I swing my sword

[Stormonu]

In the past, I've often seen threads poking at older editions of the game, saying such things is that all you can do is "swing a sword" or "stand and beat one another". However, after playing some BECMI after this weekend, I find that my experience has been far from this.

In older editions I'd normally have everyone doing theor rolls, and the players would either give me a short descriptive narration of what they were attempting or I'd put the results together into a short narration after all the dice had been rolled.

It was a similar situation for mini placement. The minis might be stagnant on the board next to each other, but the narrative that went with the combat never made it feel that way - the minis were there mostly to mark relative distance of combatants from one another.

For others that have played older editions, how do you feel towards these claims that older editions were stagnant slugfests? Am I alone in my perceptions?

An example

DM: Merv, the thief, after listening to the door and hearing gutteral murmuring beyond, pulls the portal open to reveal four hobgoblins standing near a couple of chained-up villagers. The bigger one seems to hesitate, but the others draw weapons as they see you. Roll for initiative! (players & DM roll)

Beorn, the dwarf: "Hobgoblins? Let me at them!" (to DM) I'm drawing my axe and waiting for them to come to me.

Telyrn, the elf: I'm casting magic missile at one of them (*rolls damage, which kills the hob*)

DM: It's the hobgoblins turn next. They move up to the door and attack Beorn and (rolls randomly) Merv, who hasn't gotten out of the way of the open door yet. (*rolls*) Merv, you get hit for 6 damage, but their swords just bounce off Beorn's plate mail.

Merv: Time for some revenge! I'm attacking that big hobgoblin, he looks like the leader.

DM: Unfortunately, that hobgoblin is in the back, you'll have to attack a different one. (Merv rolls, scores a hit that kills another hobgoblin)

DM, narrating the round: Okay, so here's what happened. Merv motions that he hears something in the next room, so you all draw weapons. He then throws the door open, revealing the hobgoblins. They see you, and likewise draw weapons, though the biggest one seems a little slow to react. However, before they can move to attack you, Teryn lets loose with a magic missile, which sends one of the hobglins into a spin before he falls to the floor, dead. The big guy, which you suspect is the leader, shouts at the other three, who rush you. However, because of the narrow doorway, only two manage to get in a shot - one of the hobgoblin's short swords harmlessly bounce off Beorn's armor, but the other hobgoblin catches Merv in the shoulder, drawing some blood. In return, Beorn uses his warhammer to cave his opponent's chest. Merv tries to take a stab at the leader, but the big hobgoblin pulls his own warrior in front him like a living shield. Merv does manage to stab the surprised hobgoblin in the speen though, and the hobgoblin falls gasping to the floor before expiring. Ready for the next round?

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

Methinks you've misunderstood what is meant by "I swing my sword." It refers to the fact that your only choice in combat, if you aren't playing a wizard or a cleric, is who to hit. Anything else you want to do - disarm a foe, scatter some dirt into their eyes, trip someone, goad them into attacking you instead of the wizard - is at the sufferance of the DM. The problem is that not all DMs allow you to do them, and not all DMs agree on how hard they are to accomplish.

Moreover, while you've got some nice description there, you've essentially appended it to a combat round in which, yep, everyone either "swing a sword" or "stand and beat[s on] one another."*

I add such descriptions to my 3.XE, PF, 4E, and Saga games, as well - but my players also get to make meaningful, round-to-round decisions as to where they'll move, what combat option they'll take, etc.

* Except, of course, for the wizard - who never has to just swing his sword until he's out of spells.

 

[Stormonu]

Even though I didn't put it in there (it felt like the example was running log anyway), the games I ran didn't always fall to just fall to swinging a sword at someone. I remember PCs doing disarms, swinging from chandeliers, wrestling and all sorts of strange stunts (though usually not more than 1-2 a combat, I believe). Even in the BECMI game I ran this weekend, there was one point where the thief (Merv in the example) shut the door on one of the hobgoblin's hands to try and disarm him.

Do I just run an unusual game then?

 

[billd91]

Even though I didn't put it in there (it felt like the example was running log anyway), the games I ran didn't always fall to just fall to swinging a sword at someone. I remember PCs doing disarms, swinging from chandeliers, wrestling and all sorts of strange stunts (though usually not more than 1-2 a combat, I believe). Even in the BECMI game I ran this weekend, there was one point where the thief (Merv in the example) shut the door on one of the hobgoblin's hands to try and disarm him.

Do I just run an unusual game then?

I don't think so. Not every fight is highly dynamic, but we used to do stunts from time to time as well.

 

[Janx]

Patryn does make a valid point. Minus the flavor text, most of the example was just "I swing my sword"

I've done a lot of that in 2e and in 3e.

Reasons for just swinging the sword:

• it doesn't seem advantageous to take an alternative attack action (trip, disarm, sunder, grapple) compared to just attacking.
• the environment doesn't stimulate ideas for stunts

A lot of times, it's easier to just keep attacking than to stop the game to look up the rules to disarm or trip. Not to mention grapple, which rules sucked so much that EN World released their own better design (which I have a copy). Not to mention, most of these special attacks are harder to do, which means the player is encouraged to take the more probable and predictable simple attack than the less successful and non-damaging alternative. If you keep making simple attacks, the enemy WILL die eventually. If you keep trying oddball maneuvers, most of them won't work, and the enemy won't stop hitting you.

And some encounters take place in such bland areas (a field, a hallway, a room) that they don't inspire anybody to interact with the environment in a creative way.

 

[mattcolville]

Methinks you've misunderstood what is meant by "I swing my sword." It refers to the fact that your only choice in combat, if you aren't playing a wizard or a cleric, is who to hit. Anything else you want to do - disarm a foe, scatter some dirt into their eyes, trip someone, goad them into attacking you instead of the wizard - is at the sufferance of the DM. The problem is that not all DMs allow you to do them, and not all DMs agree on how hard they are to accomplish.

Furthermore, it wasn't ever clear to new players that any of these things were possible. The universal refrain from the new player in his first turn was "what can I do?"

The answer was usually "whatever you want!" Which is patently false and highly problematic and meant the GM would have to explain that in fact you could only attempt actions that took a few moment.

 

[Herremann the Wise]

Do I just run an unusual game then?

I think not so unusual. Certainly fun though from the sounds of things. Perhaps if I give an unusual for some, typical for others short counter-counter-example for comparison, that also illustrates your overall point.

Player 1: [To the DM] Can you beat an initiative of 17? No? OK I move up and do a Spinning Blade Leap and roll a...

Player 2: Don't waste a daily on that! [/shakes head]

Player 1: 15, I hit [checks sheet]... yeah I definitely hit him for... 11 damage. And then I move back to... here.

Player 3: That's shifting isn't it? Cool. [To DM]I got a 14.

DM: Hold on, my guys beat that. He's still up by the way...no minion there [laughs]...

Please excuse the "triteness" of the example but in minor skirmishes, I have seen groups ease up a little in terms of description like this and just roll with the numbers and what's on the board.

The "swinging the sword" argument is just the same as saying that newer versions of the game are just a glorified boardgame. While the game can be played that way (and many people enjoy playing it that way), it does not have to be. Swinging the sword is assuming that there are no other dynamics there such as rescuing the princess in time, getting to the lighthouse to send a signal while under attack or just doing something unusual because the situation seems to allow it. While it can be a game of hp depletion in a small room, it doesn't have to be. In the same way, players who really get into their characters won't just rifle through their power cards focusing purely on game mechanics. There is always room for dramatic description and input.

However, I can see it being reasonably argued that older versions trend towards the "swing the sword" style of play while newer versions trend towards the "boardgame" style of play. It is up to the groups and DMs involved to keep things fresh, getting the best of both worlds during play.

Best Regards
Herremann the Wise

PS: I crafted the above example with a few things in mind: the tendency for mechanics to be the focus of play, rather than the peripheral description of the action, the assumption of both boards and miniatures (reducing further the need for description), and in comparison to Stormonu's example, the tendency for the players to be much more involved in the running of the game as against the DM being the referee as it once was. In essence, both styles of play have their advantages and disadvantages.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

For others that have played older editions, how do you feel towards these claims that older editions were stagnant slugfests? Am I alone in my perceptions?

Homey, I'm wit 'cha! I've never felt bored or second class just because I'm swinging a weapon istead of slinging a spell.

While 3Ed greatly formalized rules for other combat maneuvers (bull-rushes, grapples, disarms, etc.) beyond the need to ask a DM's permission, I never ran into a DM who flatly disallowed such maneuvers outright or came up with onerous HRs to make such maneuvers unlikely to be attempted.

 

[ExploderWizard]

There are times when, "I swing my sword" gets the job done. A quick and dirty fight with the 3 goblins guarding the chieftain's chamber doesn't have to be this mega-dramatic affair near a lava pool with pinall flippers on the wall to be interesting or important to the overall adventure.

The more mechanical options that are present merely increases the liklihood of becoming focused on the character sheet rather than the situation in game.

A DM who continually shoots down attempts to do anything other than swinging a sword isn't being of much use to the group. A game such as that is worse than a computer game, its a primitive computer game. A complex mechanical system might boil down to little more than an X-box game on the tabletop but a DM who discourages imagination is doing the same thing, except using an Atari 2600 instead of the X-box.

 

[thedungeondelver]

Anyone who brings this "I swing my sword" stuff to older editions is deliberately trying to not have fun with the game. Crying out "I need a rule to tell me what I can do!" is a sign of poor gamesmanship. If the dungeon master lets it go by without giving a novice player some hints or enjoying some seat of the pants action, then they're not trying either.