AD&D 1E Snarf's Challenge: Was it Possible to Play 1e RAW? SHARE YOUR STORIES!

[Celebrim]

Eventually I fixed it by converting all the spells to fit a 6-segment round, but that's a tedious process.

I was moving in the other direction before I gave up in frustration with how enormous my house rules were becoming. I had moved to a 10 segment round to be more coherent.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

I’m going to go out on a relatively strong- but still bendy- limb and say that if I played AD&D RAW, it was only in my first game.

The slightly older, hobbity-looking kid who introduced me (and a few others) to AD&D in 1977 or 78 seemed to be VERY MUCH a rules stickler. As a 1st time player, I didn’t really know all the rules. But it wouldn’t surprise me if he was using all of them without informing us n00bz unless/until it was relevant.

After that? I can recall house rules existed for almost every AD&D campaign I played in, and they probably existed in the ones I can’t remember as well.

I never personally ran DMed AD&D without house rules of some kind.

 

[Voadam]

Same here. Casting seems to run on a 10-segment round where everything else uses a 6-segment round; and it was never clear to me whether the extra four casting segments were supposed to be tacked on to the end of the round or whether casters used 6-second segments while everyone else's were 10 seconds.

Eventually I fixed it by converting all the spells to fit a 6-segment round, but that's a tedious process.

It is pretty explicit that it uses a 10 segment round, it just does not really explain how the d6 initiative fits into that. Segments in surprise seems fairly well explained, it is just the normal initiative interaction with segments that is not clear.

PH page 39:

TIME
Time in the campaign is very important. Your referee will keep strict account of the time consumed by various characters, for it is likely to separate them, since not all participants are likely to play at the same actual time. Time costs characters money in support, upkeep, and wage payments. It takes time to adventure, to heal wounds, to memorize spells, to learn languages, to build strongholds, to create magic items — a very long time in the last given case.
In adventuring below ground, a turn in the dungeon lasts 10 minutes (see also MOVEMENT). In combat, the turn is further divided into 10 melee rounds, or simply rounds. Rounds are subdivided into 10 segments, for purposes of determining initiative (q.v.) and order of attacks. Thus a turn is 10 minutes, a round 1 minute, and a segment 6 seconds.

Page 43:

Casting Time shows the number of melee rounds, or segments of a melee round, required to cast the spell. Remember that there are 10 segments to a melee round,10 melee rounds to a turn. Some spells require additional time and preparation.

The closest I can find is on page 65 of the DMG under Spellcasting in Melee.

Attacks directed at spell casters will come on that segment of the round shown on the opponent’s or on their own side’s initiative die, whichever is applicable. (If the spell caster’s side won the initiative with a roll of 5, the attack must come then, not on the opponent’s losing roll of 4 or less.) Thus, all such attacks will occur on the 1st-6th segments of the round.

So I guess attacks are supposed to happen on segments 1-6 (inverse of the d6 roll?) and that is when spells begin casting?

Ah but then you have weapon speed factors on DMG page 66-67

Other Weapon Factor Determinants: The speed factor of a weapon also determines when the weapon strikes during the course of the round with respect to opponents who are engaged in activity other than striking blows. Thus, suppose side A, which has achieved initiative (action) for the round, has a magic-user engaged in casting a spell. Compare the speed factor of the weapon with the number of segments which the spell will require to cast to determine if the spell or the weapon will be cast/strike first, subtracting the losing die roll on the initiative die roll from the weapon factor and treating negative results as positive. Example: A sword with a factor of 5 (broad or long) is being used by an opponent of a magic-user attempting to cast a fireball spell (3 segment casting time). If the sword-wielding attacker was represented by a losing initiative die roll of 1, the spell will be cast prior to the sword’s blow. A 2 will indicate that the spell and the blow are completed simultaneously. A 3-5 will indicate that the blow has a chance of striking (if a successful “to hit” roll is made) before the spell is cast, arriving either as the spell is begun or during the first segment of its casting. Suppose instead that a dagger were being employed. It has a speed factor of only 2, so it will strike prior to spell completion if the initiative roll which lost was 1-4 (the adjusted segment indicator being 1, 0, 1, 2 respectively) and simultaneously if the die score was a 5. If the weapon being employed was a two-handed sword (or any other weapon with a speed factor of 10, or 9 for that matter) there would be no chance for the reacting side to strike the spell caster prior to completion of the fireball. Note that even though a spell takes but 1segment to complete, this is 6 seconds, and during that period a reacting attacker might be able to attack the magic-user or other spell caster prior to actual completion of the spell! If combat is simultaneous, there is no modification of the weapon speed factor.

So weapon speed counts as segments similar to spell casting time segments, but only if not engaging someone who is also trying to trade blows with you (unless you tie your initiative roll that round in which case it is pulled back in for who goes first in striking, unless closing in which case it is weapon length that goes first).

 

[Lanefan]

It is pretty explicit that it uses a 10 segment round, it just does not really explain how the d6 initiative fits into that. Segments in surprise seems fairly well explained, it is just the normal initiative interaction with segments that is not clear.

PH page 39:

TIME
Time in the campaign is very important. Your referee will keep strict account of the time consumed by various characters, for it is likely to separate them, since not all participants are likely to play at the same actual time. Time costs characters money in support, upkeep, and wage payments. It takes time to adventure, to heal wounds, to memorize spells, to learn languages, to build strongholds, to create magic items — a very long time in the last given case.
In adventuring below ground, a turn in the dungeon lasts 10 minutes (see also MOVEMENT). In combat, the turn is further divided into 10 melee rounds, or simply rounds. Rounds are subdivided into 10 segments, for purposes of determining initiative (q.v.) and order of attacks. Thus a turn is 10 minutes, a round 1 minute, and a segment 6 seconds.

Page 43:

Casting Time shows the number of melee rounds, or segments of a melee round, required to cast the spell. Remember that there are 10 segments to a melee round,10 melee rounds to a turn. Some spells require additional time and preparation.

The closest I can find is on page 65 of the DMG under Spellcasting in Melee.

Attacks directed at spell casters will come on that segment of the round shown on the opponent’s or on their own side’s initiative die, whichever is applicable. (If the spell caster’s side won the initiative with a roll of 5, the attack must come then, not on the opponent’s losing roll of 4 or less.) Thus, all such attacks will occur on the 1st-6th segments of the round.

So I guess attacks are supposed to happen on segments 1-6 (inverse of the d6 roll?) and that is when spells begin casting?

Ah but then you have weapon speed factors on DMG page 66-67

Other Weapon Factor Determinants: The speed factor of a weapon also determines when the weapon strikes during the course of the round with respect to opponents who are engaged in activity other than striking blows. Thus, suppose side A, which has achieved initiative (action) for the round, has a magic-user engaged in casting a spell. Compare the speed factor of the weapon with the number of segments which the spell will require to cast to determine if the spell or the weapon will be cast/strike first, subtracting the losing die roll on the initiative die roll from the weapon factor and treating negative results as positive. Example: A sword with a factor of 5 (broad or long) is being used by an opponent of a magic-user attempting to cast a fireball spell (3 segment casting time). If the sword-wielding attacker was represented by a losing initiative die roll of 1, the spell will be cast prior to the sword’s blow. A 2 will indicate that the spell and the blow are completed simultaneously. A 3-5 will indicate that the blow has a chance of striking (if a successful “to hit” roll is made) before the spell is cast, arriving either as the spell is begun or during the first segment of its casting. Suppose instead that a dagger were being employed. It has a speed factor of only 2, so it will strike prior to spell completion if the initiative roll which lost was 1-4 (the adjusted segment indicator being 1, 0, 1, 2 respectively) and simultaneously if the die score was a 5. If the weapon being employed was a two-handed sword (or any other weapon with a speed factor of 10, or 9 for that matter) there would be no chance for the reacting side to strike the spell caster prior to completion of the fireball. Note that even though a spell takes but 1segment to complete, this is 6 seconds, and during that period a reacting attacker might be able to attack the magic-user or other spell caster prior to actual completion of the spell! If combat is simultaneous, there is no modification of the weapon speed factor.

So weapon speed counts as segments similar to spell casting time segments, but only if not engaging someone who is also trying to trade blows with you (unless you tie your initiative roll that round in which case it is pulled back in for who goes first in striking, unless closing in which case it is weapon length that goes first).

Thanks for reminding me why I never used 1e initiative as written.

It seems, though, like the 10-segment casting round was designed to line up with the [d6+weapon speed] initiative of the melee types.

One can accomplish much the same at way less complexity by ditching weapon speed and converting spells to 6-segment rounds.

 

[Voadam]

Thanks for reminding me why I never used 1e initiative as written.

It seems, though, like the 10-segment casting round was designed to line up with the [d6+weapon speed] initiative of the melee types.

I am not sure on that, weapon speed, like casting time segments can easily push that to over 10 segments.

Daggers and jo sticks are the quickest weapons at speed factors of 2 (and a fist has a speed factor of 1 for monks) and could always go within the 10 segments if it worked that way. Short swords, scimitars, hammers, hand axes, clubs, and bo sticks as well. A longsword though is a speed factor of 5 and so can go past initiative plus the speed factor to spill over to the next round after 10 segments. Awl pike has a speed factor of 13.

 

[fuindordm]

Page 43:

Casting Time shows the number of melee rounds, or segments of a melee round, required to cast the spell. Remember that there are 10 segments to a melee round,10 melee rounds to a turn. Some spells require additional time and preparation.

The closest I can find is on page 65 of the DMG under Spellcasting in Melee.

Attacks directed at spell casters will come on that segment of the round shown on the opponent’s or on their own side’s initiative die, whichever is applicable. (If the spell caster’s side won the initiative with a roll of 5, the attack must come then, not on the opponent’s losing roll of 4 or less.) Thus, all such attacks will occur on the 1st-6th segments of the round.

So I guess attacks are supposed to happen on segments 1-6 (inverse of the d6 roll?) and that is when spells begin casting?

See this is one of those cases where GG shot himself in the foot and then insisted it was fine.
RAW initiative is MUCH easier to run with one simple change (my house rule):

• "The side with the lower result on the d6 goes first and their actions start on the segment indicated by the result.

The whole example of a sword vs a fireball is generally moot since no one can cast a spell in melee anyway. If a fighter charges a wizard to interrupt their spell then I rule that their movement cost segments, but not the attack itself.

Personally, I don't use weapon speed factors to modify the starting segment. If your side rolls a 5 then missiles and melee go on 5, and casters begin their casting time on 5 so a fireball goes off at the end of segment 7. I do use the double attack for fast weapons on tied initiative, but it rarely comes up in practice because that little thief with a dagger does NOT want to be up in the face of an NPC with a pole arm or 2H sword!

 

[John Dallman]

You know what? I haven't even gotten to the ACTUAL initiative, and I'm not going to. Because NO ONE I KNOW EVER DID THE FULL INITIATIVE. If you did, let me know how it went for you. I don't even want to get into encounter distance. UGH.

The groups I played in at college generally reckoned that the 1e initiative system didn't make sense, and used simpler homebrew methods. After we'd graduated and got jobs, new groups formed with combinations of people from other ones. One chap who hadn't been playing regularly and was a bit keen on showing off how smart he was (he wasn't) came up with an interpretation of the RAW which was internally consistent, but required a lot of really strained readings of the wording. That didn't prove it was wrong, of course. He hadn't included weapon speed because that was too fiddly, even for him.

He ran a scenario to show off his interpretation. After a round or so of confusion, the players found that they could get his rules to produce nonsensical results in several different ways, and proceeded to demonstrate this repeatedly. He never tried to use it again.

 

[John Dallman]

Weapon vs. AC made more sense than weapon speed, but we found it incredibly inconvenient to use and abandoned the practice fairly quickly.

One group I knew found a way to make it work: they had large tables on their character sheets of armour class vs armour type, with each cell being the number they needed to hit. But when that group broke up, none of them tried to bring the practice to any other groups they joined.

 

[Voadam]

See this is one of those cases where GG shot himself in the foot and then insisted it was fine.
RAW initiative is MUCH easier to run with one simple change (my house rule):

• "The side with the lower result on the d6 goes first and their actions start on the segment indicated by the result.

That is the way 2e does it using their d10 initiative, roll a d10, add modifiers for individual actions (casting time, weapon speed) lowest goes first (with special things like multiple fighter attacks going at the start and end around the initiative numbers).

The whole example of a sword vs a fireball is generally moot since no one can cast a spell in melee anyway. If a fighter charges a wizard to interrupt their spell then I rule that their movement cost segments, but not the attack itself.

I know that is the case in Moldvay Basic "Similarly, because the words and gestures must be repeated exactly, spells cannot be cast while performing any other action (such as walking or fighting)."

But in 1e I don't think that is the case. The DMG on page 65 has the whole Spell Casting During Melee section.

 

[GreyLord]

So....
How do I phrase this...

If we ever played with Gary Gygax...since he's the one who wrote the rules...would that qualify as playing it RAW?

(Note...though...his view of RAW may not exactly adjoin with how the books may be read RAW)...

Of interest...The 5th paragraph page 8 of the PHB has this which could be construed as one of the first rules...

This game is unlike chess in that the rules are not cut and dried. In many places they are guidelines and suggested methods only. This is part of the attraction of ADVANCED DUNGEONS AND DRAGONS, and it is integral to the game. Rules not understood should have appropriate questions direct to the publisher; disputes with the Dungeon Master are another matter entirely. THE REFEREE IS THE FINAL ARBITER OF ALL AFFAIRS OF HIS OR HER CAMPAIGN. Participants in a campaign have no recourse to the publisher, but they do have ultimate recourse - since the most effective protest is withdrawal from the offending campaign. Each campaign is a specially tailored affair. While it is drawn by the referee upon the outlines of the three books which comprise ADVANCED DUNGEONS AND DRAGONS, the players add the color and details, so the campaign must ultimately please all participants. It is their unique world. You, the reader, as a member of the campaign community, do not belong if the game seems wrong in any major aspect. Withdraw and begin your won campaign by creating a milieu which suits you and the group which you must form to enjoy the creation. (And perhaps you will find that preparation of your own milieu creates a bit more sympathy for the efforts of the offending referee...)

I would hazard a guess that Gary Gygax (and Arneson even more so) lived with this as a key proponent of every game they ran.

In that light, as long as we use the rules as an outline as specified in this paragraph, is there any way to actually NOT play the RAW?