The debate arose over bows. At the time of course, bows could fire two arrows a round. The weapon specialization chart had, at 1st level a 2/1 rate for bows. Now most of my group said that that meant you could fire two arrows and more as you went up in level. One player insisted that it meant you got two attacks with the bow, each firing two arrows, for a total of four per round. The debate got so bad the player refused to play unless we allowed him to have his way (which always involved multiclass Drow for some reason).

So, who was right?

 

[Mark]

While it doesn't matter now as the group is gone and the protagonist is dead...

Is that any way to discuss your former DM...?

 

[Fenris]

Is that any way to discuss your former DM...?

Well it was a pretty intense debate
But I will clarify that the group has gone their seperate ways, but the player in question, though is deceased.

 

[Mark]

Always sad to lose a gamer.

So he was the Drow player? What did he die of?

 

[Grayhawk]

2/1 meant two arrows per round.

If you were specialized 2/1 still meant two arrows per round.

(And didn't it increase to 3/1? At 7th?)

 

[Veritas]

Yup, Grayhawk is right.

The Unearthed Arcana lists it has 2/1 with bows up to level 7, when it becomes 3/1, and then 4/1 at 13th level.

I can *kinda* see where he was coming from in this, but I don't agree with him. The chart in the UA specifically says "Attacks Per Round", and he's interpretting the rate of fire of the bow as being one attack. If both arrows that got fired used the same attack roll, he might have had a leg to stand on with his arguement, but since that's not the case, the bow gets two attacks per round normally... the real bonus at lower levels for bow specialization was the addition of Point Blank Range.

Sorry, I split off the other question I had to a new topic... I don't want to be accused of hijacking.

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

Since rangers and paladins (and later barbarians, but later not paladins) were subclasses of fighter -- not really separate classes -- they also got exceptional strength

 

[Fenris]

Always sad to lose a gamer.

So he was the Drow player? What did he die of?

Yes, everytime he was played it had to be a female drow fighter/cleric/thief. Which rankled us. But the bow issue was the straw that broke the camels back. He picked up his toys and didn't play D&D with us (he played other games though).

He died of congenital heart failure. Being over 400 lbs for 20 years will do that to you.

Thanks to all. I figured we were right, but this issue has always gnawed at me.

 

[Chimera]

He died of congenital heart failure. Being over 400 lbs for 20 years will do that to you.

Given the number of 300 pound plus people I saw at Gencon 2001 (the last one I attended) carrying around those god-forsaken 64 oz Mountain Dew barrels, I was shocked there wasn't a plague of large dead guys at the con.

Of course, maybe there was and that's just a dark secret they kept from us...

 

[diaglo]

Since rangers and paladins (and later barbarians, but later not paladins) were subclasses of fighter -- not really separate classes -- they also got exceptional strength

but Paladins in UA were under Cavalier.


i still say Gary wrote UA for his powergaming scions.