Quote from: Akrasia;638999You probably are better off with the reprint, as the binding on the original printing is famously awful.  The recent version should survive being opened more than three times.

The reprint has the errata applied as well, which is an additional selling point to some.

Quote from: Exploderwizard;639023Do you have a page reference for the whole multiple attacks automatically wins iniative rule?  That doesn't sound familiar.

Yeah I certainly don't have that understanding either. And 3/2 means 1 in the first round 2 in the second to me

Quote from: Machpants;639031Yeah I certainly don't have that understanding either. And 3/2 means 1 in the first round 2 in the second to me

From what I can remember, bow specialists could (if an arrow was knocked and drawn) get off a shot pre-initiative but there was nothing of the sort for melee fighters.

Quote from: EOTB;639010There are lots of reasons, but the #1 is that weapon specialization is much more powerful - there is no reason to create a generalist fighter.

Also, it completely upends the early level play dynamic, because in 1st edition someone with multiple attacks in a round goes before the initiative die is rolled.  And, in 1st edition, if you have 3/2 attacks you get your round of 2 attacks on the 1st round of combat.

So, if you have a 1st level fighter specialized in long sword, you get to go in advance of any initiative die on the first round of pretty much any combat, unless you are facing another PC class that is eligible for specialization, and any hit on a 1+1HD (or less) creature is often a kill, with the damage bonuses.

Yes, there are ways to houserule it, but if played as written it upset the balance of low-level play.  It changed how the game worked at the table, if you were using the rules as written previously.

Umm, no.

Just...no.

First, you're missing a lot of the rules here...and at best you've simply failed to realize a few things.

1 attack in the 1st round, and the 2nd round you get 1 attack in the first pass.  Multiple attacks are resolved later in the round in initiative / speed order.  I'm not sure where the "go in advance of any initiative dice" came from, especially if you're speaking of melee fighters.

Quote from: Blackhand;639060Umm, no.

Just...no.

What a stunning refutation.

Quote from: Akrasia;638999You probably are better off with the reprint, as the binding on the original printing is famously awful.  The recent version should survive being opened more than three times.

That makes me happier.

I agree with your other post btw. UA isn't terrible. I don't hate it. It's like 2e's Player Option I suppose - good ideas and bad non-playtested stuff all mixed up.

But then I started with 2e. Only got 1e fairly recently. I like 1e, it's a very cool game, allthough a bit fiddly here and there (but so is 2e and well I'm a 2e guy, I guess).

Sounds like Frank was mixing up UA (Unearthed Arcana) and OA (Oriental Adventures). We already know the latter was ghost-written by Zeb Cook (which isn't really surprising, since it reads pretty much like a dry-run for AD&D2E), but the former is made up almost entirely of material that was previously published (most of it 2-3 years before UA was released) in Dragon magazine under Gary's byline (except for the Demihuman Deities section, which IIRC is credited in UA as having been written by Roger Moore). Unless Frank is saying that those articles were also ghost-written, which I guess is possible, but doesn't seem very likely. Especially since 2E dropped or heavily modified most of UA's additions (if Zeb had actually ghost-written this stuff, why would he then go back and delete it?).

Quote from: Exploderwizard;639023Do you have a page reference for the whole multiple attacks automatically wins iniative rule?  That doesn't sound familiar.

DMG, p 62-3, Initiative for Creatures With Multiple Attack Routines

Quote from: EOTB;639010There are lots of reasons, but the #1 is that weapon specialization is much more powerful - there is no reason to create a generalist fighter.

Also, it completely upends the early level play dynamic, because in 1st edition someone with multiple attacks in a round goes before the initiative die is rolled.  And, in 1st edition, if you have 3/2 attacks you get your round of 2 attacks on the 1st round of combat.

So, if you have a 1st level fighter specialized in long sword, you get to go in advance of any initiative die on the first round of pretty much any combat, unless you are facing another PC class that is eligible for specialization, and any hit on a 1+1HD (or less) creature is often a kill, with the damage bonuses.

Yes, there are ways to houserule it, but if played as written it upset the balance of low-level play.  It changed how the game worked at the table, if you were using the rules as written previously.

Quote from: Blackhand;639060Umm, no.

Just...no.

First, you're missing a lot of the rules here...and at best you've simply failed to realize a few things.

1 attack in the 1st round, and the 2nd round you get 1 attack in the first pass.  Multiple attacks are resolved later in the round in initiative / speed order.  I'm not sure where the "go in advance of any initiative dice" came from, especially if you're speaking of melee fighters.

I realize things fine, lol.  I think you're getting your 2nd edition mixed up with your 1st Edition.  While it is true that 2nd edition modules, monsters and settings could be used interchangeably with 1st edition, for the most part, and vice-versa, there were differences in the combat engines that made a material difference to how things worked tactically.  1st Edition, played using most of the RAW, did not feel the same as 2nd edition core.  

Fighters were weakened by 2nd edition core, especially in relation to magic-users, by getting rid of so many of these fiddly bits that worked together to help even combat out between the two classes.

KenHR gave the page reference, but I'll quote the passages for convenience, in case not everyone has a 1E DMG handy.  Emphasis supplied to the sections that show a fighter with multiple attacks would go before initiative, and also that a 1st level fighter specialized in long sword would get 2 attacks in round 1, and 1 attack in round 2 (this was also nerfed in 2nd edition).

Quote from: DMG pgs. 62-63 - Initiative For Creatures With Multiple Attack RoutinesWhen one or more creatures involved in combat are permitted to use their attack routines twice or more often during the round, then the following initiative determinants are employed. When the attack routine may be used twice, then allow the side with this advantage to attack FIRST and LAST with those members of its group who have this advantage. If it is possessed by both parties, the initiative roll determines which group strikes FIRST and THIRD, which group strikes SECOND and LAST. If one or both groups have members allowed only one attack routine, it will always fall in the middle of the other attacks, the order determined by dicing for initiative, when necessary. If one party has the ability to employ its attack routines thrice, then the other party dices for initiative to see if it, or the multi-routine group, strikes first in the mid-point of the round. Extrapolate for routines which occur four or more times in a round by following the method above. Note that a routine is the attack or attacks usual to the creature concerned, i.e. a weapon (or weapons) for a character, a claw/claw/bite routine for a bear (with incidental; damage assessed as it occurs - the hug, for example).A 12th level fighter is allowed attack routines twice in every odd numbered melee round, for example, and this moves up to three per round if a haste spell is cast upon the fighter. Damage from successful attacks is assessed when the "to hit" score is made and damage determined, the creature so taking domage having to survive it in order to follow its attack routine.

Note that when this passage is referring to a 12th level fighter, UA and weapon specialization did not exist yet.  in the PHB, a 12th level fighter gets...3/2 attacks (PHB pg. 25).  

So, weapon specialization took an ability previously not gained until 7th level, and gave it to the 1st level fighter.  That was a big bump, absolutely.

Quote from: KenHR;639061What a stunning refutation.

Blackhand really has no idea...

[QUOTE AD&D DMG]
Originally Posted by DMG pgs. 62-63 - Initiative For Creatures With Multiple Attack Routines
When one or more creatures involved in combat are permitted to use their attack routines twice or more often during the round, then the following initiative determinants are employed. When the attack routine may be used twice, then allow the side with this advantage to attack FIRST and LAST with those members of its group who have this advantage. If it is possessed by both parties, the initiative roll determines which group strikes FIRST and THIRD, which group strikes SECOND and LAST. If one or both groups have members allowed only one attack routine, it will always fall in the middle of the other attacks, the order determined by dicing for initiative, when necessary. If one party has the ability to employ its attack routines thrice, then the other party dices for initiative to see if it, or the multi-routine group, strikes first in the mid-point of the round. Extrapolate for routines which occur four or more times in a round by following the method above. Note that a routine is the attack or attacks usual to the creature concerned, i.e. a weapon (or weapons) for a character, a claw/claw/bite routine for a bear (with incidental; damage assessed as it occurs - the hug, for example).A 12th level fighter is allowed attack routines twice in every odd numbered melee round, for example, and this moves up to three per round if a haste spell is cast upon the fighter. Damage from successful attacks is assessed when the "to hit" score is made and damage determined, the creature so taking domage having to survive it in order to follow its attack routine.

[END QUOTE]

The confusion here seems to be in classifying monster and character attacks differently when it comes to what constitutes a routine.

The way I interpret it, is that the normal number of attacks a character or monster can make in a round is thier routine. Thus the extra attack granted to a 12th level fighter in every odd numbered round is part of his routine.

Thus the fighter would only attack first automatically if hasted or otherwise sped up.

Applying the rule evenly to monsters and characters either means that all monsters with 2 or more attacks automatically attack first or that the fighter doesn't automatically win initiative just because his routine includes additional attacks at higher levels.

This also means that a wizard could never ever get even a 1 segment spell off against a fighter. That seems a bit off and not in the spirit of the rules to me.

Quote from: Exploderwizard;639338The confusion here seems to be in classifying monster and character attacks differently when it comes to what constitutes a routine.

The way I interpret it, is that the normal number of attacks a character or monster can make in a round is thier routine. Thus the extra attack granted to a 12th level fighter in every odd numbered round is part of his routine.

"Note that a routine is the attack or attacks usual to the creature concerned, i.e. a weapon (or weapons) for a character, a claw/claw/bite routine for a bear (with incidental; damage assessed as it occurs - the hug, for example).A 12th level fighter is allowed attack routines twice in every odd numbered melee round, for example..."

A weapon attack is a routine; it is explicitly stated that a 12th level fighter has two attack routines every odd-numbered round right there.  A c/c/b attack is a routine.  It's not worded in the best manner, but it's pretty clear from that passage.

As for the interaction with spell casting...I've honestly never really thought it through, so someone with more expertise can chime in on that.  But EOTB is correct.

Quote from: KenHR;639350"Note that a routine is the attack or attacks usual to the creature concerned, i.e. a weapon (or weapons) for a character, a claw/claw/bite routine for a bear (with incidental; damage assessed as it occurs - the hug, for example).A 12th level fighter is allowed attack routines twice in every odd numbered melee round, for example..."

A weapon attack is a routine; it is explicitly stated that a 12th level fighter has two attack routines every odd-numbered round right there.  A c/c/b attack is a routine.  It's not worded in the best manner, but it's pretty clear from that passage.

As for the interaction with spell casting...I've honestly never really thought it through, so someone with more expertise can chime in on that.  But EOTB is correct.

It just seems a bit silly. What of a lizardman? His routine could be a single weapon attack OR c/c/b. Don't forget about monks. They get the 3/2 attack rate much earlier than fighters with thier unarmed attacks. That would mean any median level monk trumps spellcasting.

Quote from: Exploderwizard;639366It just seems a bit silly. What of a lizardman? His routine could be a single weapon attack OR c/c/b. Don't forget about monks. They get the 3/2 attack rate much earlier than fighters with thier unarmed attacks. That would mean any median level monk trumps spellcasting.

Think of the combat round as an abstraction, not a blow-by-blow retelling of a duel, and it becomes easier to swallow.  It's how many wargames work (yes, there are exceptions like the old Tobruk game's depicting the impact of every shell hit vs. the original Squad Leader's simpler design-for-effect system), by abstracting things.

Again, with regard to the interaction with spellcasting, I don't have the mental fortitude to go thru the ADDICT document right now.  The interaction of weapons, spells and initiative in AD&D was always a bit kludgy in the RAW, so yeah, your scenario could well be the result...I honestly have never really thought it through (and my group's spellcasters rarely cast while they're in melee, so it almost never comes up).

It appears the intent was that the rule about multiple attack routines wrapping around single attack routines was only supposed to apply in melee, and shouldn't be extrapolated to include spellcasting, missile-fire, or other non-melee actions (i.e. a bow with a ROF2 does not always shoot first against a spell-caster, someone using a magic item, attempting to raise an alarm, etc.).