tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post2193179012863149554..comments2024-03-26T15:35:56.004-04:00Comments on Delta's D&D Hotspot: Critiques of ChainmailDeltahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00705402326320853684noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-5839984712692405902009-01-02T23:18:00.000-05:002009-01-02T23:18:00.000-05:00With the hero issue, I think it still comes back t...With the hero issue, I think it still comes back to—as written—both the man-to-man and fantasy supplements are supplements to the main rules. I think it is reasonable that additional adjustments might be made when trying to combine them.Roberthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16733274876782876659noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-19696021582484331492009-01-02T10:50:00.000-05:002009-01-02T10:50:00.000-05:00P.S. I did see a post from Gygax, I believe in the...P.S. I did see a post from Gygax, I believe in the last year or two, suggesting just using a computer simulation of 1:1 rules in order to adjudicate mass combat, which would also (in theory) fit the bill. I'd have other game-design critiques of that, but I share EGG's late-era motivation there.Deltahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00705402326320853684noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-39183585073383883722009-01-02T10:47:00.000-05:002009-01-02T10:47:00.000-05:00"Sure things are different at man-to-man scale... ..."Sure things are different at man-to-man scale... really, what game has mass battle rules that match the 1:1 rules?"<BR/><BR/>Yes, that's the point.. I consider that to be an unacceptable flaw in any such system. <BR/><BR/>If no such system has yet achieved that consistency, then it seems like a golden opportunity for an advancement in game design. As I've said before, I'd argue that Niles' Battlesystem II came a lot closer than other products.Deltahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00705402326320853684noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-34618989922590362002009-01-01T22:29:00.000-05:002009-01-01T22:29:00.000-05:00Except he's not "desperately fighting for...Except he's not "desperately fighting for his life" against 4 single men at all; they have no real chance of defeating him, I doubt 20 would.<BR/><BR/>Sure things are different at man-to-man scale. I doubt the idea was that you would play out a mass battle at 1:1 and get the same results as 1:20; it's a special system for special scenarios, and really, what game has mass battle rules that match the 1:1 rules? There is also the question of how likely is the hero to face massed attacks at 1:20 than at 1:1.<BR/><BR/>No doubt you've played more mass combat than I have, I just don't see your point made. Unless you're talking about the entire idea of hit dice, but in that case I don't quite get why pick on the Chainmail Hero who I think was weakened much more by the Chainmail => D&D transition of hits into hit dice.K. Baileyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06623767121412820113noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-19270590872103855942009-01-01T12:02:00.000-05:002009-01-01T12:02:00.000-05:00"Doesn't it say the Hero has to take those 4 hits ..."Doesn't it say the Hero has to take those 4 hits simultaneously?"<BR/><BR/>Yes, and it's the same in both systems, so the scaling disconnect still applies.Deltahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00705402326320853684noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-19261296307507730062009-01-01T10:37:00.000-05:002009-01-01T10:37:00.000-05:00"So the Hero who wiped out 80 men in large-scale i..."So the Hero who wiped out 80 men in large-scale is now in a desperate fight for his life against just 4 normal men when you zoom in to man-to-man scale."<BR/><BR/>Doesn't it say the Hero has to take those 4 hits <I>simultaneously</I>?K. Baileyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06623767121412820113noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-16713714464115391932008-12-19T12:55:00.000-05:002008-12-19T12:55:00.000-05:00"Gary ensured me that the fantasy supplement ..."Gary ensured me that the fantasy supplement was written only to be used with the man-to-man rules, but when I read it, it sure looks to me like the fantasy supplement was written to apply to the main rules."<BR/><BR/>Robert, that's a fascinating assertion! It certainly does make me re-interpret the entire fantasy section if I consider it through that lens.<BR/><BR/>But have to agree with you, and disagree with Gary's recollection on that score. (1) The introduction provides an intent to "refight the epic struggles related by J.R.R. Tolkien, Robert E. Howard, and other fantasy writers", and I find it hard to interpret "epic struggles" as man-to-man combat. (2) The Superheroes are described as "Few and far between, these fellows are one-man armies!," which sounds a lot more like the equal of 160 normal men than just 8 men.<BR/><BR/>And finally, (3) he did the same thing all over again in Swords & Spells, jacking up heroes in what is definitely a 1:10 scale game ("the hero will inflict .40 of the damage shown for a 4th level creature on the combat tables", p. 1, 24). So you get an exponential boost for being a Hero; using both the higher-level combat table and then multiplying *that* by 4 (times 1/10) after the fact as well. <BR/><BR/>So EGG seems pretty consistent about churning our mass combat rules where he expects Heroes to mow down hundreds (not just 4 or 8) of normal men in a mob. And in so doing, the results are different if you're at the 1:10 scale than if you zoom into to special 1:1 scale (for OD&D at that time).Deltahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00705402326320853684noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-31038711261382015482008-12-19T12:15:00.000-05:002008-12-19T12:15:00.000-05:00Great article! Now allow me to kibitz. ^_^First, a...Great article! Now allow me to kibitz. ^_^<BR/><BR/>First, according to Gary, <I>Chainmail</I> was really Perren’s baby. Most of Gary’s contributions were additions to it. IIRC.<BR/><BR/>As for his table, he had a basement. Having lived in TX all my life, I really envy that.<BR/><BR/>I think a lot of these scale issues just go to show that Gary never actually used minis with D&D. The D&D sessions were played in the living room instead of the basement.<BR/><BR/>I won’t pretend to understand it, but from what grognards say there was a real tactical difference from the split-move thing.<BR/><BR/>My two big issues with <I>Chainmail</I>:<BR/><BR/>It confuses the terms “man” and “figure”. This seems like a really nit-picky point because the reader can just figure it out from context. Except for the fact that I’ve had different <I>Chainmail</I> grognards give me very different interpretations of the same rule because of it.<BR/><BR/>Gary ensured me that the fantasy supplement was written only to be used with the man-to-man rules, but when I read it, it sure looks to me like the fantasy supplement was written to apply to the main rules.<BR/><BR/>Maybe for publication it was tweaked to apply directly to the main rules, and Gary never thought of it except the way he’d used it.<BR/><BR/>So, to use the fantasy supplement with man-to-man is kind of a two-step process. Apply the fantasy rules to the main rules, then apply the man-to-man modifications to that.<BR/><BR/>Likewise, it’s weird how D&D seems to give stats for the 20:1 <I>Chainmail</I> rules instead of in the man-to-man terms. Just more evidence that Gary never actually used <I>Chainmail</I> and miniatures with D&D, I guess.Roberthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16733274876782876659noreply@blogger.com