Great video. Proficiency, speed factors, and AC modifiers make combat so much more flavorful and varied and actually give a character a reason to use different weapons instead of always resorting to his one favorite +2 sword or whatever.
_"So, starting from the top, which in AD&D terms means starting from roughly the middle."_ Delivered so dead-pan, I only just got the joke on a re-watch. :) Have to remember that one.
Good stuff. As you might know, I'm a fan of using the AC modifiers for weapons, because without them, most of the weapons are technologically inferior to the long sword, etc. To get round the clunkiness, I have to hit tables for each player (showing their base to hit as well as two main weapons). Sounds tricky, but it's actually easier than looking up the numbers on several matrices (and can all be presented on one sheet.
Great video this helps alot and again as you said in one of the comments just looking at it , it can seem like a table of random numbers at first. I also dont use the speed stuff seems most dont it just slows everything down. It might be handy to print off some of the tables in OSRIC for this stuff as they are well done and it is AD&D just tables are more clean just to have on the table for people to flip over :-)
Speed Factor only comes into play with simultaneous Initiative. In theory, about 1 combat round in 6 for the tie. Unless you're a player in my most recent game and we had four tie results in 8 rounds of combat. That pre-initiative declaration, followed by a tie-result can be a right pain to Players. Targets are often not where they are supposed to be be. All of it is optional, but I find not using speed factor and weapon adjustments makes for bland combat. There's a reason why Fighters should have skills in many weapons. Each tool for its purpose.
We never used the weapon charts except for ranged weapons. I'm sure that the DM just didn't want to deal with it. You'd be surprised at how many times somebody said "I pull out my two handed sword" in a 10'x10' room. And that's when I stayed out of the way. Especially since we used Critical Hits and Fumble tables. I didn't want to be the guy in the room with them.
I get told a lot that no one ever uses them because they were too clunky or impractical. Yes, there's a little extra work for the DM, but once players have their Record Sheets (and I use the old ones with everything filled out - including the pummelling, grappling, overbearing %) it is easier. On one hand they're a bunch of numbers that may or may not have some correlation, but eventually weapons become formless blobs and categorised into "Yes" and "No" weapons. I've been using it for decades, and I never had a problem. I even have a chart for monster armour (Dragon scale may be like Ac 4, AC 3, or even AC 2 for weapon adjusts). It does seem to be a polarising game mechanic.
@@TheEldarGuy I also noticed that Monks open hand attacks get a hefty minus the better the armor is. It's -7 for AC 2 which makes the Monks attacks on the Thief chart pretty bad.
@@CaptCook999 the Monk attacks on the Cleric chart. Even at 17th level, the Monk hits an AC 0 on 10+ If the Monk is trying to Open Hand a plate armoured character, the situation must be dire. The Hand axe has a -3 vs AC2 and the Monk gains + half-level damage.
That wasn't uncommon, which led to the system used later. With SF being used (statistically 1 round in 6), it shouldn't have been an important mechanic (compared to space required and weapon length), I do remember an abundance of tied initiative results.
Hi, question about the ranges for missle weapons. Is it in feet, inches or grid spaces? Ive read that ranges for missles weapons on the charts are focused for inside dungeons but its not making sense to me. For example the Short Bow is S 5 M 10 L 21. 21 feet for long range seems, well no pun intended short.
@@Iambiguous That's all good. The later versions of D&D removed the inches bit out of movement, range and area of effects. The real challenge is knowing when the values change. In theory, 1" = 10' indoors, during action sequences, and inside cities/towns; the conversion to 1" =10 yards (30') is for open country and the freedom of movement are available.
Hello, First, thanks for the question. Space Required: it's in radius. When the swords, maxes, and flails start swinging, the space required includes all forms of motion. Parry, repost, feints, and of course lunges and slashes. Combat in AD&D 1st ed is in one minute blocks, the amount of damage inflicted isn't always about an actual cut or thrust, but also the pressure and fatigue of combat. It's a total different mindset from later editions of the game and the abstract nature of the round can seem awkward oftentimes. Thanks for the question.
That chart is useless 90% of the time as you are mostly fighting monsters not specific man made armors and shields. Every character would run around with flails if it was enforced. I almost never used it. I recently started experimenting with an article from an old Dragon magazine where you calculate closing distance using the speed/length/strength/level of the user/monster. The end result would add to individual initiative. Longer weapons are generally better at attacking first and shorter ones were harder to get close enough to be as effective. It's clunky but kinda realistic. Have you familiar with this process? It was called "Who Get's First Swing?" by Ronald Hall.
I'm not familiar with that article... I'll have to read through it. I also use the weapon adjustment for monsters/critters. It's about figuring out what the attacks and defenses are like. Most natural armours are AC 8 to 6, depending on the type of natural hide; a dragon is like plate mail and shield or just plate mail (providing either base AC 2 or 3), and the claw/bite being like dagger/short sword; it's a tiny amount of extra work - and you only have to do it once. Thanks for watching and commenting. Everyone works it out their own way,
In the Monster Manuel. I noticed in the description of a brownie with an 18 dexterity, and the chest of a male lion being leathery. That many monsters have an unarmored AC of 7. Where as players have an unarmored AC of 10. Many of monsters with AC higher than 0. When you compare their physique to what type of natural armor it could be. It makes a lot more sense. The DMG states that this on page 28. Its contradictory on how its written, and if you make the assumptions above. You will see almost all weapons get a penalty to hit unarmored monsters by default. This is further supported by the fact that not a single monster has an AC worse than 9.
Like most tables of near-random numbers and when you couple that with the fact that a Players Handbook had no information on how to use it, there's no surprise that people ignored it or made their own house rules. Really though, Speed Factor comes in only when the Initiative die is a tied result. Speed Factor 4 goes before SF5; the head mess is when there a major difference between the two values. A Speed Factor 4 weapon vs SF8 allows the SF4 weapon to make a 2nd attack, a short sword (SF3) vs a two-handed sword (SF10) can get three attacks! So I give you the Monk with an Open Hand attack (SF1) vs any weapon against SF3+ and a tied Initiative result, can gain two additional attack routines (routines not attacks), giving the 9th Lvl Monk three routines at 2 attacks per routine and doing damage at 3d4 per hit! The key takeaway is that lower SF weapons are faster than higher SF, and it only comes into play when Initiative is tied. Hope I've helped a little. Thanks for commenting and I appreciate your support.
Great video. Proficiency, speed factors, and AC modifiers make combat so much more flavorful and varied and actually give a character a reason to use different weapons instead of always resorting to his one favorite +2 sword or whatever.
Space Required is another of those rules. Using these additional rules encourages Fighters to be versatile and use the right tool for the job.
_"So, starting from the top, which in AD&D terms means starting from roughly the middle."_
Delivered so dead-pan, I only just got the joke on a re-watch. :)
Have to remember that one.
Sorry about the shaking, it w as s a nice day, and I wanted to do something outside.
Good stuff. As you might know, I'm a fan of using the AC modifiers for weapons, because without them, most of the weapons are technologically inferior to the long sword, etc. To get round the clunkiness, I have to hit tables for each player (showing their base to hit as well as two main weapons). Sounds tricky, but it's actually easier than looking up the numbers on several matrices (and can all be presented on one sheet.
Great video this helps alot and again as you said in one of the comments just looking at it , it can seem like a table of random numbers at first. I also dont use the speed stuff seems most dont it just slows everything down. It might be handy to print off some of the tables in OSRIC for this stuff as they are well done and it is AD&D just tables are more clean just to have on the table for people to flip over :-)
Speed Factor only comes into play with simultaneous Initiative. In theory, about 1 combat round in 6 for the tie. Unless you're a player in my most recent game and we had four tie results in 8 rounds of combat.
That pre-initiative declaration, followed by a tie-result can be a right pain to Players. Targets are often not where they are supposed to be be.
All of it is optional, but I find not using speed factor and weapon adjustments makes for bland combat.
There's a reason why Fighters should have skills in many weapons. Each tool for its purpose.
We never used the weapon charts except for ranged weapons.
I'm sure that the DM just didn't want to deal with it.
You'd be surprised at how many times somebody said "I pull out my two handed sword" in a 10'x10' room. And that's when I stayed out of the way. Especially since we used Critical Hits and Fumble tables. I didn't want to be the guy in the room with them.
I get told a lot that no one ever uses them because they were too clunky or impractical. Yes, there's a little extra work for the DM, but once players have their Record Sheets (and I use the old ones with everything filled out - including the pummelling, grappling, overbearing %) it is easier.
On one hand they're a bunch of numbers that may or may not have some correlation, but eventually weapons become formless blobs and categorised into "Yes" and "No" weapons.
I've been using it for decades, and I never had a problem. I even have a chart for monster armour (Dragon scale may be like Ac 4, AC 3, or even AC 2 for weapon adjusts).
It does seem to be a polarising game mechanic.
@@TheEldarGuy I also noticed that Monks open hand attacks get a hefty minus the better the armor is. It's -7 for AC 2 which makes the Monks attacks on the Thief chart pretty bad.
@@CaptCook999 the Monk attacks on the Cleric chart. Even at 17th level, the Monk hits an AC 0 on 10+
If the Monk is trying to Open Hand a plate armoured character, the situation must be dire. The Hand axe has a -3 vs AC2 and the Monk gains + half-level damage.
@@TheEldarGuy , yes, my mistake, it is the clerics table. But still a -7 against AC 2 is a Big difference.
Monks were not great, I know because I saw 2 in 40 years playing or as DM. Now using that table they are completely unplayable.
I used weapon speed for initiative but not armor class adjustment for to hit.
That wasn't uncommon, which led to the system used later.
With SF being used (statistically 1 round in 6), it shouldn't have been an important mechanic (compared to space required and weapon length), I do remember an abundance of tied initiative results.
Hi, question about the ranges for missle weapons. Is it in feet, inches or grid spaces? Ive read that ranges for missles weapons on the charts are focused for inside dungeons but its not making sense to me. For example the Short Bow is S 5 M 10 L 21. 21 feet for long range seems, well no pun intended short.
LOL nvm, Iwatched to the end and you answered it.
@@Iambiguous That's all good. The later versions of D&D removed the inches bit out of movement, range and area of effects.
The real challenge is knowing when the values change. In theory, 1" = 10' indoors, during action sequences, and inside cities/towns; the conversion to 1" =10 yards (30') is for open country and the freedom of movement are available.
Is space required diameter or radius?
Hello,
First, thanks for the question.
Space Required: it's in radius.
When the swords, maxes, and flails start swinging, the space required includes all forms of motion. Parry, repost, feints, and of course lunges and slashes.
Combat in AD&D 1st ed is in one minute blocks, the amount of damage inflicted isn't always about an actual cut or thrust, but also the pressure and fatigue of combat.
It's a total different mindset from later editions of the game and the abstract nature of the round can seem awkward oftentimes.
Thanks for the question.
That chart is useless 90% of the time as you are mostly fighting monsters not specific man made armors and shields. Every character would run around with flails if it was enforced. I almost never used it. I recently started experimenting with an article from an old Dragon magazine where you calculate closing distance using the speed/length/strength/level of the user/monster. The end result would add to individual initiative. Longer weapons are generally better at attacking first and shorter ones were harder to get close enough to be as effective. It's clunky but kinda realistic. Have you familiar with this process? It was called "Who Get's First Swing?" by Ronald Hall.
I'm not familiar with that article... I'll have to read through it.
I also use the weapon adjustment for monsters/critters. It's about figuring out what the attacks and defenses are like.
Most natural armours are AC 8 to 6, depending on the type of natural hide; a dragon is like plate mail and shield or just plate mail (providing either base AC 2 or 3), and the claw/bite being like dagger/short sword; it's a tiny amount of extra work - and you only have to do it once.
Thanks for watching and commenting.
Everyone works it out their own way,
In the Monster Manuel. I noticed in the description of a brownie with an 18 dexterity, and the chest of a male lion being leathery. That many monsters have an unarmored AC of 7. Where as players have an unarmored AC of 10. Many of monsters with AC higher than 0. When you compare their physique to what type of natural armor it could be. It makes a lot more sense. The DMG states that this on page 28. Its contradictory on how its written, and if you make the assumptions above. You will see almost all weapons get a penalty to hit unarmored monsters by default. This is further supported by the fact that not a single monster has an AC worse than 9.
I have to admit that weapon speed combined with initiative always baffled me. Just sayin'.
Like most tables of near-random numbers and when you couple that with the fact that a Players Handbook had no information on how to use it, there's no surprise that people ignored it or made their own house rules.
Really though, Speed Factor comes in only when the Initiative die is a tied result. Speed Factor 4 goes before SF5; the head mess is when there a major difference between the two values.
A Speed Factor 4 weapon vs SF8 allows the SF4 weapon to make a 2nd attack, a short sword (SF3) vs a two-handed sword (SF10) can get three attacks!
So I give you the Monk with an Open Hand attack (SF1) vs any weapon against SF3+ and a tied Initiative result, can gain two additional attack routines (routines not attacks), giving the 9th Lvl Monk three routines at 2 attacks per routine and doing damage at 3d4 per hit!
The key takeaway is that lower SF weapons are faster than higher SF, and it only comes into play when Initiative is tied.
Hope I've helped a little.
Thanks for commenting and I appreciate your support.
Thank you for putting this together David! Such a great help. I’m running a retro AD&D 1e game this next few weeks.