D&D 2E Did The Complete Fighter's Handbook kill "Zero to Hero"?

[James Gasik]

Just went back to check: bows never granted you bonuses to hit from Strength in 2e, only damage.

 

[Willie the Duck]

Just went back to check: bows never granted you bonuses to hit from Strength in 2e, only damage.

View attachment 385360

I noticed that this text mentions the damage bonus, but not the to-hit (making them silent on the issue). So I dug a little deeper. I think this is a place where the rule is spread across multiple sections.

The rules in the Attribute section under strength read:
"Hit Probability adjustments are added to or subtracted from the attack roll rolled on 1d20 (one 20-sided die) during combat. A bonus (positive number) makes the opponent easier to hit; a penalty (negative number) makes him harder to hit.
Damage Adjustment also applies to combat. The listed number is added to or subtracted from the dice rolled to determine the damage caused by an attack (regardless of subtractions, a successful attack roll can never cause less than 1 point of damage).
For example, a short sword normally causes ld6 points of damage (a range of 1 to 6). An attacker with Strength 17 causes one extra point of damage, for a range of 2 to 7 points of damage. The damage adjustment also applies to missile weapons, although bows must be specially made to gain the bonus; crossbows never benefit from the user’s Strength."

This would imply that you do get the to-hit bonus for strength with a bow (and do so without need for a special bow, since that is only referenced for the damage bonus). In the combat section we find:

"Ability Modifiers in Missile Combat
Attack roll and dam-damage (sic) modifiers for Strength are always used when an attack is made with a hurled weapon. Here the power of the character’s arm is a significant factor in the effectiveness of the attack.
When using a bow, the attack roll and damage Strength modifiers apply only if the character has a properly prepared bow (see Chapter 6: Money and Equipment). Characters never receive Strength bonuses when using crossbows or similar mechanical devices.
Dexterity modifiers to the attack roll are applied when making a missile attack with a hand-held weapon. Thus, a character adds his Dexterity modifier when using a bow, crossbow, or axe but not when firing a trebuchet or other siege engine."

That suggests that you do get the to-hit for high strength, but only if you have a specially made bow.

 

[James Gasik]

I noticed that this text mentions the damage bonus, but not the to-hit (making them silent on the issue). So I dug a little deeper. I think this is a place where the rule is spread across multiple sections.

The rules in the Attribute section under strength read:
"Hit Probability adjustments are added to or subtracted from the attack roll rolled on 1d20 (one 20-sided die) during combat. A bonus (positive number) makes the opponent easier to hit; a penalty (negative number) makes him harder to hit.
Damage Adjustment also applies to combat. The listed number is added to or subtracted from the dice rolled to determine the damage caused by an attack (regardless of subtractions, a successful attack roll can never cause less than 1 point of damage).
For example, a short sword normally causes ld6 points of damage (a range of 1 to 6). An attacker with Strength 17 causes one extra point of damage, for a range of 2 to 7 points of damage. The damage adjustment also applies to missile weapons, although bows must be specially made to gain the bonus; crossbows never benefit from the user’s Strength."

This would imply that you do get the to-hit bonus for strength with a bow (and do so without need for a special bow, since that is only referenced for the damage bonus). In the combat section we find:

"Ability Modifiers in Missile Combat
Attack roll and dam-damage (sic) modifiers for Strength are always used when an attack is made with a hurled weapon. Here the power of the character’s arm is a significant factor in the effectiveness of the attack.
When using a bow, the attack roll and damage Strength modifiers apply only if the character has a properly prepared bow (see Chapter 6: Money and Equipment). Characters never receive Strength bonuses when using crossbows or similar mechanical devices.
Dexterity modifiers to the attack roll are applied when making a missile attack with a hand-held weapon. Thus, a character adds his Dexterity modifier when using a bow, crossbow, or axe but not when firing a trebuchet or other siege engine."

That suggests that you do get the to-hit for high strength, but only if you have a specially made bow.

Huh. Well as I was then. I have a few characters who were owed an attack roll bonus apparently. I wonder why that fact was buried in the combat chapter and not spelled out under the bow description.

 

[Lanefan]

I agree with virtually all of that, but minor pickpick- Secondary Skills date back to the 1E DMG. Though they do say that this is relatively minor knowledge, not a whole prior career.

We expanded that secondary skills list to include a whole lot of other things, in part to allow for the previous professions of characters who might have been alive for a few hundred years (Elves, Gnomes, even Dwarves) before starting to adventure and in part to allow for a greater variety of randomly-generated backgrounds and secondary skills.

We also added a d10 roll to give a general idea of how good/proficient you were or became at that profession.

 

[Lanefan]

I do think Zero to Hero gets conflated a lot- there's the narrative aspect, which apparently was never proposed by the books, but just sort of manifested out of the aether (probably by DM's thinking of heroes who are assistant pig keepers, farmboys, or lowly squires who go off and have adventures), and the "start off super weak and get more powerful from there", which has changed over time. In AD&D a 1st level character might be challenged by a thrown knife or a housecat.

Part of that stems from a fair bit of fantasy literature also covering characters' zero-to-hero arcs. The Hobbits in Tolkein, for example, aren't exactly seasoned adventurers before heading out on what become their various quests, but they are by the time they get back. They did have immense plot protection, however, without which they wouldn't have made it past Old Man Willow (and even if they had they'd have died in the Barrow Mounds).

Giving that degree of plot protection to D&D characters IMO ruins the game; IMO what matters is the general zero-to-hero arc of the party while assorted zeroes, heroes, and everything in between come and go along the way.

Either way, if the game did change the way some say it did, 2e apparently wasn't the moment where it happened. Thanks for the replies, everyone!

For me the change, in terms of poorly-edited power gallop, came with 1e's UA.

 

[Mannahnin]

They did have immense plot protection, however, without which they wouldn't have made it past Old Man Willow (and even if they had they'd have died in the Barrow Mounds).

Giving that degree of plot protection to D&D characters IMO ruins the game; IMO what matters is the general zero-to-hero arc of the party while assorted zeroes, heroes, and everything in between come and go along the way.

This seems like a fundamental misunderstanding of how stories work.

And if we want to interpret the trek of the Hobbits to Bree via D&D through the lens of D&D rules, the encounter with Old Man Willow and rescue by Tom Bombadil could be represented by two random encounters occurring at the same time, and the Barrow Wight by one PC making their saving throw at the right time. Which is kind of the point of saving throws, as Gary explained at some length in 1979.

 

[PHATsakk43]

Depends on the mage. You shoot first (before they can take cover or get into a melee scrum where you roll to see who you hit), but you only get one shot. See DMG:
"Whatever the ROF, multiple missile shots are handled the same way as other multiple attacks for the purposes of determining initiative."
"When the attacks are true multiples--using the same weapon more than once--as in the case of a highly skilled fighter, the attacks are staggered. Everyone involved in the combat completes one action before the second (or subsequent) attack roll is made."

You get your two shots. One before any other actions and then, technically RAW, one after all other actions. Although I'd probably allow the second shot on the fighter's initiative roll.

Again, the shot itself is what is valuable, as long as the hit is good, you're disrupting the caster's action that round.

 

[Willie the Duck]

You get your two shots. One before any other actions and then, technically RAW, one after all other actions. Although I'd probably allow the second shot on the fighter's initiative roll.

Again, the shot itself is what is valuable, as long as the hit is good, you're disrupting the caster's action that round.

Okay. I was interpreting "Basically, unless surprised, the specialist bow armed fighter likely will alpha strike any mage off the field" as dropping the mage, not disrupting their first-round spell. If that's not how you meant it, than I was answering a different question.

 

[PHATsakk43]

Given the low hp of wizards in general, the high damage potential of a buffed fighter, it isn't completely unrealistic to think it could happen.

A wizard that can't cast in round 1 is often a dead wizard anyway.

 

[James Gasik]

Actually would the first arrow shot even affect spellcasting? Since it happens at the beginning of the round, before initiative is rolled, no one has declared their actions yet, so they haven't even begun casting yet!