I've been following the discussion over at Monster and Manuals - specifically Piledriving D&D and I Blame The Children; Or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love Declaring Actions Before Rolling Initiative, with as much interest as my sick, overworked brain has allowed. One of the things that noism is talking about is missing out or forgetting important rules in Old School D&D - and the effect it has on the game. One specific example is Declaring Actions before initiative is rolled.
That has been pressing on my mind for a while. A few months into our Labyrinth Lord game, I noticed that the combat appeared a bit clunky, and that things that mattered, like spell casting, didn't seem to be going the way that they should. I began to pay more attention to how I was running the combats and discovered the shocking truth - I was very sloppy about the whole thing - not enforcing any sort of order of sequence. Over the past few months, I've been slipping order back into the combat sequence - at a pace that my feeble brain could remember - and it seem to be working well.
Except . . .
Except I've got this big block on 'Declaring Actions.' It doesn't seem right. And Declaring actions before initiative just seems downright crazy in the head. Not nonsensical - just foreign - alien - aberrant - Cthullic.
Noism seems to think it works just great. But then Zak piped up about how in the ConstantCon, nobody declares nothing in combat until their turn in initiative, and people seem to 'just do it' without a break in their stride.
The whole thing bugged me, so I began to delve into every Old Schoolish D&D version that I had in paper form (okay, I skipped Hackmaster, so sue me.) I started to chart out their Combat Sequences, and dumped them into Excel. While I didn't have the Holmes version to hand, I did take a peek at what Matt Finch had to say about it in Swords & Wizardry: Complete Rulebook, for some historical perspective.
Here is what I came up with:
B/X (B23-27)
|
BECMI (DMR22-24)
|
AD&D (61-84)
|
Distance Check
|
||
Surprise Check
|
Surprise Check
|
Surprise Check
|
Distance Check
|
||
Reaction Check
|
||
Declare Intentions
|
Spell Declaration
|
|
Roll Initiative
|
Roll Initiative
|
Roll Initiative
|
Monster Reaction / Morale Checks
|
Morale Checks
|
Encounter Reactions
|
Movement
|
Movement
|
Missile, Magical Device Attacks, Spell Casting, Turn Undead
|
Missile Combat
|
Missile Combat
|
|
Magic Spells
|
Spells and Magic Items
|
|
Closing / Charge
|
||
Set Weapons Against Charge
|
||
Melee Combat
|
Melee Combat
|
Armed Combat
|
Unarmed Combat
|
||
Rinse / Lather / Repeat for Next Group / Player
|
Rinse / Lather / Repeat for Next Group / Player
|
Rinse / Lather / Repeat for Next Group / Player
|
End of Turn
|
End of Turn
|
End of Turn
|
Labyrinth Lord (50-56)
|
Swords & Wizardry
Complete (36-43)
|
LotFP Grindhouse
(R&M56-62)
|
Distance Check
|
Distance Check
|
|
Surprise Check
|
Surprise Check
|
Surprise Check
|
Distance Check
|
||
Reactions
|
||
Movement / Action Declaration
|
Spell Declaration
|
|
Roll Initiative
|
Roll Initiative
|
Roll Initiative
|
Each Character Completes Their Actions One At A Time
|
||
Movement
|
Movement and Missile Combat
|
|
Missile Combat
|
||
Magic Spells
|
Melee Combat and Spells
|
|
Melee Combat
|
||
Rinse / Lather / Repeat for Next Group / Player
|
Rinse / Lather / Repeat for Next Group / Player
|
Rinse / Lather / Repeat for Next Group / Player
|
End of Turn
|
End of Turn
|
End of Turn
|
It appears that declaring one's actions wasn't what you did in early D&D. After some digging in the Dungeon Master's Guide, I saw that you are supposed to declare spells before you cast them, but it wasn't very obvious. If AD&D had more on declaring actions, I couldn't find it. The first time I found a version specifically saying that Actions (Intentions) should be declared - all actions - and before initiative, was the BECMI version of D&D - which I don't consider as 'early' - more like mid-morning.
And that completely explains why it felt so strange to me. My D&D track is Holmes->B/X->AD&D. No declaring there, except for spells - and that's probably something I overlooked then. For the most part, we were just chugging along with a B/Xish AD&D variant.
That also gets my head itching about why Labyrinth Lord, with it's hooks firmly set in B/X, pulled out a BMCMI combat sequence. Odd. :)
Oh, and Holmes was a complete odd-ball, seeming to be a heck of a lot more like d20 in it's combat sequence. No offence, doctor - none at all. Before your time, you were.
Of course, I could be completely wrong with my analysis of the combat sequences - or my understanding of exactly what noism said or meant. It was only a few hours worth of work, anyway. But the exercise has gotten me very interested in WHY the editions picked the combat sequences they did. I'd say that I'm so interested, I'm INSPIRED. :)
So, go pick an idea in role playing that always seemed kind of fuzzy - and go do some deep dive research on it. You just might find a whole mess of interesting stuff you didn't dream of. And who knows, your game might even be better for it!
- Ark





