Quote from: Christopher Brady;919733AD&D 1e, NOT in 2e.  Please make sure you get your editions right.

Wrong. It is in the 2e DMG as well.
(Black border DMG, p. 80, 2nd column, 2nd optional grey box.)

I think this issue is a great litmus test for someone's understanding of the purposes or goals of rpg's (and games generally). A 1 minute combat round is stupid if you think you are playing a game that emulates detailed, super-slowmo action movie fights. A turn that represents 10 seconds of real-world time would be stupid if you were playing monopoly. So, if you are playing OD&D and believe the game is about beat-by-beat combat action, you are simply wrong and should either switch to a different game that is about that, hack the game to be more like what you wanted in the first place, or happily accept that an OD&D combat round is a schematic, 'gamist' representation of the integrated activities of a minute of skirmishing.

Quote from: darthfozzywig;919829I tend to agree, because the people writing and playing those rules are familiar with how battles actually play out, either through study or first-hand experience. Thus, the understanding that people typically don't fight-fight-fight continually, and instead are prone to the dithering, cowering, hiding, catching their breath, etc, for considerable stretches that I mentioned up-thread.

That sort of phenomenon gets happily abstracted in a longer combat round, which provides a realistic tempo but also doesn't enforce "you have to sit doing nothing for the next 10 rounds to catch your breath" rules that might not be as fun.

Also, the value of these games as games is totally independent of these issues; the only sense in which it matters what period of time you declare corresponds to a movement or combat phase (if you are playing a game that has such things) is the feeling of realism, which doesn't have that much to do with the way the game works as a game. How big is a square in chess? How long are we to imagine it takes a pawn to move?

Quote from: Larsdangly;919841How big is a square in chess? How long are we to imagine it takes a pawn to move?

If you're playing me, about three minutes longer than you'd think it should.

Quote from: Opaopajr;919831Wrong. It is in the 2e DMG as well.
(Black border DMG, p. 80, 2nd column, 2nd optional grey box.)

'Black border'?  Honest question:  do you have a picture?  Cuz the one I had was this one:  
[ATTACH=CONFIG]387[/ATTACH]

But it could also have had that rule, and I missed it, would not be the first time.  But in AD&D 2e's Player's Handbook that I remember, it didn't have that rule for the Fighter.

Quote from: Larsdangly;919837I think this issue is a great litmus test for someone's understanding of the purposes or goals of rpg's (and games generally). A 1 minute combat round is stupid if you think you are playing a game that emulates detailed, super-slowmo action movie fights. A turn that represents 10 seconds of real-world time would be stupid if you were playing monopoly. So, if you are playing OD&D and believe the game is about beat-by-beat combat action, you are simply wrong and should either switch to a different game that is about that, hack the game to be more like what you wanted in the first place, or happily accept that an OD&D combat round is a schematic, 'gamist' representation of the integrated activities of a minute of skirmishing.

The problem is, as Gronan asked, what background players have.  In my circle, most of us weren't wargamers first, and so our frame of reference were 80's Fantasy novels, shows and movies.  Which a lot can happen in a minute, especially against small groups of 'minions', which has been in various forms of media for a VERY long time.  From the ancient Greek stories and epics to modern comics and movies.

And the comment about 'how many arrows did you lose' is actually pretty relevant, if I remember what a 1 minute round describes:  Parries, blocks and dodges.  Now assuming that you're an archer facing off with another, and both of you are running around the battlefield, you're going to be loosening shot after shot, as you're target may be just perfect, but manages to juke, the wind bursts and takes your arrow too far left, or he dives into cover, miraculously avoiding your arrow.

In that minute, you could empty an entire 24 arrow quiver and miss most of the shots.  Less if both targets are not moving, but you've lost several arrows anyway, trying to judge wind, distance and arc required to hit your foe over there on the low hill beneath you.

A minute round is unfeasible for several types of combats.  My local groups and I rolled with by putting it out of our minds.  We just did the 'beat by beat' thing because to us, it felt better.

Quote from: gwb79;919830I've been rereading the AD&D1e PHB lately and I was surprised to find a rule (pg 25) that all Fighter classes get one attack per level against 1HD (less than d8) monsters and all zero-level humans, etc...   I totally forgot that AD&D had a so called "mook rule".  So your 12th level fighter against a goblin mob can get 12 attacks in.  Then the 1-minute round starts to look a bit better.

Actually it is less than 1 HD so that all 1-1 HD and lower monsters and NPCs.

Right.  That's what I meant by less than d8. So that still includes goblins, kobolds, and the like.

Quote from: Christopher Brady;919887'Black border'?  Honest question:  do you have a picture?  Cuz the one I had was this one:  
[ATTACH=CONFIG]387[/ATTACH]

Full picture DMG, p. 57, 1st column, 1st grey box optional rule.

When I'm running OD&D, rounds officially last 10 seconds. I think Delta did some research that suggested that 10 seconds is also the average length of time between damaging blows for professional boxers and archers, so I'm happy describing a single attack. In practice though, rounds last some vague unspecified length of time, which is enough to do something interesting, but not too long that it feels like no one else is doing anything.

I'll admit that a minute seems like a really long time to me, and I have difficulty picturing all the stuff that could happen during such a long interval.

I don't think it really matters in play unless you have a player that obsesses about it and then it only matters because they won't just shut up and play.

There is always a solution for That Player.

Quote from: Moochava]Look, I saw this on the Discovery Channel, and I think it'd really help the gaming groups of many folks here on RPGNet. You know those monkeys with the candy-colored asses? Mandrills or whatever? Well, I was watching the Discovery Channel, and apparently, when in a group (read: gaming group), the bright-assed monkeys symbolically mount on-another to show dominance. The males, I mean. The dominant ones just pin down those lower in the pecking order and rut again them.

Now, it's not actual sex--the monkeys aren't getting any jollies out of it (I'm a keen judge of when a monkey is really enjoying his rutting)--it's just to keep the lesser bright-assed monkeys in their place.

So, I figured, why not try this in the gaming group? You know, I'm the DM, thus the dominant male, so when one of the bright-assed monkeys I game with gets all uppity, I just pin him to the table and hump his hams. Now, we're all well-adjusted, perfectly normal heterosexual men, so there's nothing erotic about it; it just goes to symbolize that I am, in fact, the master, and he is, in fact, the player (bitch).

I mean, really, you've gotta keep those players in their place. Mocking them and throwing dice at them only goes so far; eventually, you gotta take the final step, pin them against the table, and hump them vigorously in order to show that you are the dominant male. It's the only way.

I can understand if you're apprehensive, of course--pinning other guys down and humping them is normally a "homosexual" activity, and you don't wanna be associated with that sort of stigmatized life-style. And I sympathize with that concern! But really, the bright-assed monkeys have shown me that you *can* rut against your fellow male gamers in a completely hetero-sexual, ritualized way, merely to show that you are the dungeon master, and that you wear the Viking hat, whereas they are the bitches, and are forced to wear little beanie hats to symbolize their submissive position within the gaming group hierarchy.

Have I made myself clear?

Quote from: Skarg;919811Yes. Unless you add the pausing to the game mechanics, too. In my house rules, Combat Awareness is often one of the most important measures of effectiveness in combat. It also lets you game someone, who can sometimes avoid or get past goons without actually fighting them (maybe not even using a weapon), by confusing or faking them out.

I'm interested in how you work this in.

Quote from: Larsdangly;919837A 1 minute combat round is stupid if you think you are playing a game that emulates detailed, super-slowmo action movie fights.

The problem is that this thread started with a discussion about Zweihander, which unlilke OD&D is exactly about detailed action movie fights. This might lead us to the conclusion that this rule might be inappropriate (I would not use the word "stupid") for the goals of that specific game.

Quote from: yosemitemike;919960I don't think it really matters in play unless you have a player that obsesses about it and then it only matters because they won't just shut up and play.

Some of us play with players who will care, and since the GM is one, there tend to be situations where it matters what is happening besides combat and away from the combat, during combat.

Examples that come immediately to mind include: People who run away, who are either part of the combat or are near the combat (e.g. witnesses or people being protected by the fighters on one side, who flee and leave people to stall the attackers). The time the combat takes is also the time that these people have to hide, scatter, run away, go for help/reinforcements, take pictures, call 911, wander along into the combat zone from outside, notice the noise, lying on the battlefield bleeding from wounds and not receiving first-aid, not putting out fires, etc etc etc. In a dynamic situation that includes nearby people, the time a combat takes can make many kinds of vitally-important difference.

Quote from: Onix;920019I'm interested in how you work this in.

I've tried various sets of house rules over the years, and/or GM rulings. Each combatant has one or more ratings and/or states which influence how they can behave in combat, which can range from dirt simple to complex. Complex can include vision, hearing, leadership, combat experience, group training, gesture, etc etc.

An overview of a simple version can be something like:

Ratings:
======
Non-fighter (usually only runs, stuns, or cowers)
Green (roll or delay to switch states)
Trained (easier roll or shorter delay to switch states)
Vet (switches states readily but rolls to notice/react to things)
Expert (full options with some rolls to notice or react to some things)

Basic States:
==========
Surprised/frozen/unaware/startled/confused (can't do anything, attackers get advantages on them)
Fleeing/hiding (can only flee or hide)
Passive (alert but not doing anything unless attacked - then they can fight back against whoever attacked them)
Active (can take basic combat actions)
Lucid (can take complex combat actions)

More Detailed State Breakdown, if desired:
=================================
Surprised/frozen/unaware (Unaware of combat - does nothing or non-combat activity, no tactical movement)
Startled/confused (aware of threat, but confused - can only take a step, change facing, some defensive reactions (at penalty) to immediate proximate attacks)
Fleeing/hiding (can run away and/or hide, maybe duck/weave/dodge, and that's about it)
Passive (doing nothing proactive but can fight back if attacked in melee, or dodge/take cover etc under ranged attack)
Focused/Engaged (doing one sort of combat activity (e.g fighting one person) - can keep doing that, but not higher state actions)
Waiting (alert but choosing to wait for a good moment - gives an advantage on eventual action but does nothing in the meantime)
Active (can move and choose to engage people or take most basic actions)
Lucid (unrestricted player choice of clever/complex actions)

I'm usually playing with one-to-five-second turns, so even in a non-surprise combat, many figures are spending many turns Waiting, Focused/Engaged, or Passive. Some events/actions can knock some people into startled/confused, too. Because Engaged allows fighting back, it's not just giving the more aware people extra turns, it's more that the more aware/experienced/coordinated and better-led side gets more options to drive who is fighting whom when, and where people maneuver on the field, which can be decisive but in a very different way to just letting one side attack more, which feels very good to me (worth doing the extra layer of rules/rolling/rulings, to me, anyway). There is also a nice effect on time spent, where the total time taken feels more realistic (not just fight fight fight every second, so total time for battles feels more right) and there are tradeoffs between deliberate delays and waiting till your side is coordinated, and taking immediate actions even if your comrades aren't quite ready to back you up, etc.

I'm sure it could tend to drive "lets get combat over with" players nuts to think about, though I usually just GM-side it. I do get push-back from players who hate being told their character is spacing out during combat, but that can be overcome by giving them characters who are (and invest character points in) an expert level of Combat Awareness etc. - in fact, that can turn such players completely around, as those players also tend to LOVE having their characters be more alert/aware than most others on the field. It gives an effect of character ability that lands at the player's level of control, so not only do they get better to-hit and damage rolls, but they get more freedom of action than others more often. It lets you replicate in a literal way fights where an expert dominates rookies by being able to drive the action and take them on without getting immediately surrounded and butchered, because they hesitate and can't coordinate in time.