Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 6315889" data-attributes="member: 42582">I came to AD&amp;D from Moldvay/Cook/Marsh B/X.We changed some rules to fit the new system - AC 10 rather than 9, minute rounds rather than 10 second rounds, etc - but I don't think we seriously revisited the initiative or targeting rules. Though we did use the &quot;segments of surprise&quot; rule, but I think not with all the permutations.And on the topic of surprise - I think ADDICT gets at least one part of the surprise rules wrong. It has each surprise segment treated as 3 rounds for purposes of missile fire, but I don't think that's what's intended. I think Gygax intends that, in surprise segments, the missile rate of fire is three times what it normally is - so you can hurl one dart per segment, one dagger (or shoot one arrow) every two segments, etc.The &quot;reason&quot; that melee attacks get to be 10x faster is because in a surprise segment the other side is not defending itself, and so each d20 roll really correlates to roughly one swing, rather than to the luckiest of a series of manoeuvres over the course of a minute of melee.And on a different topic - I had a look at the pursuit rules today. They're quite interesting, but once again suffer badly from poor editing. The rules for the opportunity to avoid an encounter are split between p 49 (encounter distance and evasion in wilderness encounters) and p 63. And the rules for likelihood of pursuit are split between pp 63 and 67-68. Finally, the rules for outdoor evasion talk about evasion failing and confrontation resulting on &quot;any result of 0% or less&quot; in the context of a d% roll which cannot be less than 01 (because the modifiers adjust the percentage chance of success, not the roll). I think the best interpretation of what is intended here is &quot;if the roll fails by more than 20&quot; - much like the Pick Pocketing rules.Once these infelicities are cleaned up and the system looked at as a whole, though, it is quite interesting. In many ways it is as structured as a 4e skill challenge, although the mechanical framing of the structure, and the inputs into the resolution, are a bit different.Does anyone have memories of resolving evasion in AD&amp;D? How did it work out?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 6315889, member: 42582"] I came to AD&D from Moldvay/Cook/Marsh B/X. We changed some rules to fit the new system - AC 10 rather than 9, minute rounds rather than 10 second rounds, etc - but I don't think we seriously revisited the initiative or targeting rules. Though we did use the "segments of surprise" rule, but I think not with all the permutations. And on the topic of surprise - I think ADDICT gets at least one part of the surprise rules wrong. It has each surprise segment treated as 3 rounds for purposes of missile fire, but I don't think that's what's intended. I think Gygax intends that, in surprise segments, the missile rate of fire is three times what it normally is - so you can hurl one dart per segment, one dagger (or shoot one arrow) every two segments, etc. The "reason" that melee attacks get to be 10x faster is because in a surprise segment the other side is not defending itself, and so each d20 roll really correlates to roughly one swing, rather than to the luckiest of a series of manoeuvres over the course of a minute of melee. And on a different topic - I had a look at the pursuit rules today. They're quite interesting, but once again suffer badly from poor editing. The rules for the opportunity to avoid an encounter are split between p 49 (encounter distance and evasion in wilderness encounters) and p 63. And the rules for likelihood of pursuit are split between pp 63 and 67-68. Finally, the rules for outdoor evasion talk about evasion failing and confrontation resulting on "any result of 0% or less" in the context of a d% roll which cannot be less than 01 (because the modifiers adjust the percentage chance of success, not the roll). I think the best interpretation of what is intended here is "if the roll fails by more than 20" - much like the Pick Pocketing rules. Once these infelicities are cleaned up and the system looked at as a whole, though, it is quite interesting. In many ways it is as structured as a 4e skill challenge, although the mechanical framing of the structure, and the inputs into the resolution, are a bit different. Does anyone have memories of resolving evasion in AD&D? How did it work out? [/QUOTE]

Verification