PDA

View Full Version : Figuring out the Rules Cyclopedia combat system



ken-do-nim
2007-02-01, 11:17 AM
This is a thread for those interesting in playing the original D&D game as presented in the Rules Cyclopedia, because sometimes less is more. In particular, I'm trying to figure out the combat system. The rules present the following options, and I'd like to know if anyone out there has any experience with it and can tell me how it went.

Initiative

Group-based initiative - this option looks great for speeding up play. The downside that I can see is that if all members of one side go before all the others, it can really skew things. In particular, if one side goes last in a round, then goes first in the next, that's a lot of actions before the next side gets to go. The additional challenges of group-based initiative are what to do about the halfling's +1 to initiative or the smash/haymaker maneuvers which specify that you go last.
Individual initiative - I think the way this would work is that there are 8 phases in a round, numbered 7 to 0. Phase 7 is for halflings who rolled a 6. The next 6 phases are based on the initiative roll. Phase 0 is for those using an action like smash/haymaker that specify that they go last in the round. I'm assuming adding dexterity modifier to initiative is a bad idea because monsters don't have it.Combat
Quite unintentionally, Cyclopedia presents 2 combat systems if you read closely.

One action per round - this system states that you can do only one thing per round: move, attack, cast a spell, etc. If you start your round engaged in melee, you can take a 5 foot step to adjust your position. I think from a mechanics standpoint, this system works. However, I worry that it leads to a situation where no one ever wants to move up, because there is no charge option for characters.
Move + one maneuver - this is the system that I think makes the most sense. It does lead to some interesting problems though. Say Grimlock, the party's 10th level fighter, rolled a 5 for initiative. He moves up to attack in the movement phase, then decides he wants to use the smash maneuver. Does he freeze at that point and wait for phase 0? Or does he declare he intends to smash before he moves, thus delaying his whole move + smash until phase 0? Once phase 0 is reached, can he change his mind? Another thing to notice is that a fighting withdrawal is only a 5 foot step while a retreat is moving more than half your movement. So if you start a round engaged in melee, can you move away from one opponent, and as long as you move less than half your movement, go attack another in the same round? Finally, is that 5 foot step done in the movement phase or the hand-to-hand combat phase?Charging
If you look at the special actions section for monsters, it says a monster can charge. Is that all monsters, or only those who specifically say they can charge as a special ability? If the former, that makes goblins and kobolds much more formidable, because charging does double damage. This is especially nasty if you use the one action per round method. The poor players can't attack if they move up, while the monsters charge them and nail them silly. It's also plain unfair.

Ties
I can see problems with the movement phase here. It also makes a difference whether that 5' foot step is in the movement phase or in the hand-to-hand phase. If opponents A & B start the phase engaged in melee, if A takes a 5 foot step in the movement phase and B doesn't, A could then throw a javelin at B and B can do nothing to retaliate because the movement phase has passed. So I guess it makes life easier to put the 5 foot step into the hand-to-hand phase (which the fighting withdrawal has set a precedent for anyway).

House Rules
Here's what I've collected so far:

Weapon mastery beyond skilled should not be permitted until players reach master's levels (25+) (and maybe not even then).
Two-weapon fighting should be allowed as an option for thieves. The second weapon though should be small-sized (and used at one less level of weapon mastery if you do use it).
Thieves should use an enhanced skills table (thank you paigeoliver!)Here's some house rules I've come up with:

Guard combat maneuver. Anything that approaches you later in the same round you can attack when it comes into reach. I then alter the fighting withdrawal rule to say it is really a 5 foot step plus a guard. Note the subtle change that guard has over fighting withdrawal, because the latter specifies you get your attack at the end of the opponent's move phase. I want a guarding character to hit anybody trying to get past him, not just trying to attack him.
Withdrawal maneuver. This is when you start your turn engaged in melee, and you move up to half your movement away (but more than 5 feet). This differs from retreat in that you do not leave yourself exposed.
Delay. You voluntarily drop your initiative phase to a lower number. Say Grimlock once again rolled a 5. He says he is delaying. Now every time I announce a new phase, he can decide whether he wants to act in that phase. Sometimes when you win initiative, you want to go last!Well I'd like to hear your experiences or thoughts on any of these rules questions or others that I missed, because when I do eventually run my Cyclopedia campaign I want everything to go smoothly.

ken-do-nim
2007-02-01, 06:51 PM
I just came across a rule saying in the equipment section that "users of two-handed weapons lose individual initiative". So now the question which was previously just obscure maneuvers like haymaker & smash becomes more relevant. Does losing individual initiative mean losing ties? Does it mean automatically taking a 1? A 0? And of course the big question still is, if you move first, then declare you are using a two-handed weapon to attack, does your attack itself get postponed?

Altair_the_Vexed
2007-02-02, 10:53 AM
I played D&D from the Rules Cyclopedia regularly for a decade or so.

Initiative is adjusted by Dex, remember - so you need more than 7 to 0.
Group initiative was handled by making one ROLL, but adjusting it according to all the character's stats. Monsters tend to go all together, and they have no Dex stats (i.e.: they have 10).
My house rule for equal initiative results was that the one with the lower modifier had to declare their intent first, but that we resolved the action simultaneously. That let the "faster" character choose what to do based on the other's action. These days, I'd most likely use the d20 rule of "highest adjustment goes first".

I always assumed there was a move + attack action permitted in the RC combat system. One action (move OR attack OR whatever) is just too restricting, especially as the combat round is 10 seconds long.

Only monsters with the charge ability listed in the description can charge - it's a special move that adds huge damage (usually DOUBLE), not the d20 system's +2 to attack.

Weapon Mastery is necessary to avoid TPK at medium levels - you need to be able to dish out more damage (because you have no criticals) once you're past 9th level, cause you get VERY few extra HP each level. Remember, to get to Expert with a single weapon, a character has to be 6th level or higher, and train in it to the exclusion of all others.

I suggest you nerf a few of the Weapon Mastery features - we did! Deflection needs to become an opposed STR check, adjusted for Hit Dice vs Level difference (a 10th level Fighter tries to deflect an attack by a Sea Hag, so he has a +2 Level difference bonus: he rolls, adds his STR adjustment, the Hag rolls and adds her STR adjustment [use whatever bonus to damage the monster has, in this case 0])- otherwise anyone with "Deflection" ends up nigh on invulnerable (Death Ray Save DC being 6 for this 10th level fighter, and then adjusted by magic...).

Yes, Thieves are rubbish in old D&D games. In our games, we used DEX adjustment + Thief level + 1d20 vs DCs for Open Locks, Find Traps, Remove Traps, and Hear Noise. We used Thief level + DEX adjustment + 1d20 vs NPC's level (or Hit Dice) + 1d20 to resolve Pick Pockets, Move Silently and Hide in Shadows.

Gosh - we were ahead of our time!

Hope that helps.

ken-do-nim
2007-02-02, 12:08 PM
Thank you so much for answering my post! I will consider all your suggestions carefully. Please tell me what you did about actions like:
- using a two-handed weapon
- using the smash option
- wrestling an armed opponent
all of which say "you lose initiative" if you do them. How does losing initiative work? I see the following options:
1. Using one of these slow maneuvers drops you to phase 0
2. Or you simply lose ties on a given phase
3. Or you have to announce it before the initiative roll and you get dropped to phase 0
4. You can move in your regular phase, but then the slow action itself gets dropped to phase 0
5. You simply drop one phase, not all the way to zero.

I haven't seen any monsters yet that specify a charge special ability, but I guess they are there. Thanks for clearing that one up!

Oh, and is there a way to disrupt spellcasters in Rules Cyclopedia? I'm thinking wrestling is the only answer, because from what I've seen casting is instantaneous and there are no readied actions.

ken-do-nim
2007-02-03, 07:55 PM
Well even if this is a mostly one-sided conversation, it has helped me a lot to type this all out. I think the easiest way to adjucate the "lose initiative" options is just that you announce the action at the start of the hand-to-hand combat phase, and if you makes you go slower than your foe than you lose the tie.

For instance, let's say Traxed the thief is battling Mungar the avenger. They both rolled a 4 for initiative. At the start of the hand-to-hand phase, Traxed announces his intent to stab Mungar with his dagger, and Mungar announces his intent to attack Traxed with his two-handed sword. Since two-handed swords are slow, Traxed would go first, breaking the tie.

Now suppose Traxed declared he was trying to wrestle. Both would go at the same time. Now suppose Traxed declared a wrestle and Mungar declared a smash with his two-handed weapon. Two-handed weapon + smash is 2 "slow" actions, while wrestle is only one. Therefore Traxed's wrestle would happen first.

Matthew
2007-02-03, 07:58 PM
I have been following it, but I don't have a copy of the Cyclopedia or any (O)D&D Rules, sadly. You might want to try Knights & Knaves Ale House (http://www.knights-n-knaves.com/phpbb/index.php) or somewhere like that for more knowledgable folk.

ken-do-nim
2007-02-03, 08:27 PM
I have been following it, but I don't have a copy of the Cyclopedia or any (O)D&D Rules, sadly. You might want to try Knights & Knaves Ale House (http://www.knights-n-knaves.com/phpbb/index.php) or somewhere like that for more knowledgable folk.

Thanks for the link Matthew!

For the curious, here's the module progression I have planned for this campaign:

Palace of the Silver Princess (B3) 1 -> 2
Horror on the Hill (B5) 2 -> 3
Rahasia (B7) 3 -> 4
Isle of Dread (X1) 4 -> 5
Castle Amber (X2) 5 -> 6
Quest for the Heartstone (XL-10) 6 -> 7
Master of the Desert Nomads (X3) 7 -> 8
Temple of Death (X4) 8 -> 9
War Rafts of Kron (X7) 9 -> 10
Blackmoor series (DA1-DA3) 10 -> 13
some dragon/giant adventures 13 -> 15
Test of the Warlords (CM1) 15 -> 16
Death's Ride (CM2) 16 -> 17
Earthshaker (CM4) 17 -> 18
Where Chaos Reigns (CM6) 18 -> 19
Sabre River (CM3) 19 -> 20

I would like the campaign to go all the way to immortal levels. I really like the fact that Classic D&D has a built-in campaign progression: dungeon crawls, then wilderness exploration, then dominion rulership, then the quest for immortality, then finally establishing one's place among the gods.

ken-do-nim
2007-03-11, 09:07 PM
For the record, I found my answers over on the Dragonsfoot forums. Apparently there is supposed to be a declare intentions phase at the start of combat; this was left out of the Rules Cyclopedia. This allows spells to be disrupted since they must be declared. There is also an alternate initiative order that takes care of all moving & shooting first, then hand-to-hand combat. So Dirk with his two-handed sword or Bob who wants to grapple can move right away, but the slow attack comes at the end of the hand-to-hand phase.

Matthew
2007-03-12, 12:49 PM
That's good to hear. Strange that they left that out of the Cyclopedia. Still, it wouldn't be the only book of its time to be missing important text...