THE MELEE
IN D&D®
by Gary Gygax
And a few additional words... | - | - | - | - |
Dragon 24 | - | - | - | Dragon |
There is some controversy
regarding the system of resolving individual battles used in DUNGEONS
& DRAGONS and the somewhat
similar ADVANCED
DUNGEONS & DRAGONS melee system. The
meat of D&D is the concept
of pure adventure, the challenge of the unknown, facing the unexpected
and overcoming all obstacles. At times
this requires combat with
spell, missile, and hand-to-hand fighting.
How crucial to the game
as a whole is the melee? What part should it
play? Is “realism” an important
consideration?
To put the whole matter into
prespective, it is necessary to point out that there is probably
only a small percentage
of the whole concerned with possible shortcomings in the melee system,
but even 1% to perhaps 5% of an audience of well over 100,000 enthusiasts
is too large a number to be
totally ignored. To the
majority who do not have problems with the rationale of fantasy melee as
presented in D&D, what follows will serve
to strengthen your understanding
of the processes and their relationship to the whole game. For those who
doubt the validity of D&D combat systems, the expostulation will at
least demonstrate the logic of the
systems, and perhaps justify
them to the extent that you will be able to
use them with complete assurance
that they are faithful representations of the combat potential of the figures
concerned.
There can be no question
as to the central theme of the game. It is
the creation and development
of the game persona, the fantastic
player character who is
to interact with his of her environment —
hopefully to develop into
a commanding figure in the milieu. In order
to do so, the player character
must undergo a continuing series of activities which are dictated by the
campaign at large and the Dungeon
Master in particular. Interaction
can be the mundane affairs of food,
equipment and shelter, or
it can be dealing with non-player characters
in only slightly less routine
things such as hiring of men-at-arms, treating with local officials, and
so on. But from even these everyday affairs
can develop adventures,
and adventurers are, of course, the meat of
D&D; for it is by means
of adventuring that player characters gain
acumen and the wealth and
wherewithal to increase in ability level.
The experience, actual and
that awarded by the DM, is gained in the
course of successive adventures,
and it is most common to engage in
combat.
Hacking and slewing should
not, of course, be the first refuge of
the beleaguered D&Der,
let alone his or her initial resort when confronted with a problem situation.
Naturally enough, a well run campaign will offer a sufficient number of
alternatives as well as situations
which encourage thinking,
negotiation, and alternatives to physical
force, by means of careful
prompting or object lessons in the negative
form. Aside from this, however,
combat and melee will certainly occupy a considerable amount of time during
any given adventure, at
least on the average. Spell
and missile combat do not consume any appreciable amount of time, but as
they are also often a part of an overall
melee, these factors must
be considered along with hand-to-hand
fighting.
What must be simulated in
melee combat are the thrusts and
blows (smashing and cutting)
of weapons wielded as well as natural
body weaponry of monsters
— teeth, claws, and so forth. Individual
combat of this sort can
be made exceptionally detailed by inclusion of
such factors as armor, weapon(s),
reflex speed, agility, position of
weapon (left or right hand
or both), training, strength, height, weight,
tactics chosen (attack,
defend, or in a combination), location of successful blows, and results
of injury to specific areas. If, in fact, D&D
were a game of simulation
of hand-to-hand combat utilizing miniature
figurines, such detail would
be highly desirable. The game is one of
adventure, though, and combats
of protected nature (several hours
minimum of six or more player
characters are considered involved
against one or more opponents
each) are undesirable, as the majority
of participants are most
definitely not miniature battle game enthusiasts. Time could be reduced
considerably by the inclusion of such
factors as death blows —
a kill at a single stroke, exceptionally high
amounts of damage — a modified
form of killing at a single stroke,
specific hit location coupled
with specific body hit points, and special
results from hits — unconsciousness,
loss of member, incapacitation
of member, etc.
Close simulation of actual
hand-to-hand combat and inclusion of
immediate result strokes
have overall disadvantages from the standpoint of the game as a whole.
Obviously, much of the excitement and
action is not found in melee,
and even excitement and action is not
found in melee, and even
shortening the process by adding in death
strokes and the like causes
undue emphasis on such combat. Furthermore, D&D is a role playing campaign
game where much of the real
enjoyment comes for participants
from the gradual development of
the game personae, their
gradual development, and their continuing
exploits (whether successes
or failures). In a system already fraught
with numberless possibilities
of instant death — spells, poison, breath
and gaze weapons, and traps
— it is too much to force players to face
yet another. Melee combat
is nearly certain to be a part of each and
sibility of character death
highly likely, but it also allows the wise to
withdraw if things get too
tough — most of the time in any case.
The D&D combat systems
are not all that “unrealistic” either, as
will be discussed hereafter.
The systems are designed to provide
relative speed of resolution
without either bogging the referee in a
morass of paperwork or giving
high probability of death to participants’ personae. Certainly, the longer
and more involved the melee
procedure, the more work
and boredom from the Dungeon Master,
while fast systems are fun
but deadly to player characters (if such
systems are challenging
and equitable) and tend to discourage participants from long term committment
to a campaign, for they cannot
relate to a world in which
they are but the briefest of candles, so to
speak.
In order to minutely examine
the D&D combat system as used in
the ADVANCED game, an example
of play is appropriate. Consider a
party of adventurers treking
through a dungeon’s 10’ wide corridor
when they come upon a chamber
housing a troop of gnoll guards. Let
us assume that our party
of adventurers is both well-balanced in
character race and class.
They have a dwarf, gnome, and halfling in
the front rank. Behind them
are two half-elves. The last rank consists
of three humans. Although
there are eight characters, all of them are
able to take an active part
in the coming engagement; spells and
missiles can be discharged
from the rear or middle rows. The center
rank characters will also
be able to engage in hand-to-hand combat if
they have equipped themselves
with spears or thrusting pole arms
which are of size useful
in the surroundings. The front rank can initially use spells or missiles
and then engage in melee with middle rank support, assuming that the party
was not surprised. Whether or not any
exchange of missiles and
spells takes place is immaterial to the example, for it is melee which
is the activity in question. Let us then move on
to where the adventurers
are locked in combat with the gnolls.
Each melee round is considered
to be a one minute time period,
with a further division
into ten segments of six seconds each for determination of missile fire,
spell casting and the striking of multiple telling blows. Note that during
the course of a round there are assumed to
be numbers of parries, feints,
and non-telling attacks made by opponents. The one (or several) dice roll
(or rolls) made for each adversary, however, determines if a telling attack
is made. If there is a hit indicated, some damage has been done; if a miss
is rolled, then the opponent managed to block or avoid the attack.
If the participants picture
the melee as somewhat analogous
to a boxing match they will have a
correct grasp of the rationale
used in designing the melee system. During the course of a melee round
there is movement, there are many attacks which do not score, and each
“to hit” dice roll indicates that
there is an opening which
may or may not allow a telling attack. In a recent letter, Don Turnbull
stated that he envisioned that three sorts of
attacks were continually
taking place during melee:
1) attacks which had no chance of hitting, including feints, parries, and the like;
2) attacks which had a chance
of doing damage but which
missed as indicated by the
die roll; and
3) attacks which were telling
as indicated by the dice roll and
subsequent damage determination.
This is a correct summation
of what the D&D melee procedure
subsumes. Note that the
skill factor of higher level of higher
levelfighters — as well
as natural abilities and/or speed of some
monsters — allows more than
one opportunity per melee round of
scoring a telling attack
as they are more able to take advantage of
openings left by adversaries
during the course of sparring. Similarly,
zero level men, and monsters
under one full hit die, are considered as
being less able to defend;
thus, opponents of two of more levels of hit
dice are able to get in
one telling blow for each such level or hit die.
This melee system also hinges
on the number of hit points assigned to characters. As I have repeatedly
pointed out, if a rhino can
take a maximum amount of
damage equal to eight of nine eight-sided
dice, a maximum of 64 or
72 hit points of damage to kill, it is positively
absurd to assume that an
8th level fighter with average scores on his or
her hit dice and an 18 consititution,
thus having 76 hit points, can
physically withstand more
punishment than a rhino before being
killed. Hit points are a
combination of actual physical consititution,
skill at the avoidance of
taking real physical damage, luck and/or
magical or divine factors.
Ten points of damage dealt to a rhino indicated a considerable wound, while
the same damage sustained by the
8th level fighter indicates
a near miss, a slight wound, and a bit of luck
used up, a bit of fatigue
piling up against his or her skill at avoiding the
fatal cut or thrust. So
even when a hit is scored in melee combat, it is
more often than not a grazing
blow, a scratch, a mere light wound
which would have been fatal
(or nearly so) to a lesser mortal. If sufficient numbers of such wounds
accrue to the character, however,
stamina, skill, and luck
will eventually run out, and an attack will
strike home . . .
I am firmly convinced that
this system is superior to all others so
far concieved and published.
It reflects actual combat reasonably, for
weaponry, armor (protection
and speed and magical factors), skill
level, and allows for a
limited amount of choice as to attacking or
defending. It does not require
participants to keep track of more than
a minimal amount of information,
it is quite fast, and it does not place
undue burden upon the Dungeon
Master. It allows those involved in
combat to opt to retire
if they are taking too much damage — although
this does not necessarily
guarantee that they will succeed or that the
opponents will not strike
a telling blow prior to such retreat. Means of
dealing fatal damage at
a single stroke or melee routine are kept to a
minimum commensurate with
the excitement level of the system.
Poison, weapons which deliver
a fatal blow, etc. are rare or obvious.
Thus, participants know
that a giant snake or scorpion can fell with a
single strike with poison,
a dragon or a 12 headed hydra or a cloud
giant deliver considerable
amounts of damage when they succeed in
striking, and they also
are aware that it is quite unlikely that an opponent will have a sword
of sharpness, a vorpal blade, or some similar
deadly weapon. Melee, then,
albeit a common enough occurrence, is a
calculated risk which participants
can usually determine before engaging in as to their likelihood of success;
and even if the hazards are
found to be too severe,
they can often retract their characters to fight
again another day.
Of course, everyone will
not be satisfied with the D&D combat
system. If DM and players
desire a more complex and time consuming
method of determining melee
combat, or if they wish a more detailed
but shorter system, who
can say them nay.
However, care must be
taken to make certain that
the net effect is the same as if the correct
system had been employed,
or else the melee will become imbalanced.
If combat is distorted to
favor the player characters, experience levels
will rise too rapidly, and
participants will become bored with a game
which offers no real challenge
and whose results are always a foregone
conclusion. If melee is
changed to favor the adversaries of player
characters, such as by inclusion
of extra or special damage when a high
number is rolled on a “to
hit” die, the net results will also be a loss of
interest in the campaign.
How does a double damage on a die score of
20 favor monsters and spoil
a campaign? you ask. If only players are
allowed such extra damage,
then the former case of imbalance in favor
of the players over their
adversaries is in effect. If monsters are allowed
such a benefit, it means
that the chances of surviving a melee, or withdrawing from combat if things
are not going well, are sharply reduced.
That means that character
survival will be less likely. If players cannot
develop and identify with
a long lived character, they will lose interest
in the game. Terry Kuntz
developed a system which allowed for telling
strokes in an unpublished
game he developed to recreate the epic
adventures of Robin Hood
etal. To mitigate against the loss at a single
stroke, he also included
a saving throw which allowed avoidance of
such death blows, and saving
throw increased as the character successfully engaged in combats, i.e.
gained experience. This sort of approach
is obviously possible, but
it requires a highly competent designer to
develop.
Melee in D&D is certainly
a crucial factor, and it must not be
warped at risk of spoiling
the whole game. Likewise, it is not unrealistic — if there is such a thing
as “realism” in a game, particularly a
game filled with the unreal
assumptions of dragons, magic spells, and
so on. The D&D melee
combat system subsumes all sorts of variable
factors in a system which
must deal with imaginary monsters, magicendowed weaponry, and make-believe
characters and abilities. It does
so in the form as to allow
referees to handle the affair as rapidly as possible, while keeping balance
between player characters and opponents,
and still allowing the players
the chance of withdrawing their
characters if the going
gets too rough. As melee combat is so common
an occurrence during the
course of each adventure, brevity, equitability, and options must be carefully
balanced.
Someone recently asked how
I could include a rule regarding
weapons proficiency in the
ADVANCED game after decrying what
they viewed as a similar
system, bonuses for expertise with weapons.
The AD&D system, in
fact, penalizes characters using weapons which
they do not have expertise
with. Obviously, this is entirely different in
effect upon combat. Penalties
do not change balance between
character and adversary,
for the player can always opt to use nonpenalized weapons for his or her
character.
It also makes the game
more challenging by further
defining differences in character classes
and causing certain weapons
to be more desirable, i.e. will the magic
hammer + 1 be useful to
the cleric? It likewise adds choices. All this
rather than offering still
another method whereby characters can more
easily defeat opponents
and have less challenge. How can one be mistaken as a variation of the
other? The answer there is that the results of
the two systems were not
reflected upon. With a more perfect
understanding of the combat
system and its purposes, the inquirer will
certainly be able to reason
the thing through without difficulty and
avoid spoiling the game
in the name of "realism."
Realism does have a function
in D&D, of course. It is the tool of
the DM when confronted with
a situation which is not covered by the
rules. With the number of
variables involved in a game such as D&D,
there is no possibility
of avoiding situations which are not spelled out
in the book. The spirit
of the rules can be used as a guideline, as can the
overall aim of rules which
apply to general cases, but when a specific
situation arises, judgement
must often be brought into play.
Sean
Cleary pointed this out
to me in a letter commenting on common misunderstandings and difficulties
encountered by the DM. While the
ADVANCED system will make
it absolutely clear that clerics, for example, have but one chance to attempt
to turn undead, and that there
is no saving throw for those
struck by undead (life level is drained!),
there is no possibility
of including minutia in the rules. To illustrate
further, consider the example
of missile fire into a melee. Generally,
the chances of hitting a
friend instead of a foe is the ratio of the two in
the melee. With small foes,
the ratio is adjusted accordingly, i.e. two
humans fighting four kobolds
gives about equal probabilities of hitting either. Huge foes make it almost
impossible to strike a friend, i.e.
aiming at a 12’ tall giant’s
upper torso is quite unlikely to endanger the
6’ tall human of a javelin
of lightning bolts into a melee where a
human and a giant are engaged.
The missile strikes the giant; where
does its stroke of lightning
travel? Common sense and reality indicate
that the angle of the javelin
when it struck the giant will dictate that the
stroke will travel in a straight
line back along the shaft, and the rest is a
matter of typical positions
and angles — if the human was generally
before the giant, and the
javelin was thrown from behind the human,
the trajectory of the missile
will be a relatively straight line ending in
the shaft of the weapon
and indicating the course of the bolt of lightening backwards. The giant’s
human opponent will not be struck by the
stroke, but the lightning
will come close most probably. Therefore, if
the human is in metal armor
a saving throw should be made to determine if he or she takes half or no
damage.
In like manner, reality can
illustrate probabilities. If three husky
players are placed shoulder
to shoulder, distances added for armor,
and additional spaces added
for weapon play, the DM can estimate
what activities can take
place in a given amount of space. Determination of how many persons can
pass through a door 5’ wide can be
made with relative ease
— two carefully, but if two or three rush to
pass through at the same
time a momentary jam can occur. How long
should the jam last? How
long would people actually remain so
wedged? With an added factor
for inflexible pieces of plate mail, the
answer is probably one OF
two segments of a round. Of course, during
this period the jammed characters
cannot attack or defend, so no
shield protection or dexterity
bonus to armor class would apply, and
an arbitrary bonus of +
4 could be given to any attackers (an arbitrary
penalty of -4 on saving
throws follows).
The melee systems used in
D&D are by no means sacrosanct.
Changes can be made if they
are done intelligently by a knowledgeable
individual who thoroughly
understands the whole design. Similarly,
“realism” is a part of melee,
for the DM must refer to it continually to
ajudicate combat situations
where no rules exist, and this handling is
of utmost importance in
maintaining a balanced melee procedure.
With this truly important
input from the referee, it is my firm belief
that the D&D system
of combat is not only adequate but actually unsurpassed by any of its rival’s
so-called “improvements” and
“realistic” methods. The
latter add complication, unnecessary record
keeping, or otherwise distort
the aim of a role playing game —
character survival and identification.
What is foisted off on the gullible is typically a hodge-podge of arbitrary
rulings which are claimed to
give “realism” to a make-believe
game. Within the scope of the whole
game surrounding such systems,
they might, or might not, work well
enough, but seldom will
these systems fit into D&D regardless of the
engineering attempts of
well-meaning referees.
The logic of the D&D
melee systems is simple: They reasonably
reflect fantastic combat
and they work damn well from all standpoints. My advice is to leave well
enough alone and accept the game for
what it is. If you must
have more detail in melee, switch to another
game, for the combat portions
of D&D are integral and unsuccessful
attempts to change melee
will result in spoiling the whole. Better to
start fresh than to find
that much time and effort has been wasted on a
dead end variant.
AND A FEW ADDITIONAL
WORDS . . .
Those of you who read the
first article in this series (“Dungeons &
Dragons,
What It ls And Where It Is Going,” DRAGON #22) will appreciate knowing
that TSR is now in the process of creating its Design
Department. Jean Wells is
now on the staff in order to give the game
material with a feminine
viewpoint — after all, at least 10% of the
players are female! Lawrence
Shick also joined us recently, and he will
work primarily with science
fantasy and science fiction role playing adventure game material, although
you’ll undoubtedly be seeing his
name on regular D&D/AD&D
items as well. In the coming months I
envision the addition of
yet more creative folks, and as new members
are added to our staff,
you’ll read about it here. What TSR aims to do is
to assure you that you get
absolutely the finest in adventure gaming
regardless of the form it
is in; and the new Design Department will answer your questions, handle
the review of material submitted for possible publication by TSR, appear
at conventions, design tournaments,
author material for this
publication (and probably for other vehicles as
well), and create or assist
with the creation of playing aids and new
forms of adventure games.
This is a big order, certainly, but both Jean
and Lawrence are talented
and creative gamers. Expect great things
from them, and the others
who will join them soon, in the months to
come!