"Black Dougal gasps 'Poison!' and falls to the floor. He looks dead."

Saturday, October 16, 2010

B/X Combat - Fast, faster, fastest


One of the benefits (at least in my mind) of B/X combat is the speed at which it is resolved.

Recent editions have focused on taking long duration combats and giving the players enough "fiddly bits" to make the combats interesting. However, I prefer the fast, abstract combats of B/X. A few reasons why:

1. Initiative is rolled every round - I much prefer this to the cyclical initiative in the most recent editions. I like the uncertainty and I really like the fact that it eliminates the need for such things as Attacks of Opportunity. It is also instrumental in balancing spellcasters and fighters.

2. Declaration of actions prior to initiative - I find that this and the fact that initiative is rolled every round keeps players at the table and interested. it also speeds things up. It eliminates the "what am I going to do this round…" when it cycles to each players' turn.

3. You can really try anything - I know that free form actions in combat are not restricted in 3E or 4E but I find that feats and powers have the unintended consequence of focusing a players decisions to a relative narrow scope of actions. There are no such mechanical focuses in B/X.

3. Fast feedback - Tactics in B/X are very different than in the most recent editions. Proper tactics in B/X are really focused on the decisions made prior to combat - things such as marching order, choke points, resource management, etc. But there are still enough decision points after entering combat to give players some control over what happens after combat begins - such things as trying to trigger opponents morale checks, when to withdraw or retreat, etc. The speed with which B/X combat is resolved allows for quick feedback of these larger macro decisions. There may only be three of these large scope decisions to be made each combat but the speed of B/X combat allows for these decisions to be made in quick succession. The longer combats of recent editions instead focus on micro decisions such as 5-ft steps, avoiding attacks of opportunities, etc. I would rather have a 10 minute combat where there are three important decisions that impact the outcome of the combat and then move onto the next encounter instead of an hour long combat where there are thirty decisions each of which has a minor impact on the outcome of the combat.

4. Onto the next encounter - I much prefer a series of short interesting encounters than a long encounter with a series of variables. Maybe it is a lack of attention span.

However, recently I have been finding myself getting wrapped up in the narrative description of what is happening in a combat. I am beginning to think this is actually a "bad" thing. Why would describing the action be bad?

1. Slows things down - if one of the key benefits/strengths of B/X combat is speed, anything which detracts from this is harming the action.

2. I can't compare to players' imagination - How can the words I use compete with the image in each player's head? Any verbs or adjectives I use may be counter to how a player imagines the action. My descriptions cannot be as vivid nor as interesting as what a player can have in their mind's eye.

3. It takes focus off of the important decisions - who cares if the orc hit with an overhand chop or a sweep at the legs? it doesn't impact the decisions that the players can make to affect the combat.

4. It takes focus off the things which do create tension in B/X combat - Tension in a B/X combat is not created by intricate description of the action but instead by the attrition of the party's resources. Quick combat keeps the focus on how many hit points you have left, what spells you have remaining, how many retainers have fallen, etc. Me describing how a bunch of hobgoblins press the attack does not create tension as much as a player seeing their hit points dwindle under the on-slot of those hobgoblins.

What do you think? Do you prefer fast abstract combats with only a few significant decision points or long combats with a large number of intricate decisions? Do you use colourful descriptions in your combats or instead stick to the basic, "you are hit for 6 points of damage"?

Sunday, September 26, 2010

B/X Monsters - Carrion Crawler

Two thoughts about the Carrion Crawler:
1. What is it about the illustration of the Carrion Crawler? I remember being fascinated by it as a kid and now my kids are fascinated by it.

2. Eight tentacles! Yipes. Given that they are each 2 feet long and a Carrion Crawler is 3 feet tall, I would guesstimate that the spread of tentacles would be about 5 to 6 feet. Put a Carrion Crawler in the middle of a 10 ft wide dungeon corridor and you have a wall of tentacles coming at you. A Carrion Crawler hits Armour Class 2 35% of the time and with eight attacks each round the characters are looking at making a lot of saving throws.

Saturday, September 25, 2010

B/X Monsters - Bandits

Another "man-monster", bandits to me really reinforce the relative differences between adventurers, monsters and normal men as discussed in the excellent post by JB on B/X Blackrazor.

We are told that bandits are NPC thieves that have banded together for the purpose of robbing others. Looking at the entries for bandits and normal men we can see that bandits have on average nearly twice as many hit points and are +1 better to hit compared to normal men. Their dangerous and nefarious lifestyles make bandits far more dangerous than normal men. The average farmer would be terrified of a group of bandits as they could easily take what they wanted and kill him and his family.

We are told that bandits have a leader that can be of any class. This leaves open many possible adventure hooks. A bandit group led by a magic-user could have very different goals than one led by a cleric or thief.

Looking at the Wilderness Encounter Table - Subtable: Men on page X57, bandits can be found in nearly all terrain types, except desert and ocean where they are replaced by dervishes and pirates respectively. Bandits are more likely to be found in "Inhabited" or "City" areas which makes sense since you need other people to rob.

In my games, bandits are often one of the most common monsters.

I would like to come up with an adventure hook involving a group of bandits led by a cleric that are hiding out in a jungle.

B/X King of the Ring: Clerics vs Fighters

In the comments to the post: Does the B/X Fighter need to be Buffed? K-Slacker mentions how he doesn't like that at times the Cleric surpasses the Fighter in fighting ability. Now, I've never really examined this in detail before. I put the following tables in the comments section to that post but I wanted to pull them into a post of their own.

Table 1: Cleric vs Fighter THAC0
XP..…CLevel..….CTHAC0……Flevel……..FTHAC0
0………….1………………19………………1……………….19
1500……..2………………19………………1……………...19
3000……..3………………19………………2……………...19
6000……..4………………19………………3……………...19
12000…….5……………..17………………4……………...17
25000…….6……………..17………………5……………...17
50000…….7……………..17………………6……………...17
100000…..8……………..17………………7……………...14
200000…..9……………..14………………8……………...14
300000….10…………….14……………….9……………..14
400000….11…………….14……………..10……………..12
500000….12…………….14……………..11……………..12
600000….13…………….12……………..12……………..12
700000….14…………….12……………..12……………..12

Table 2: Cleric vs Fighter Average Hit Points
XP..…CLevel..….CAvgHP……Flevel……..FAvgHP
0………….1………………3.5…..………1……………….4.5
1500……..2………………7………………1………………4.5
3000……..3………………10.5……………2………….…9
6000……..4………………14………………3………………13.5
12000…….5……………..17.5……………4………………18
25000…….6……………..21………………5………………22.5
50000…….7……………..24.5……………6………………27
100000…..8……………..28………………7………………31.5
200000…..9……………..31.5……………8………………36
300000….10…………….35……………….9……………..40.5
400000….11…………….38.5…………..10……………..45
500000….12…………….42……………..11……………..49.5
600000….13…………….45.5…………..12……………..54
700000….14…………….49……………..12……………..54

So yes, from a hit point perspective the Cleric does intermittently surpass Fighters at low (from 1,500 to 12,000) experience point levels. However, I don't think the discrepancy is enough to tip the scales too far in the Clerics favour as the discrepancy only lasts for a short time.

Also, if the optional variable damage system is used, the damage output of the fighter will likely be higher as they will likely have a weapon that will do at least 1d8 damage and they might have a strength based damage bonus. Also fighters will likely have any magic swords that are found.

Screwing Magic-Users

In the comments of my previous post Will says:
"Regarding the "by the book rules for spellbooks": I suppose if you really want to run it that way, nobody can stop you, but I think it's a clear case of adhering to the letter of the rules rather than their spirit, since context (every version of the game before and since) makes it clear that this is a simple misinterpretation. I'd never make run a M-U in a game with that rule in effect, because I'd obviously be getting screwed."

Two comments:
1. B/X was the first version of D&D I played. I picked up Moldvay's basic set when I was 10 years old and played that for five years before I picked up the AD&D PHB. I don't see how using the B/X rulebooks as written could possibly be a misinterpretation. I would contend that anyone that doesn't use this rule is house ruling their B/X game. Which is fine. I house rule some aspects of my game as well.

2. I don't think the rule as written obviously screws the magic-user. Sure it limits his versatility but page X11 says, "Magic-users and elves must be taught their new spells… Either the player or the DM may choose any new spells." I usually run this as various high level magic-users have their own specific spellbooks. Some will be famous for having certain spells such as the witch in the swamp that can communicate with otherworldly beings (Contact Higher Plane) or the Ice Mage that lives in the castle on top of a glacier (Wall of Ice). When a PC magic-user wants to learn a new spell they can do some research about who has the desired spell already in their spellbook and can then go an approach that magic-user about learning the spell from them. This allows players to customize their magic-user exactly the way they want and gives numerous adventure and roleplaying opportunities.

I agree that some players will dislike the limitations placed upon magic-users by using this rule. That's fine. I don't like playing clerics. Everyone has their own preferences. However, I like the rule and plan to continue to use it in my B/X games.

What do you think? Does the rule limit magic-users and elves too much?

Friday, September 24, 2010

Does the B/X Fighter need to be "buffed"?

A little while ago a short thread started on Dragonsfoot about adding multiple attacks for fighters as they advance in levels. The thread specifically focused on BECMI but that is close enough to B/X for me to comment.

The thesis put forward in the thread is that the damage output of fighters is dwarfed by spellcasters in later levels and that by adding extra attacks the fighter can keep up.

I don't think this is necessary. One of the reasons why I love B/X is that the by-the-book rules for spellbooks (whether intentionally written this way or not) is that magic-users and elves may only have as many spells in their spellbook as they are able to cast each day. I believe that this limits spellcasters so that such tweaks are unnecessary. Yes, a couple of times per day they may be able do things the fighter can't but the magic-user's limited resources and versatility keeps the fighter very relevant.

What do you think? Do B/X fighters need "buffing"?

B/X Monsters - White Ape

White apes are one of my favourite monsters. They illicit a strong sword & sorcery vibe. If I make up the tower of a decadent wizard, odds are that I included a white ape inside as a guard. White apes are tough (HD 4) and quick (move 120') but they are fairly easy to hit (AC 6) and don't cause too much damage with their two attacks (1-4 each). They also have ranged attack - they may throw stones for 1d6 damage.

Another reason why I like them is that they are associated with Neanderthals which I also really like for their S&S vibe.