Knights & Knaves Alehouse

Stormcrow wrote:Geez, are we talking about this again?

You know, it's like War Pigs. It doesn't get a lot of time in the rotation anymore on the classic rock stations, and we've all heard it a bazillion times already probably, but it's a goody and you can't resist when it shows up again.

It's, admittedly, not btb, but my favorite method still is "You go when I say you go", and I think it's the best method of all.

Now, back to the everyone-will-never-agree btb debate. Gary could never agree with himself for pete's sake, so how could his game?

TheRedPriest wrote:It's, admittedly, not btb, but my favorite method still is "You go when I say you go", and I think it's the best method of all.

That's what I've effectively adopted.

I'm (mostly) with Ska. Other side's initiative as a base.
From what I remember Gary saying, spell casting was the initiative + casting time, but the spell required all of the casting time segments be used. Example: A 3 segment spell starting on a 2, would = segments 2, 3, and 4 would be spent casting, and the spell would take effect during segment 5. Or maybe that was just my interpretation of it.
I think that's one of the BTB methods described, and like Ska, I've talked to EGG about that many times.
I'm not a fan of the initiative method that uses speed factor.

Scott

ScottyG wrote:I'm (mostly) with Ska. Other side's initiative as a base.
From what I remember Gary saying, spell casting was the initiative + casting time, but the spell required all of the casting time segments be used...I think that's one of the BTB methods described, and like Ska, I've talked to EGG about that many times.

I've got no problem with the concept of using the initiative roll for determining the segment for spellcasting in melee; I agree it has by-the-book precedent (one option for handling spell vs. melee, anyway). However, I'm not so sure about taking the concept and expanding it as a general rule for all actions, including spellcasting out of melee.

It's always a case of continuing actions versus "instant actions". Does the fighter reach the orc before the orc shoots/strikes, after, or at the same time? It seems odd to leave that up to an initiative roll, rather than take the distance into account, when we already allow spell casting times to modify our decisions. On the other hand, if a spell casting time is literally the time it takes to cast the spell, what is the spell caster doing for the rest of the round. No easy answers on either score, which is what keeps us coming back to the discussion.

I think Philotomy is right, though, it is mainly about limiting spell casters.

I'm having a discussion on RPGSite with a guy named Spinachcat about initiative, weapon & armor speeds. Right now, we're starting in on the initiative system from the Ready Ref Sheets.

http://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?t=12412

I predict before the end we'll have some kind of cobbled-together mashup of JG & OD&D using Classic Traveller range bands all based on a d6. All we're missing is DMPRata to drop by and tell us just how wrong we really are.

I thought that looked familiar; he posted the same proposition at Dragonsfoot in the Workshop.

It occurs to me now that the whole reason that bows have a shooting rate of "2" in AD&D may be on account of the idea of beginning and end shooting phases.

initiative

AAAAAAGGGGGGGHHHHHHH!!!!!!!

This has to be the most hated topic of debate thats ever come up on this forum.

For the benefit of those who haven't read this before, I asked Gary a couple years ago to answer a few questions regarding his BTB understanding of the rules (as he meant them to be at the time he wrote them), NOT his house rules).

This was cut from DF I believe (I guess I asked it after I was banned but before you had to log in to post, so whenever that was). This pretty much confirms what SKA is talking about.

http://knights-n-knaves.com/phpbb/viewt ... 22&start=0


PJ, casting a spell from behind is no different then firing a bow or throwing a dagger or anything else for that matter (such as just moving from point a to point b). When you are in combat you are subject to all the stresses that are occuring and are thus no different then those in hand to hand range. For example, the guy casting a spell from behind his wall of fighters has all kinds of things to contend with: components (he fumbles for a few seconds perhaps to find them, his cloths in the way...he's panicing a bit), he needs to find a place of good footing the ground is mucky or cobwebs are messing him up, he can see someone with a spear or bow aiming at him and he has to spend the first 20 seconds ducking and moving around a bit to get the guy to give him a chance to start casting, the spell caster simply forgets the spell in his head for a moment "how does that one start again", the spell caster wants to cast his spell but needs to wait for a chance to get a clear shot at his enemy etc,

As I understand it, a round lasts 60 seconds, and is 10 segments long (each segment being 6 seconds). The role for initiative assumes everyone will get the chance to start acting by at least the 6th segment (or 6x6=36 seconds into combat of the 60 second round). a 6 segment spell begun on segment 6 would go off on segment 1 of the next round (6+6=11-10=1)

Per Gygax, a spell goes off on the end of the segment it is cast:

(Casting Time + Segment Started -1) So a magic missile cast on segment 1 would go off on the end of segment 1 not the begining of segment 2.

I realize some of you guys disagree with Gary or believe he's contradicted himself before this, thats fine (I have yet to see an example of one of these contradictions regarding initiative and spells however, so I don't know if they actually exist).

As always the best BTB answer is read the damned books and come up with your own conclusion. Thats what BTB means afterall.

Axe ducks behind tree, allowing SKA to take the barrage of rotten tomatoes thrown his way.

AxeMental wrote: I realize some of you guys disagree with Gary or believe he's contradicted himself before this, thats fine (I have yet to see an example of one of these contradictions regarding initiative and spells however, so I don't know if they actually exist).

If I am not mistaken, Gygax contradicts that very interpretation in this discussion with Melkor:

Melkor wrote: One thing I forgot to include would be a note regarding what happens if a spellcaster's casting time takes him into the next round. From what I understand (and please correct me if I am wrong):

• A spellcaster begins casting his spell on the segment rolled on the initiative die. That segment is considered to be the first segment of the spell's Casting Time.

• A character who's casting segment time, when combined with his initiative die roll, totals over '10' will act on the segment of the next round based on that total (for example, a roll of 9, and a casting time of 3 would act on segment 1 of the next round). Unfortunately for the spellcaster, after casting that spell, he would not be able to act again until the following round.

Gygax wrote: 9 + 3 = 12, so the spell activates on that segment (2) of the next round, and indeed that's it for the spell caster.

Melkor wrote: I was thinking for some reason that the '9' would actually be considered the first segment of the 3 segment casting time so it would look like 9 + (3-1).....I never was very good at math though

Gygax wrote: Casting begins on segment 9, and a 1 segment spell would be activated on segment 10, indeed, so a 9 + 3 =12 is correct. the 3 segment spell will be cast on the 2nd segment of the following round.

Melkor wrote: My math in my quote was based on the thinking that the 9th segment would be the first segment that the spell was started on - in other words, the first of the 3 segment casting time would occur on segment 9, and there would be 2 casting segments left over...one which would occur on segment 10, and one on the 1st segment of the next round.

From your response, it would seem to indicate that you simply add the initiative roll (in this case, 9) to the casting time (in this case, 3) to come up with the total, which is when the spellcaster gets his spell off.

I went back and looked at another set answers to initiative questions over on this thread.

From your quote here to ScottyG, it would seem like my original way of thinking above was correct:

Gygax wrote: A 1 segment casting time duration means that the spell is cast in the initiative segment indicated by the die roll. In your example of a 4, that's when the spell is cast. Each casting-time segment above 1 is added to the 4 to find the segment of casting, so a spell with a casting time of 3 segments would be cast in the 6th segment. all action begins at the start of a segment and just before the next spells being cast are active.

Would you mind clarifying which one is correct ?

As always, thanks for your patience, and willingness to answer questions.

Gygax wrote: Spell Casting:

A spell that requires one segment to cast is active on the segment after the one in which it was cast. If that segemnt was the 1st, the spell is cast at the beginning of the 2nd segment, if the 2nd, then it is cast at the beginning of the 3rd and so forth. The segment time is a whole number, so each segment is added to the initiative segment number. A spell requiring one segment of casting time can not be cast in the same segment as initiative indicated action begins. The spell is started then and cast at the beginning of the following segment as it requires whole segments to cast, not some fraction of a segment, not even 99/100ths.

Cheers,
Gary

AxeMental wrote:For the benefit of those who haven't read this before, I asked Gary a couple years ago to answer a few questions regarding his BTB understanding of the rules (as he meant them to be at the time he wrote them), NOT his house rules).

Don't believe a word of it. No matter how you asked the question, Gary wasn't giving anyone a "how I meant for it to work" answer; he gave "how to do it" answers. He always figured that people were asking how they should do initiative, and he was annoyed that people didn't work it out for themselves, that they wanted to be spoon-fed. He wasn't quite right about that, but that was always the basis of his answers.

You can see a similar attitude with his delays in publishing Castle Greyhawk. He could never see why anyone would want to see his personal notes and maps of the dungeon; he always insisted that any publication be finished, polished, and professional. No matter what he may have said, no Castle Greyhawk you ever saw or will see published will be the dungeon that Gary himself ran.

(This was the disagreement he and Rob Kuntz had. I have to say I that I agree with Rob. I'm not interested in running players through Castle Greyhawk; I just want to see how he did it. This is why I like Bottle City so much.)

No matter what he may have said, no Castle Greyhawk you ever saw or will see published will be the dungeon that Gary himself ran.

That's the crux of the problem, isn't it? It seems that a lot of people really believe Gary had some grand master plan that just needed polishing up or a little conversion work. The confusion about delays and discrepencies in various published/unpublished bits seemed to reinforce the myth that someone was holding out or holding forth. Obviously as the myth grew, Gygax himself was hesitant to just come out and admit that it was an improvisational tool that never failed to amaze. It was his 'live show'.

As any good DM could tell you, a lot of it is just smoke and mirrors meant to give the illusion of complexity without the hassle. Maybe, in the case of Castle Greyhawk, we're all just players who have no idea what's really behind the DM screen. Some have peeked, but even they can't agree on what it is that they saw. I hope that up in heaven Gary is having a long hard laugh at our expense.

Storm Crow, you might be correct about that. But I did pose the question as his BTB understanding of 1E AD&D rules. That was my point. I tend to take people at face value, and even though your statement is logical, I think its impossible to know for sure. Given that his confirmation of SKA's method does not contradict the rules as written, I think they should stand as the closest we will ever come to knowing his understanding of the official rules regarding how initiative works. I think we all agree, side A and side B both role d6s and high role goes first. The big disagreement is over magic and missiles I think.

I know you and SKA got into it once listing the relavent qoutes from the book, but for the life of me I can't find that thread. If someone else can find that please post a link to it, as I'd like to take another look.

Thanks Matthew I hadn't seen that before. It does indeed seem to be a contradiction.

In the answer he gave me, if the Magic User casts MM on segment 2 (seconds 7-12) the spell would go off on second 12 (or the end of segment 2).

In the answer he gave here, he's saying in the above example the spell would go off on second 13 of the 60 second round not secon 12. (or at the beginning of the 3rd segment).

What he is saying is that the spell requires 100% of the time of the segment to cast (so it takes all 6 seconds to cast the spell). I think this doesn't contradict the answer he gave me (seg +casting time - 1) because its going off before the completion of the first second of the next segment (in otherwords its going off before the completed second of segment 2).

It seems anal to go into this detail, but its important to know if a 1 seg spell goes off on the segment roled or the next segment. Given the two contradictory examples, I think a DM would be fine using either method (I prefer that seg + casting time -1 because I find it easier, a MM cast on segment 3 goes off on segment 3).

The important thing to remember is that he believed the spell to start on the segment rolled (and thats the role the other side roles not what you role yourself). Another thing about the above example is that he's using a d10 to role initiative rather then a D6. The D6 method of AD&D had all the actions at least being started by the 6x6=36th second of the 60 second round. The d10 method suggests some actions might not be started until the 9th or even 10 segment. Thats a big difference in the flow of the game and might have been making him confused about what information he wanted (d10 was not BTB but his home method of rolling).
Therefore, I think the seg+casting time-1 method should perhaps trump the seg + casting time method for now, at least until another example can be found of how he thinks init. should work with a d6 rather then a d10.

AxeMental wrote:Therefore, I think the seg+casting time-1 method should perhaps trump the seg + casting time method for now, at least until another example can be found of how he thinks init. should work with a d6 rather then a d10.

You see, the thing is that Gary didn't really have a way he thought initiative should work. His initiative system boils down to:

"The impartial referee decides who goes first. All other things being equal, roll some dice."

All the stuff about casting time and weapon speeds and whatnot is just for referees to make this decision, and for players to have an idea of what will happen when they do or use things.

If Gary really thought determining initiative was important, he would have been clearer about it.

My current thinking is that all spell casting starts just pre-segment 1 of melee (I think this is BtB for what it's worth) and the interaction between spells and weapon speeds is best handled this way:

Characters with multiple attacks per round divide the weapon speed of the weapon they are using by that rate for all purposes. So a halberd used by a character with 3/2 used it at a speed of 6. A two-handed sword used by a 13th level specialist in that weapon would have a speed of 4.

Secondly, for the purposes of deciding if a spell is interrupted by an attacker in general melee, compare initiative dice:

On a tie, the first attack comes on the segment indicated by the weapon's speed. Natural weapons are speed 1.

If the caster wins initiative, the first attack comes on the segment indicated by the weapon speed or the caster's initiative die, whichever is higher.

If the attacker wins initiative, the first attack comes on the segment indicated by the weapon speed minus the attacker's initiative die, minimum of 0. A segment of zero indicates "before a 1 segment spell completes" - specifically, the number of seconds shown on the caster's die (1-5), so possibly interrupting even a cantrip.

I think this gets in the spirit of both DMG p65 and pp66-67 and is fairly quick to use. Slow weapons can fail to interupt short spells even when winning initiative, and a slow spell can be interrupted by a fast weapon even when the caster wins initiative.

For cases where the attacker is not being distracted by possible other attacks, then they can hack away for free on each subsequent segment until the spell is complete as if the segments were surprise segments (of course, the caster can give up the spell and start defending themselves properly at any time).

If there is other melee going on and the attacker has to worry about his/her own defense, then subsequent attacks (if the attacker is entitled to such) come at <weapon speed> intervals.

The system IN THE BOOK is different and I would opine that even when one does untangle all the if's and but's the result is not satisfactory.