Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 3764055" data-attributes="member: 4937">There was or is a thread in main forum in which 1e combat is examined in detail by running a 9th level fighter (with -4 AC) against a group of goblinoids.  In the first simulated combat, the goblinoids simply swarm the fighter.  In the second, they attempt an overbearing attack.  You'll notice that the goblins actually do better with stardard melee tactics.The reason isn't completely obvious to someone whose mainly familiar with 3rd edition.  The goblins where equipped with military picks, and military picks have a strong bonus to hit targets with low base AC's.  Between this and the fact that 1st edition had facing which made the flanking rules much harsher, comparitively low HD monsters in 1st edition could with the right equipment hit even well armored foes.   Which isn't to say a 10th level fighter couldn't put his back to wall and kill off 200 or so orcs, but that between that and 1st editions greater emphasis on 'operational level' problems, you would see more encounters as a 10th level party that involved say 20 hobgoblins than you would as a similar party in 3rd edition and that these encounters meant more and were more sensible in context than they would be in 3rd edition.As for the rest, I don't think anyone is suggesting that limited per encounter powers harm the game at a tactical level.  Obviously, they do for exactly the reasons you suggest.  But, if you are trying to prove that the game is still tactically rich with per encounter abilities rather than per day abilities, you are very much missing the point.</blockquote>

Verification