mazina@pur-ee.UUCP (Der Kaiser) (07/25/85)
In article <561@hou2g.UUCP> scott@hou2g.UUCP (N. Ersha) writes: > >What about tying them up? Seems this could EASILY be >done in one round to a sleeping foe. In fact, the party >I DM for did just that, polishing off a high(er) level >mage by commanding him to die or sleep (or whatever), >and then trussing him up like a Christmas gift. (Not >to mention the fact that our Chaotic thief proceeded >to lop off his tongue--ugh!--to prevent spell casting >"from bondage"). > >This was just TOO EASY. Any suggestions for modifications? Of COURSE it was too easy, your DM was feeding you candy! (Check for cavities :-) Tying someone up in one round is o.k. if you go by the AD&D combat round, which is 1 minute long. You can tie them up, tattoo them, and perhaps even give them a haircut! What should be done is shorten the round so as to give a more reasonable ratio between combat and non-combat actions, i.e. 1 attack, vs. tying someone up... Thomas Ruschak pur-ee!mazina
jims@hcrvax.UUCP (Jim Sullivan) (07/29/85)
> Tying someone up in one round is o.k. if you go by the AD&D > combat round, which is 1 minute long. You can tie them up, tattoo them, and > perhaps even give them a haircut! What should be done is shorten the round > so as to give a more reasonable ratio between combat and non-combat actions, > i.e. 1 attack, vs. tying someone up... > > Thomas Ruschak > pur-ee!mazina Agreed, I find it difficult to believe that a fighter can only swing once in one minute ! What I'va always done is maintained a two-tier system. During regular play, a round is a minute, but during melee, things speed up abit. This makes battle more realisitic, and since my players know that I treat time this way, I don't get any wild statements about attempting strange feats during melee ("well, I have the time") Jim Sullivan
steve@siemens.UUCP (07/31/85)
There is (or was some editions ago) an explanation somewhere about D&D
(or AD&D) melee rounds. One round (one attack roll) does not imply one
swing of the sword. It implies a series of attacks and parries lasting
one minute. (Maybe it's not one minute, but whatever time interval.)
It is the smallest amount of time one can spend fighting, supposedly.
Often in real fights the two people will go at it for a series of swings,
back off and breathe for a moment, go at it again, etc. The rules most
closely reflect this type of fight.
I do not intend to express either endorsement or rebuke of D&D or AD&D
melee systems.
......{ihnp4, topaz}!princeton!siemens!stevemff@wuphys.UUCP (Swamp Thing) (07/31/85)
In article <1899@hcrvax.UUCP> jims@hcrvax.UUCP (Jim Sullivan) writes: >> Tying someone up in one round is o.k. if you go by the AD&D >> combat round, which is 1 minute long. > >Agreed, I find it difficult to believe that a fighter can only swing once >in one minute ! > >Jim Sullivan Now, I don't want to get into an arguement about whether it makes sense or not, but I believe that the rationalization for this is that, when two fighters are duking it out, there are many swings in one minute, but that only one (on the average, and for fighters below 7th level) hits for any damage. (God, what a long sentance!) Of course, that doesn't explain why a fighter also only gets one swing/round against a spell-casting MU, but you can't have everything. I hope this has helped to confuse the issue. Mark F. Flynn Department of Physics Washington University St. Louis, MO 63130 ihnp4!wuphys!mff "There is no dark side of the moon, really. Matter of fact, it's all dark." P. Floyd
warack@aero.ARPA (Chris Warack ) (08/03/85)
In article <1899@hcrvax.UUCP> jims@hcrvax.UUCP (Jim Sullivan) writes: >> Tying someone up in one round is o.k. if you go by the AD&D >> combat round, which is 1 minute long. You can tie them up, tattoo them, and >> perhaps even give them a haircut! What should be done is shorten the round >>so as to give a more reasonable ratio between combat and non-combat actions, >> i.e. 1 attack, vs. tying someone up... [THOMAS RUSCHAK] >Agreed, I find it difficult to believe that a fighter can only swing once >in one minute ! What I'va always done is maintained a two-tier system. >During regular play, a round is a minute, but during melee, things speed >up abit. This makes battle more realisitic, and since my players know >that I treat time this way, I don't get any wild statements about attempting >strange feats during melee ("well, I have the time") [Jim Sullivan] One thing to keep in mind when judging the length of a round is that it means more than one swing. The one attack per one minute round takes into account circling, protective moves and feints. It also is a short cut -- instead of giving a fighter a 3% to hit each swing at 1 swing every 5 seconds, the round system takes an average and gives him a 36% chance to hit each round. A single roll can reflect more than one swing. As more experience is gained, fighting is more effective -- this is translated as a better over all chance to cause damage that round [by increased hit probability] or by more rolls --> more chances for more damage [2 hit rolls per round]. It's important for a player under this system to understand this, or the "I can do more than that" syndrome hits. If a player wants to take his hit roll for a round; he should not be allowed to do anything else; or should take a substantial penalty to his hit chance. [This topic has been discussed to death every so often in almost any FRP magazine. Look in back issues for more examples.] -- _______ |/-----\| Chris Warack (213) 648-6617 ||hello|| || || warack@aerospace.ARPA |-------| warack@aero.UUCP |@ ___ | seismo!harvard!talcott!panda!genrad!decvax!ittatc!dcdwest! |_______| sdcsvax!sdcrdcf!trwrb!trwrba!aero!warack || || \ Aerospace Corporation, M1-117, El Segundo, CA 90245 ^^^ ^^^ `---------(|=