Whirlwind attack vs combat dominance

[jdizzy001]

Those are my thoughts exactly, and for that reason, I always equip my PC's with as light of armor as possible. Very few people from the dark ages tromped around in full plate. They were usually on horse back or they wore something much lighter. Heck, look at the fellowship (not from the movie) they carried very little. When they left Rivendell they had their weapon of choice and maybe a helmet. Once they were at journey's end they acquired 1 magic item from Galadriel and the hunters acquired a chain shirt. Oh, Merry and Pippin also acquired a bit of armor but they were going to the battle field.

[Dracyian]

Those are my thoughts exactly, and for that reason, I always equip my PC's with as light of armor as possible. Very few people from the dark ages tromped around in full plate. They were usually on horse back or they wore something much lighter. Heck, look at the fellowship (not from the movie) they carried very little. When they left Rivendell they had their weapon of choice and maybe a helmet. Once they were at journey's end they acquired 1 magic item from Galadriel and the hunters acquired a chain shirt. Oh, Merry and Pippin also acquired a bit of armor but they were going to the battle field.

Frodo left Rivendell with a mithril chain tunic dwarven made a gift from Bilbo, and I want to say that (Its been a while since I have read LoTR) that Aragon and Gimili wore Chain Tunics underneath their outerwear.

One of my favorie quotes and I can't remember it exactly is from David Eddings Ruby Knight when the four knights representing the 4 orders of the Holy Knights in the book are talking one of them doesn't own a full Plate set (they all have chain mail too for when they aren't charging into battle and a squire) and they ask how he got away with it because they hate having to put on the ceremonail plate for official events and stuff. Sir Ulath's response was that you can't swim in full plate. When the Head of his order started arguing that full plate is worth the risk they went down to a river which a lot of them had been thrown into by by Trolls, which are common in his country, and first threw in a member of the order wearing a chain tunic, in less than a minute he had surfaced. When they tossed in the order's leader in all plate they surmised after not seeing him in a few minutes that he had found something more interesting at the bottom of the river

[jdizzy001]

Yes, frodo left rivendell with armor but aragorn and gimli got their chainmail in Rohan. So, yes, Gorn and gimli wore armor but not until book 2

[tylermo]

The video of Davis with all of the armor and equipment on is a friggin' classic. There's another video in which Davis takes an empty Dr. Pepper box to the head. A must see!

[zombiehands]

So let me get this straight, the reason Combat Dominance does not suck is that 1 HD monsters can pose a threat to high level PCs, they can pose a threat because players are supposed to have low armor class and plate armor is generally not available? In my current game (as player not dm) the front line of the party has between 24-21 AC the lighter armed characters 21-18. The single best piece of armor we have is +2 shield, everything else is +1.

I really don't think it is un reasonable for front line fighters at mid level to have low 20's AC. which means that 1 hd creatures are pretty worthless. +1 for flanking sill leaves them needing a 20 to hit.

I don't think it is all that good of an ability as written.

The fighter needs some revamping IMHO.

We have proposed two simple fixes for our next game. 1) critical hits allow a second attack and 1's give the foe a free attack. 2) You can make called shots at -8 and get a critical hit if you hit ie a second attack.

[mgtremaine]

The change I made was really tiny in concept... Just add another 1HD for every 4 Levels, otherwise leave it the same.

4th 2 attacks vs 1 HD and less
8th 3 attacks vs 2 HD and less
12th 4 attacks vs 3 HD and less
16th 5 attacks vs 4 HD and less
20th 6 attacks vs 5 HD and less

[zombiehands]

But then there is little difference between that and Whirlwind Attack.

[mgtremaine]

Perhaps not, i like it because it is such a small change you just tell your players or by the way the means an extra HD every 4 levels....Although at higher level it would be far superior since Whirlwind attack caps out at 4 attacks at 10th level. This keeps going... making Fighters, well, that best.

-Mike

[zombiehands]

The change I made was really tiny in concept... Just add another 1HD for every 4 Levels, otherwise leave it the same.

4th 2 attacks vs 1 HD and less
8th 3 attacks vs 2 HD and less
12th 4 attacks vs 3 HD and less
16th 5 attacks vs 4 HD and less
20th 6 attacks vs 5 HD and less

Well I am not to sure about the fighter being better with 6 attacks at level 20, To me level 20 is not even realistic to consider.

the Barbarian is as follows
4th 2 attacks at 2HD (much better)
6th 3 attacks at 3HD (much better)
10th 4 attacks at 5HD (much better)

So if you are saying to someone hang in there to 16th level and you will be better at a barbarian at attacking lower level creatures, that is kind of a hard sell.

Heck going back to first edition AD&D with on attack per level vs. zero HD would be better. Since zero level is not a thing in C&C 1 HD.

[mgtremaine]

You do what ever you want that's the fun of running your own game... I can mash the rules until I'm out of breath but I think you already have an opinion formed. My last point will be that Dominance is always on and Whirlwind is 1 per combat. Other then that enjoy 1ed...

-Mike

[mgtremaine]

You do what ever you want that's the fun of running your own game... I can mash the rules until I'm out of breath but I think you already have an opinion formed. My last point will be that Dominance is always on and Whirlwind is 1 per combat. Other then that enjoy 1ed...

-Mike

[Arduin]

Other then that enjoy 1ed...

-Mike

???

[mgtremaine]

Other then that enjoy 1ed...

-Mike

???

Heck going back to first edition AD&D with on attack per level vs. zero HD would be better

That isn't meant in a bad way. If someone comes to my door and says lets play 1ed, I'll say "let me get my dice. "

Added:

I missed that Rigon already posted what I did also... [Naturally he's probably posted every rule change out there :p ]

-Mike

[Arduin]

Heck going back to first edition AD&D with on attack per level vs. zero HD would be better

Oh. I have this rule in my C&C game. Fighters get that vs. less than D8 foes.

[dunbruha]

So let me get this straight, the reason Combat Dominance does not suck is that 1 HD monsters can pose a threat to high level PCs, they can pose a threat because players are supposed to have low armor class and plate armor is generally not available? In my current game (as player not dm) the front line of the party has between 24-21 AC the lighter armed characters 21-18. The single best piece of armor we have is +2 shield, everything else is +1.

I really don't think it is un reasonable for front line fighters at mid level to have low 20's AC. which means that 1 hd creatures are pretty worthless. +1 for flanking sill leaves them needing a 20 to hit.

I don't think it is all that good of an ability as written.

But...

If a PC is surrounded by 6 1hd creatures, then would the fighter (or any class) get the benefit of shield? Of Dex bonus? I don't think so. If you are trying to fight off 6 foes, you can only use your shield against one (maybe 2 tops), and any evasive move against one might allow another to get an opening.

I am considering giving a +1 to attack for each foe above 1 (whether or not they are flanking). The fighter would keep all bonuses for shield and Dex, but the foes would have a better chance to hit. So, if a fighter is surrounded by 6 orcs, then they would each get +5 bonus to hit (on top of their +1). Being surrounded is dangerous... (this would also work for PCs surrounding foes)

[Arduin]

But...

If a PC is surrounded by 6 1hd creatures, then would the fighter (or any class) get the benefit of shield? Of Dex bonus? I don't think so. If you are trying to fight off 6 foes, you can only use your shield against one (maybe 2 tops), and any evasive move against one might allow another to get an opening.

Which is why fighters in my game tend to be tanks. Mid level fighters in my game that wear nothing but Studded Pantyhose tend to have short, colorful (blood red) careers.

[zombiehands]

So let me get this straight, the reason Combat Dominance does not suck is that 1 HD monsters can pose a threat to high level PCs, they can pose a threat because players are supposed to have low armor class and plate armor is generally not available? In my current game (as player not dm) the front line of the party has between 24-21 AC the lighter armed characters 21-18. The single best piece of armor we have is +2 shield, everything else is +1.

I really don't think it is un reasonable for front line fighters at mid level to have low 20's AC. which means that 1 hd creatures are pretty worthless. +1 for flanking sill leaves them needing a 20 to hit.

I don't think it is all that good of an ability as written.

But...

If a PC is surrounded by 6 1hd creatures, then would the fighter (or any class) get the benefit of shield? Of Dex bonus? I don't think so. If you are trying to fight off 6 foes, you can only use your shield against one (maybe 2 tops), and any evasive move against one might allow another to get an opening.

I am considering giving a +1 to attack for each foe above 1 (whether or not they are flanking). The fighter would keep all bonuses for shield and Dex, but the foes would have a better chance to hit. So, if a fighter is surrounded by 6 orcs, then they would each get +5 bonus to hit (on top of their +1). Being surrounded is dangerous... (this would also work for PCs surrounding foes)

Yes being surrounded should be bad.

+1 to hit for each foe above 1 seems a lot easier than counting how many foes attack vs. shield and how many are flanking.

But I don't want to lose my point that AC is the low 20's is not uncommon for mid-level characters.

[Rigon]

I missed that Rigon already posted what I did also... [Naturally he's probably posted every rule change out there :p ]

-Mike

That's just because I have a big brain and a lot of down time during the day.

R-

[PeelSeel2]

When Combat Dominance worked, AD&D's to hit charts made AC 0 through AC -6 (our modern parlance, AC 20 through 26) a 20 to hit. That is 20 before modifiers. So If the opponents manages to get a +1 to +3 modifier due to circumstances, They Needed 17 to 20 to hit AC 20 through 26. AC's effectiveness went way down in that first tier after AC 20.

So DM's could throw low level mooks at high level characters, even up to AC 26, and they might have a fair chance of hitting. That is a pretty good threat in numbers.

So If you adopt a rule that says AC 20 through AC 26 is actually = AC 20, and then on a one to one basis after that, AC 27 = AC 21, it might take care of the combat dominance issue. Or make it easy for every 5 levels of AC after 20, it goes up by one. AC 20-25 = AC 20, AC 26-30, AC 21

Also, nothing wrong with giving mooks in numbers special bonuses to hit when fighting next to 3 or more buddies, like a +1 per mook.