I'm increasingly finding it much easier in solo play when using OD&D rules to use CHAINMAIL Troop Combat to handle many of my encounters, as there is so much less to track and not as many rolls to make.
Troop Combat or probably better known as 20:1 combat (although it doesn't necessarily have to be used at that ratio) relies on determining a Fighting Capability and Attack As and Defend As ratings for the troops involved. A major disclaimer here is that this is not based necessarily on weapons and armour of troops but is more complex than that. It subsumes things such as a units formation, whether close or loose so it's best not to think of a figure's ability to defend in troop combat as a direct conversion from armour class. That being said, armour class is a useful reference in deciding what troop classification a figure should be.
Deciding what Fighting Capability a character will fight as can be simply a matter of looking at the Fighting Capability column under the Statistics Regarding Classes section of D&D Volume 1. A hero as CHAINMAIL tells us is 4 Men and a Superhero is 8 Men. For more exotic classes like the Ranger and Illusionist for example, you could take the Fighting Capability from the parent class. Remember that the Ranger is a subclass of the Fighter and the Illusionist a subclass of the Magic-User. A Druid although a subclass of Cleric has some explicitly stated fighting capabilities already. Thieves had their fighting capabilities listed in the Great Plains Gameplayer's Newsletter issue 9. It's important to note though that is is not as cut and dry as that and is ultimately up to the referee. Imagination and creativity must be encouraged. For solo players like myself I like to have something robust in place so I am likely to go with the original listings and parent class inheritance to handle my conversions.
Curiously, we do have an example of non-CHAINMAIL classes being used within the CHAINMAIL system by none other than Gary Gygax and Jeff Perrin themselves (co creators of CHAINMAIL) in a battle report for "The Battle of the Moathouse". This battle report concerns a war waged against the Temple of Elemental Evil and was written up by Paul J. Stormberg in 2006 and posted on Dragonsfoot. The battle was played out at a Lake Geneva Gaming Convention. This battle was fought at a 10:1 scale.
The order of battle lists various D&D to CHAINMAIL conversions, which includes a Ranger Lord fighting as a Superhero (8 Men) and 2 Druids, 1 a Warlock (2 Men) and another a Seer (2 Men). There is also a Cleric fighting as a Sorcerer (2 Men).
It is evident here that some creativity has been applied when deciding on the capabilities of these figures.
If we inherit from the parent Fighter class then the Ranger Lord would fight as a Superhero+1 so it's close. The original article that introduces the ranger class to OD&D does say "Where not otherwise specified Rangers perform as Fighting Men." so directly inheriting fighting capability from the parent class is not a far-fetched solution.
The Druid as a Warlock definitely breaks from its original listing in Eldritch Wizardry, which lists a high level Druid as having a fighting capability of Superhero. However, our players in the Battle for the Moathouse decided on a Warlock being an appropriate stand in for one of them and a Seer for the other, less powerful Druid. A warlock is technically a Wizard-2 and Seer a Wizard-4 and both are equivalent to 2 Men (or 2 Heavy Foot). Further, the Cleric fighting as a Sorcerer goes against its explicit capabilities in D&D Volume 1, which suggests high level Clerics should fight as Heroes and Superheroes.
When using the explicit OD&D listings and inheriting from the parent class, although at highest level most of these classes work out to be worth about 8 men, one quirk of this is that when a Magic-User (or subclass thereof) reaches a level whereby their Fighting Capability is as a Wizard they will drop to a capability of 2 men from their previous Hero + 1, which is 4 men + 1. This is because CHAINMAIL wizards fight as 2 men, or 2 Armoured Foot to be precise. The trade off here though is they will be treated as being armoured even though they cannot wear armour. Time will tell how this approach might work out...
For Monsters, on page 5 of D&D Volume 2 it says "Attack/Defence capabilities versus normal men are simply a matter of allowing one roll as a man-type for every hit die, with any bonuses being given to only one of the attacks". I take this to mean a monsters Fighting Capability is the same as their hit die.
Now, the elephant in the room is the Defend As and Attack As category for each figure. CHAINMAIL covers quite a lot of this. It tells us that all missile troops attack and defend as Light Foot so this covers Men-At-Arms categories for archers, longbowmen and crossbowmen.
We already know that when a Magic-User reaches the Fighting Capability of a Wizard they attack and defend as Heavy Foot (or Heavy Horse if mounted).
In regards to Heroes and Superheroes, CHAINMAIL states that there attack and defence rating is "dependent on the arms and equipment of the Hero [or Superhero] types themselves, who can range from Light Foot to Heavy Horse.
It's clear there is no exact science here. It's all dependant on the wargaming knowledge of the individual who must make an appropriate assessment.
Gary Gygax's 1975 rules for Classic Warfare offer some guidance on how troops should be classified. He explains that the heaviest of infantry, which in CHAINMAIL is Armoured Foot has "considerable body armour and large shields." and are "trained to fight in close formation." Medium infantry, which in CHAINMAIL is Heavy Foot are "nearly as well armoured" as Armoured Foot but "operate in loose order or formation." Last but not least the equivalent of CHAINMAIL Light Foot are "unarmoured or "scantily protected with armour or small shields" and they "do not attack in formation."
One of the key indicators regarding categorising troops is whether they are in tight formation or not. It's reasonable to say that a party of adventurers would never be in a tight disciplined formation so as a unit they should always be considered at their best, Heavy Foot.
You would think that considerable body armour and large shields can be no less than plate & shield or Armor Class 2. However, CHAINMAIL recommends use with 40mm Elastolin figures and describes dismounted knights as Armoured Foot. These knights are modelled to wield everything from hand axes without a shield to sword and shield to two-handed pikes. So, it's probably more precise to say that Armoured Foot can be anything higher than AC4.
Unarmoured or scantily protected with armour or small shields could not be interpreted any other way but unarmoured (AC9), shield (AC8), leather armour (AC7) or leather armour and shield (AC6). There is a specific example in OD&D Volume 2 under bandits that describe light foot bandits as having leather armour and shield in support of this.
In regards to mounted figures Classic Warfare explains that Heavy Horse have "considerable body protection". Whilst Medium Horse have lighter body armour and usually "some form of shield" and finally Light Horse have "little body protection". Horse is a bit harder to interpret cleanly but seems more or less comparable to the three categories of infantry. The major thing to factor in is whether a war horse has barding. If not then it's probably better to categorise it is heavy horse at best.
This leaves us with the following summary:
AC Category
-- --------
Less than 4 Armoured Foot* or Heavy Horse**
AC4-5 Heavy Foot or Medium Horse
AC6 & up Light Foot or Light Horse
* Must be fighting in close formation otherwise treat as Heavy Foot.
** Horse most have barding otherwise treat as Medium Horse.
It's certainly not as easy as just looking at a figures Armour Class, you might ask. If this was the case then why would D&D Volume 2 list Light, Medium and Heavy Horse as all being AC7?! Well this refers to the horse itself without a rider acting independently.
CHAINMAIL gives some explicit attack and defence ratings for various "non-fantastic", "fantasy types", i.e halflings which are attack and defend as Light Foot, dwarves, goblins and kobolds, which attack as Heavy Foot but defend as Light Foot and elves and orcs, which both attack and defend as Heavy Foot. CHAINMAIL also tells us sprites attack and defend as Light Foot, so this could be interpreted to mean pixies, nixies and dryads.
CHAINMAIL also gives us many attack and defence capabilities for many monsters, which can be looked up individually but all must be cross referenced with D&D Volume 2 as things such as whether they are impervious to normal attacks and missile fire may have been overwritten.
In a nutshell fantastic creatures who cannot be hit in troop combat, because they are hurt by magical weapons only for example, should be fought using the Alternative Combat System, which was effectively the replacement for the Fantastic Combat table in CHAINMAIL.
A good rule of thumb, perhaps, is to go with any explicitly mentioned attack and defence rating and if one is not given then fall back on an armour class conversion as outlined above.
I've prepared a table to help with this type of conversion:
Men-at-Arms Attack As Defend As
----------- --------- ---------
Non Fighters Light Foot Light Foot
Archers Light Foot Light Foot
Crossbowmen Light Foot Light Foot
Longbowmen Light Foot Light Foot
Non-Fantastic
Fantasy Types
-------------
Halflings, Light Foot Light Foot
sprites
(nixies,
pixies and
dryads)
Dwarves, Heavy Foot Light Foot
gnomes,
goblins,
kobolds
Elves, orcs Heavy Foot Heavy Foot
Giant Wolves Light Horse Light Horse
(including
Dire Wolves)*
Fantastic
Fantasy Types
-------------
Magic-User Heavy Foot Heavy Foot
above 10th (Heavy Horse) (Heavy Horse)
Level
Trolls Heavy Foot Heavy Foot
Giants Heavy Foot** Heavy Foot
Rocs, Light Horse Heavy Horse
Griffons,
Wyverns
Basilisk, -- Heavy Foot
Cocatrice
Wights, Ghouls Light Horse Heavy Horse
Amour Class
-----------
AC Less than 4*** Armoured Foot Armoured Foot
(Heavy Horse) (Heavy Horse)
AC 4-5 Heavy Foot Heavy Foot
(Medium Horse) (Medium Horse)
AC 6 and above Light Foot Light Foot
(Light Horse) (Light Horse)
* Medium Horse in movement. Reduced to Heavy Horse if mounted.
** Add extra die for over-sized weapons.
*** Must be fighting in close formation otherwise treat as Heavy Foot.
**** Must have barding otherwise treat as Medium Horse.
Further simplification can be added by scaling from 1:1 to 10:1 or 20:1. (always rounding down). For example, a party fighting as the equivalent of 30 men against 13 giant rats could be fought at 3 versus 1 (10:1) but could not be fought at 20:1 as this would be 1 versus 0.
Comments
Post a Comment