As a companion to the Critical Hit thread.
How do/did you guys handle these? I find it hard to conceive, one guy disengages combat and someone else, who is engaged in a separate combat, can reach out and get a free swing on the fleeing enemy. Or the person he was fighting would get a free hack at the retreating enemy's back.
This came up in my last session and I only allowed those that still had not gone that turn get a swing at the fleeing bugbear. One player jokingly demanded an attack of opportunity, but I just brushed it off.
Are AOOs legitimate? What are/were your houserules?
Quote from: Kaz;589295As a companion to the Critical Hit thread.
How do/did you guys handle these? I find it hard to conceive, one guy disengages combat and someone else, who is engaged in a separate combat, can reach out and get a free swing on the fleeing enemy. Or the person he was fighting would get a free hack at the retreating enemy's back.
This came up in my last session and I only allowed those that still had not gone that turn get a swing at the fleeing bugbear. One player jokingly demanded an attack of opportunity, but I just brushed it off.
Are AOOs legitimate? What are/were your houserules?
Free attacks sometimes happen based on a snap ruling by the GM ("does a free attack make sense given the in world circumstances?" If yes: free attack. If not: No.)
We used common sense.
"The goblins turn to flee, so you guys have a chance to get in an extra attack on their flanks."
No "free" attacks, though.
Free attack if someone was engaged in melee combat and tried to flee. Always decided by the DM, of course.
Besides retreat, two common cases that AoO are used for are:
(1) moving past an opponent, like a monster trying to go around the fighter to hit and disrupt the wizard - or conversely PC trying to get past a second monster to concentrate attacks on the first
(2) casting a spell when in combat - like a desperate wizard trying to get a goblin off him
Quote from: jhkim;589312Besides retreat, two common cases that AoO are used for are:
(1) moving past an opponent, like a monster trying to go around the fighter to hit and disrupt the wizard - or conversely PC trying to get past a second monster to concentrate attacks on the first
(2) casting a spell when in combat - like a desperate wizard trying to get a goblin off him
I don't use either of those, just the ordinary attack rules. There may be a bonus for attacking from the flank or rear, and an attack can disrupt a spell, but I'm dead-set against "free attacks".
Quote from: talysman;589301We used common sense.
"The goblins turn to flee, so you guys have a chance to get in an extra attack on their flanks."
No "free" attacks, though.
Pretty much. However, we do allow ranged free attacks if the creature can't get reasonably under cover quickly and the characters had the weapons ready.
The only one 2e I deal with is Fleeing. It's a free attack according to the rules. Not currently dissatisfied with that, but if I did change it I'd have it cost an attack (and thus just be an attack with re-prioritized initiative). So far, not an issue and it keeps melee something to watch out for -- no constant fleeing back to range all the time, so having a personnel buffer matters.
Everything else is a regular strike with only re-prioritized initiative. Sometimes situation hands the initiative to your opponent, like attacking unarmed against an armed attacker, or charging versus a polearm. But they weren't "free" (extra) attacks.
If the opponent is fleeing, do you give them a penalty to their AC?
Is this different if they are trying a fighting retreat, as opposed to just turning and beating feet?
Quote from: Kaz;589360If the opponent is fleeing, do you give them a penalty to their AC
I would not count the shield bonus.
"Breaking Off From Melee:
"At such time as any creature decides, it can break off the engagement and flee the melee. To do so, however, allows the opponent a free attack or attack routine. This attack is calculated as if it were a rear attack upon a stunned opponent. When this attack is completed, the retiring/fleeing party may move away at full movement rate, and unless the opponent pursues and is able to move at a higher rate of speed, the melee is ended and the situation becomes one of encounter avoidance."
"Stunned, Prone or Motionless Opponents: Treat all such opponents as if being attacked from the rear, but in this case the "to hit" bonus is +4 rather than +2."
- 1e AD&D DMG, p. 70
I require players to give up one of their attack opportunities to disengage. Which is slower but works out to much the same thing.
Now, if two party members are in the front of one monster, would that make it easier for one of them to disengage while the other "covers" him or her? I'm inclined to say yes, and my system lets this happen pretty naturally.
Quote from: Kaz;589295As a companion to the Critical Hit thread.
How do/did you guys handle these? I find it hard to conceive, one guy disengages combat and someone else, who is engaged in a separate combat, can reach out and get a free swing on the fleeing enemy. Or the person he was fighting would get a free hack at the retreating enemy's back.
This came up in my last session and I only allowed those that still had not gone that turn get a swing at the fleeing bugbear. One player jokingly demanded an attack of opportunity, but I just brushed it off.
Are AOOs legitimate? What are/were your houserules?
DM's judgement call.
Quote from: Black Vulmea;589365"Breaking Off From Melee:
"At such time as any creature decides, it can break off the engagement and flee the melee. To do so, however, allows the opponent a free attack or attack routine. This attack is calculated as if it were a rear attack upon a stunned opponent. When this attack is completed, the retiring/fleeing party may move away at full movement rate, and unless the opponent pursues and is able to move at a higher rate of speed, the melee is ended and the situation becomes one of encounter avoidance."
"Stunned, Prone or Motionless Opponents: Treat all such opponents as if being attacked from the rear, but in this case the "to hit" bonus is +4 rather than +2."
- 1e AD&D DMG, p. 70
I was just going to come and post that. Those are the exact rules I use.
Note also per page 107 of the Players Handbook that characters (or NPCs) engaged in melee may
fall back and no penalty is incurred. This is just a retrograde movement, and the other side may follow up or disengage as needs be.
There isn’t anything in OD&D to cover how to disengage from combat, though it does explain how monsters will pursue.
In Basic D&D, a combatant that is engaged in combat is allowed to make a fighting withdrawal at half speed, or a retreat at full speed which gives opponent’s bonuses to hit. In both cases the withdrawal needs to be away from your opponents, and will be blocked by other combatants that are in the way. Note that you don’t get a free attack, thought retreats leave you vulnerable to follow up attacks before your next turn.
My rule is as follows
You can move half your move rate and still attack.
You can take a step (one square/hex) without drawing any further attacks.
You can safely move out of combat by taking a half move with no further action.
Any other type of move will allow anybody within melee range a single set of attacks (in case of monsters with multiple attacks). This is NOT on a per square basis but on a per move. So a elf running by an orc means the orc only get one free attack not three for the three squares on the grid the elf would have to pass through to get by the orc. But the elf could be attacked by as many orcs that he runs by that are in melee range.
The biggest point to remember is that D&D combat are anywhere from multiple seconds to a minute in length (AD&D 1st). Each roll of the dice doesn't equal a single swing of swords even though that how most people think of it. By making a full move in the face of enemies within melee range you are ignoring your defense to make a full movement. Thus giving your oppoenent an extra opportunity to deal damage.
My retreat rule reflects the idea that by only take a half move, the combatant is keeping their defense up and thus denying the extra attack.
By declaring the move action itself grants the opportunity it eliminates some of the wonkiness of the grid based AOO rule of 3.X
For opponents with equal moves, the expected flow of combat is that by limiting a withdrawal to a half move, the opponent can then do a half move and attack and continue the melee. Only by doing a full move and granting their opponent a free attack can a person break off combat. However in practice since most melee involves multiple combantants the half move withdrawal often proves advantageous as the opponent would have to a half move pass the person's allies thereby drawing free attacks from them.
In GURPS and many other detailed tactical combat system this is a non-issue. Mainly due to the fact in those system one roll does equal one swing of a weapon.
In 2e (not that it's any great authority), there were four situations that I know of:
1. "Fleeing" as opposed to "withdrawing" (mentioned above).
2. (Optional) Trying to close in on opponents with pole arms "set for defense or advancing slowly" (auto-hit to boot). They point out these weapons are useless at close range, however.
3. Trying to close in to punch or wrestle an armed opponent, who gets a +4 bonus to hit. They note that creatures with natural weapons are always considered "armed" :cool:
PC: "I wrestle the owlbear!"
Group: *face palm*
4. (Didn't know this one before a few months ago) Warriors (fighters, paladins, rangers) get free attacks against creatures of 1-1 HD or less equal to their level. It's only mentioned in the DMG, and not in bold or a sidebar, like some of the other optional rules. It should have been in the PHB, IMO. I do recall seeing the rule in 1e, and in C&C later.
Ok, confession time.
Bill's 1E dnd houserules.
Warning..not for the faint of heart!!!
I don't use the 'attack someone when they run away' rule.
I don't require spell components to cast a spell; instead, I offer a small bonus if you use the components when casting.
I let lost levels from energy draining return very slowly; death save a day to regain 1 level.
I rarely disrupt a spell casters spell from the caster taking damage.
I don't use 'weapon type vs armor'
I use group xp. All xp earned is shared by the party equally. period.
These houserules have served me well for many, many years, and many campaigns.
Hopefully these shocking revalations will not hurt anyone too badly.
Pre-3e D&D rules were written by sensible people, so only the guys already attacking you get a free attack on you if you turn your back on them. The guy fighting your buddy certainly does not.
Quote from: Black Vulmea;589365"Breaking Off From Melee:
"At such time as any creature decides, it can break off the engagement and flee the melee. To do so, however, allows the opponent a free attack or attack routine. This attack is calculated as if it were a rear attack upon a stunned opponent.
- 1e AD&D DMG, p. 70
My only experience of AD&D 1st ed is through the Gold Box computer games but this is exactly what used to happen. As such fight sequences would consist of a slow grind between the party and the monsters up until the monster's morale broke. It's when the monsters finally turned to ran is when the real butchery would begin.
Kind of like a real medieval battle come to think about it.
Quote from: The Were-Grognard;5894844. (Didn't know this one before a few months ago) Warriors (fighters, paladins, rangers) get free attacks against creatures of 1-1 HD or less equal to their level. It's only mentioned in the DMG, and not in bold or a sidebar, like some of the other optional rules. It should have been in the PHB, IMO. I do recall seeing the rule in 1e, and in C&C later.
Holeee Shit! That 1e jabber is still in there! It's in my older copy (2e, not 2.5e? black border version) as a blue box option on page 57, 1st column.
As an option, a warrior fighting creatures with less than one Hit Die (1-1 or lower) can make a number of attacks equal to his level (i.e., a 7th-level fighter can make seven attacks.) These attacks are handled in order of initiative. 2e pre-revised DMG, pg. 57, column 1, blue box.
That's actually quite good to know. Not that I'd call that or "owlbear v. wrestler" free attacks per se in the AoO sense, where the attack is a conditional bonus that doesn't count towards their #atk that round. I'd call this an increase in allotted attacks under special circumstances -- but it has a known finite quantity beforehand. And the unarmed v. armed situation is the armed person gets initiative priority. Just how I see it.
Fleeing does remind me of an AoO because it's not a known quantity at the start. Granted you could only really target 6 creatures of your same size, as that's generally your max attackers when surrounded. If they all fled you could in theory get 6 "Fleeing" free attacks, but it's generally an unknown quantity that doesn't end up counting towards your attacks that round. Or at least that's how I see it being closer to an AoO analog versus the others.
(I'll have to look up the polearm bit. I wonder if it's the same one from being set to receive a charge...)
And of course you can wrestle an owlbear! You just need to hold your action and move in at the end of first attacks that round! The owlbear's attacks are simultaneous and all have to go during first attacks of the round. :) Then you can grab it by the neck and suplex it into a full nelson submission hold! And then you have to be well armored and strong and have spare HP and a day or two for rest or a healer...
Quote from: Frey;589303Free attack if someone was engaged in melee combat and tried to flee. Always decided by the DM, of course.
This is what we used.
Quote from: Opaopajr;589620That's actually quite good to know. Not that I'd call that or "owlbear v. wrestler" free attacks per se in the AoO sense, where the attack is a conditional bonus that doesn't count towards their #atk that round. I'd call this an increase in allotted attacks under special circumstances -- but it has a known finite quantity beforehand. And the unarmed v. armed situation is the armed person gets initiative priority. Just how I see it.
I do wonder if the intention in these situations is for the "opportunist" to get his attack regardless of initiative order (the situation triggers it), rather than a free extra attack that round.
Anyone well-versed in 1e rules lore know?
Quote from: The Were-Grognard;589915I do wonder if the intention in these situations is for the "opportunist" to get his attack regardless of initiative order (the situation triggers it), rather than a free extra attack that round.
Anyone well-versed in 1e rules lore know?
Dunno about 1e and the development of this rule into 2e. That's an interesting question. Hopefully someone here can answer it. But 2e differentiates between initiative priority and actual free attacks with these paragraphs:
Weapons in Defense: A character attempting to punch, wrestle, or overbear an armed opponent can do so only by placing himself at great risk. Making matters worse, an armed defender is automatically allowed to strike with his weapon before the unarmed strike is made, regardless of the initiative die roll. Furthermore, since his opponent must get very close, the defender gains a +4 bonus to his attack and damage rolls. If the attacker survives, he can then attempt his attack.-- AD&D 2e PHB, pg. 98, column 2 "Weapons in Non-Lethal Combat"
Which is very different from this paragraph on free attacks against those Fleeing melee.
Fleeing:...
The enemy is allowed a free attack (or multipline attacks if the creature has several attacks per round) at the rear of the fleeing character. This attack is made the instant the character flees: It doesn't count against the number of attacks that opponent is allowed during the round, and initiative is irrelevant.-- AD&D 2e PHB, pg. 97, column 1 "Movement in Combat: Retreat"
Which, even though there's no perfect analogy to AoO in pre-3e D&D, shows what forms are closer to AoO's free additional attacks, in my view. It also explains the tactic of Holding your attack until the end of the round's first attacks before "wrestling the owlbear." Naturally it'd be better to wrestle something more sane, but the principle is the same.
Quote from: Bill;589511Ok, confession time.
Bill's 1E dnd houserules.
Warning..not for the faint of heart!!!
I don't use the 'attack someone when they run away' rule.
I don't require spell components to cast a spell; instead, I offer a small bonus if you use the components when casting.
I let lost levels from energy draining return very slowly; death save a day to regain 1 level.
I rarely disrupt a spell casters spell from the caster taking damage.
I don't use 'weapon type vs armor'
I use group xp. All xp earned is shared by the party equally. period.
These houserules have served me well for many, many years, and many campaigns.
Hopefully these shocking revalations will not hurt anyone too badly.
You are a monster.
No, just kidding. Actually, for years I rarely used the running-away rule, I never used spell components (played mostly RC D&D, which doesn't have them), didn't use weapon vs. armor for ages, and I still to this day use group-xp (the only differences being prime requisite and one player getting the "best roleplay" bonus).
RPGPundit
Quote from: Bill;589511I don't use the 'attack someone when they run away' rule.
We rarely had the need to flat out run away, so we used a 'fighting withdrawal' to switch positions, because our DM considered abandoning your melee position the same as fleeing; essentially, you were ignoring the opponent that was trying to stab you in the face, so they get a free attack while you were disengaging. It made sense, so we absorbed it and moved on.
QuoteI don't require spell components to cast a spell; instead, I offer a small bonus if you use the components when casting.
We paid lip service to spell components. I played the Magic User, so I shelled out the cash for them between adventures, but we didn't really keep track of them. It is an excellent means of keeping the spellcasters in line, though. I like your method here, I think I will adopt that.
QuoteI let lost levels from energy draining return very slowly; death save a day to regain 1 level.
This one I really like. If you need the levels back quickly, go out and find a Cleric. If not, contact with the (Negative) Plane of Death will eventually wear off, but until then, the character will be shaken to their very core.
QuoteI rarely disrupt a spell casters spell from the caster taking damage.
I am still of two minds about this. On the one hand, there is a very real possibility that the spell casters will be shut out of combat almost permanently. Not a huge problem for Clerics or Druids, but Magic Users and Illusionists don't have weapon skills to fall back on. On the other hand, it will keep the spellcasters from standing in the middle of the encounter and blasting away with 5ht, 6th, 7th or even higher level spells all day.
QuoteI don't use 'weapon type vs armor'
You're missing out! :) It's really the only thing that makes the Fighter's universal proficiency worthwhile. Without this, the player will generally take a two-handed sword or a bastard sword used with two hands and hack away at anything crossing their path. Maybe a spear for reach and a composite long bow for missiles. Skeletons are about the only monster that really requires a blunt weapon, and the Cleric can turn those and polish off the rest with a mace. Half damage on a two-hander is still pretty significant.
QuoteI use group xp. All xp earned is shared by the party equally. period.
Yeah, I never quite got the individual xp stuff. Maybe for that rare, extraordinary event like if the Magic User broke their Staff of the Magi to hold off a group of orcs while the party escaped and actually survived the blast. Other than that, you tally up the total for the adventure and divide by the number of participants; henchmen get half shares. Now, let's start arguing over the treasure! :)
QuoteHopefully these shocking revalations will not hurt anyone too badly.
It feels kind of like whiplash, but I will recover. :)
Quote from: StormBringer;590029Yeah, I never quite got the individual xp stuff. Maybe for that rare, extraordinary event like if the Magic User broke their Staff of the Magi to hold off a group of orcs while the party escaped and actually survived the blast. Other than that, you tally up the total for the adventure and divide by the number of participants; henchmen get half shares. Now, let's start arguing over the treasure! :)
In principle I agree, but just to play devil's advocate Marvel Super Hero Karma provides a good reason for individual XP.
1. Karma in MSH is awarded at the end of each scene or conflict not the end of the session or adventure. This bring into sharp focus link between what the characters achieved and how much Karma was earned.
2. Karma isn't just XP. It can (and really should) be spent during the game to improve dice rolls. This means that you could actually spend more Karma on a fight than you earn if you are not careful.
3. Superhero adventures often feature heroes splitting up or pursuing their personal interests and responsibilities (which can also earn the player Karma).
All the above make individual XP an important factor in MSH.
The combination of these three points really give MSH in play an extra dimension (not unlike the Fate point economy of Fate only 20 years earlier) that is not obvious on a casual read of the rules and I suspect some GMs might actually miss entirely.
Quote from: Soylent Green;590033In principle I agree, but just to play devil's advocate Marvel Super Hero Karma provides a good reason for individual XP.
1. Karma in MSH is awarded at the end of each scene or conflict not the end of the session or adventure. This bring into sharp focus link between what the characters achieved and how much Karma was earned.
2. Karma isn't just XP. It can (and really should) be spent during the game to improve dice rolls. This means that you could actually spend more Karma on a fight than you earn if you are not careful.
3. Superhero adventures often feature heroes splitting up or pursuing their personal interests and responsibilities (which can also earn the player Karma).
All the above make individual XP an important factor in MSH.
Certainly, but as you allude in #2, Karma is an active resource that can be spent or lost in other ways (allowing crimes to occur if you are playing a hero, neglecting personal responsibilities). So the big difference is that AD&D xp is passive, and Karma is active. For MSH it works really well, because you have to decide on using Karma to improve your character or to possibly survive a fight or achieve some side goal like 'protect the hostages' or whatever.
QuoteThe combination of these three points really give MSH in play an extra dimension (not unlike the Fate point economy of Fate only 20 years earlier) that is not obvious on a casual read of the rules and I suspect some GMs might actually miss entirely.
No arguments there. As I recall, it was one of the first games to have multiple purposes for xp like that. I'm sure there were some other ones, but I don't know them off the top of my head. Anyone remember what they might have been?
Quote from: Soylent Green;589616It's when the monsters finally turned to ran is when the real butchery would begin.
Kind of like a real medieval battle come to think about it.
Bingo! The line breaks and hell follows with it. That's the one thing I really like about HM5, once a character finishes off his opponent and isn't engaged with other opponents, he is no longer stuck in the attack/recovery timing and can act more freely, which means he can move to help others, which will drop their opponent faster, and the group can move on, etc... The end result is very much like the description of historical conflict where the flank collapses and the line "rolls up like a scroll".
In my games, if a character tries to directly run from battle (or hit and then move away), their opponent gets a free attack; likewise, if they're in melee with someone and then try to hit or attack someone other than the person they're in melee with, their opponent gets a free attack.
That's it.
The complexity of AoO in 3e is one of the absolute worst elements of that system.
RPGPundit
Quote from: StormBringer;590029You're missing out! :) It's really the only thing that makes the Fighter's universal proficiency worthwhile. Without this, the player will generally take a two-handed sword or a bastard sword used with two hands and hack away at anything crossing their path. Maybe a spear for reach and a composite long bow for missiles. Skeletons are about the only monster that really requires a blunt weapon, and the Cleric can turn those and polish off the rest with a mace. Half damage on a two-hander is still pretty significant.
Actually, won't they just use the 2h sword anyway? I think it had the best overall weapon type bonus.
Quote from: Bill;590541Actually, won't they just use the 2h sword anyway? I think it had the best overall weapon type bonus.
It is. Footman's flail isn't too far behind, though. If you aren't using the table, it's not even really on the radar unless you are a Cleric.