As one of the developers for the OSE system for Foundry, I always feel a little flutter of pride when I see folks out in the wild putting it to use. I hope it's helped make your games easier and more fun to run!
Hey! Thank you for dropping by. Love the system. It works great when I want to play BECMI online. Please pass on my gratitude to the rest of your team.
@@rolanejo8512 Not that I'm seeing, but depending on how similar Whitebox is to OSE, that might not be true for long. Once we're wrapped up with our v2.0 release for OSE, I *think* we're finally moving ahead on our plans to extract OSE out into a set of tools to create most any system that uses D&D's six stats and five saves :)
Just a quick note to expand on my explanation of announcing spellcasting in the Movement Phase. What I meant to add is that it’s most relevant to Simultaneous Combat in Group Initiative, and Individual Initiative that uses the Combat Sequence Checklist, as these are the circumstances in which a spellcaster may best be interrupted. EDIT: It’s been brought to my attention that the Intentions (Declaration) phase is in the combat sequence checklist shown in the Basic DM’s Handbook on page 3. This is correct. I guess I knew there was a reason I mentioned I was using the RC. 😉 Thanks for watching!
Appreciate this clarification - I was gonna ask about how exactly an interrupted/lost spell casting would happen in Group Initiative but hadn't considered an initiative tie.
@@Agell I knew there was a reason for stating me using the RC rules. I don’t think Intentions ever really took off for the reasons I give in the video, which is why, I think, it’s absent from the RC. Again though. Nothing is broken either way. I love this game. ❤️
You're right to have the declaration for casters, even if not mentioned directly in the rules. Otherwise, it becomes the 5e uninterruptable spell-caster syndrome. While a hindrance for the spell-casting player characters, they'll thank you when they're up against a cadre of evil, spell-casting wizards. heh
I’ve always liked the combat order checklist as a concept but declarations in large groups are a complete nightmare in my experience, for 3 big reasons. 1. Keeping track of what everyone says is obnoxious. 2. Telling a player “sorry you can’t do that because it’s not what you said in the declarations phase” is even more obnoxious. 3. Whenever I ask new players what they intend to do, their instinct is to do it (e.g. move their tokens); so I’ve found myself telling them “Wait! Don’t do it yet.” Also obnoxious. Finally, tbh, if one side is taking its entire turn before the other side, the checklist is completely moot. In your example, you cited the tactical problem of one goblin getting in the goblin archer’s way during the movement phase. But since it’s still the movement phase of the goblins’ turn, the archer could just move, himself. Heck, since it’s still the movement phase, the first goblin could just be “re-moved” before the phase ends without violating any rules. (Edit - Sorry for the long comment). I think FM’s addition of “declare intentions” in the Set 1 Dungeon Master’s Rulebook is not intended to be an actual rule. Note that it’s not mentioned anywhere else in either of the basic set books, it’s just at the top of that one table. And it was also omitted from the RC. My only real question is are you supposed to follow the checklist if you’re doing paired combat? RC says to follow the checklist even in the event of a tie, but is silent on paired combat.
I do like the group initiative method to make the fight less predictable and potentially more dangerous. On a different note, I'd like to see a deep dive of BECMI magic in comparison to modern editions. I know it was mentioned in earlier videos, but would be interesting as well as some adjustments in those rules.
An interesting thing about reaction rolls using 2d6 is that you should have more neutral encounters than hostile encounters. This is a stark contrast to the myth of old school D&D as hack and slash.
A major thing i noticed in the basic rules is that many of the monsters have information on their typical dispositions, and both intelligent monsters and animals are unlikely to seek violence mindlessly. For this reason, mindless monsters can often be more dangerous, but are often weaker or appear in low numbers.
Your love and respect for this rules set really shines through. I know I'm just some wing nut out there on the internet but you really bring it with your videos. Well done.
Group initiative on the player side really allows for some nice strategies to be developed at the table. I like individual initiative too but sometime going that way means a loss of tactical discussion as you're more beholden to the dice rolls determining order for each PC.
Have you considered having both sides act in each phase, with the winning side acting first in that phase? Rather than alternating after the entire phase progression, I mean. Maybe this is how they intended the magic user to be able to be interrupted before the magic phase. The uncertainty of what might happen betweeen movement and your combat phase might also create interesting play too. Thanks for the videos!
Back in the day, we pretty much ignored the checklist (it seemed complex, and confounded my pre-teen comprehension) and did individual initiative taking full actions on each turn, much as done in modern D&D. I have to say however, seeing this example, and being able to wrap my head around it now, I can really appreciate the tactical potential in it, and will likely use group initiative with the combat checklist in the BECMI installment of my crazy "through the editions" mega campaign! Thanks for another excellent installment!
Some house rules if anyone is interested Crossbows: can fire before initiative if loaded and readied (Gygax ad&d) I also add the range modifier to damage, making crossbow bolts more powerful in close range by +1 and weaker at long range by -1 Duel wielding: roll 2d6 for damage. Drop the lowest Polearms: can be used to attack from the 2nd rank. Such as a phalanx formation. Shields: can "sunder". Players/DMs can choose to negate incoming damage by sacrificing their characters shield.
I have never played with these rules, but it seems very cool. One change I would consider is maybe have the movement phase after all the attacks. Which has two effects: making blindly charging an opponent a bit more dangerous, and making escaping a bit more too, without adding some sort of attack of opportunity. If the players find the combat going wrong from them and try to escape, they still have to survive through a whole round before getting away.
I recognize that my method isn’t by-the-books, but it works for me. 1) I decide privately what monsters will do, including surprise and morale 2) players give me their intentions 3) each player character rolls 2d6 for their initiative check. Monsters are almost always considered to have an initiative of 7. Halflings get +1 to this roll. 4) players who rolled 8 or higher resolve their intentions 5) monsters and players who rolled 7 resolve their intentions simultaneously 6) players who rolled 6 and lower resolve their intentions
I moved my 5e game over to group initiative (we use a d10). It works brilliantly. The players love it and so do I - it's fast, they can use team work, and the repeat turns makes it dangerous. The Combat Sequence Checklist is cool too but my players didn't like the less flexible movement. Thanks for your fantastic content too - love it! cheers
Ha! My party just cleared this section of the caves this weekend gone…. Another great video, reinforcing that I am running BECMI right after a 30 year hiatus. Thank You for uploading.
My Cyclopedia is my go to game in the D&D games... Your approch is what I like about this game (no bonus action, you dead when at zero, etc.) Nice video. Many thanxx
I strictly enforce line of sight for spells and missles so they can't just shoot through their own lines. Also shooting into melee has a chance of hitting anyone in that chaotic scrum, larger monsters may count as two or more. I can't remember if that was in BECMI, but its in the OSE rules I run. But however anyone does it is fine as long as everyone is having fun. Also I find group inititative better just for less time worrying about initiaitve order each round. Great video.
Line of sight is critical if one is using minis or a VTT such as in this video. Otherwise the precise locations of each PC & NPC is irrelevant. This is also born out by the round sequence itself; it is WHY movement precedes missile combat (and magic). There are implications obvious to seasoned gamers. I don't recall if Moldvay B/X mentions line of sight and I never had Holmes. However, AD&D core books were released BEFORE Moldvay/Cook B/X. The history of D&D is public knowledge. M/C B/X was intended to introduce people, whether war-gamers or not, to this new thing called role-playing. Without minis (computers didn't exist) it was impossible to manage complex combats with a high degree of accuracy or "realism." This is why, it seemed to me, the phases were written as such in M/C B/X. A beginner learned the concepts and then developed from there. Again, AD&D was available for when players were ready and able to handle more mechanics for combat. Having acquired AD&D a year before M/C B/X was released there was no way my friends and I could "go backward." Part of the fun was the challenge. That's right! We strove to read and try to understand the "high Gygaxian" and were proud of it though often humbled in our attempts. Having such VTTs and NOT using line of sight is counter-intuitive at best. Although fantasy, the availability of the VTT then DETRACTS from the experience if one ignores line of sight. Would one ignore the area of effect of sleep or fire-ball? .
I was never a fan of hitting your own when shooting into melee, with the possible exception of critical misses if using them. Despite the arguments for chaos of battle and scrum and all, I find that it hampers and frustrates missile focused characters and subtracts rather than adds fun m
I think my preference would be to use the Group Initiative (at least for the monsters), but run each phase for both groups consecutively rather than one side all phases first. I would likely run the whole scene with the original initiative rolls, too, to prevent a sudden double action opportunity. For instance, in Movement Phase, first group moves and then the other. So in the case of the goblins rushing towards the PCs, the PCs have to rush to counter the goblins or to stay put (using missile weapons) and hence give the goblins the possibility of swarming them in the more open intersection the following round. Once moving to the Melee Phase, the Goblins would get their attacks first (since they won the initiative), and the PCs only afterwards. This also gives the goblins a chance to interrupt the spell casting, as I would insist on it being declared at the beginning of the movement phase, so the enemy's missile phase comes before the spell-casting. To be honest, I would probably move the spell-casting to be contemporaneous with the melee, so that if the spellcaster loses initiative, even melee opponents can ring his bell before the spell goes off.
Concerning spell interruption: announcing spell casting is one thing I always require before the initiative is rolled. And it's assumed that they begin the act of casting immediately. If the group loses initiative then that's when there's a chance for an interruption.
I ran a Swords and Wizardy campaign last year (OD&D) and loved the initiative system. It's similar to the combat checklist but the combat checklist actually mattered (unlike in BECMI) because the sides alternated through each phase. First the winners moved, then the losers. Then the winners fired missiles, then the losers, etc. Spells and melee were simultaneous. That's HUGE because of how deadly spells are in combat. Spellcasters have to declare their intention to cast a spell at the beginning of the round, and everyone can see them doing it. That draws missile fire like crazy because damage disrupts the spell. If you lose that, then your entire third-level party can suffer a TPK to a single first-level magic-user with a sleep spell. The fate of your entire party relies on two rolls: initiative, and the MU rolling to see the total HD affected. I love my BECMI but without the alternating phases, the impact of the combat checklist is very watered down. Group initiative with BECMI was simple and fast (and it was Basic D&D, after all) but I prefer the Swords and Wizardry version.
@@becmiberserker Yeah i am doing well, still working on my TTRPG, these videos you make help alot with thinking about game concepts. How are you these days?
My initiative house rule was and is: Roll once for each side and then apply dex or halfling bonus (or fast monster). This is IMO a happy medium of efficiency for the table, while not nerfing the already weak Thief and Halfling. It means a thief actually has a prayer of getting their backstab off. Anyway, great video!
In the early days we used standard initiative rules. Only occasionally using individual initiative for larger battles and even those were mostly small groups controlled by the PC. Later with AD&D we started using a D10 and dexterity modifiers which meant with 10 segments you went on the segment you rolled. The DM would decide how he wanted to group the monsters initiative. Possibly by weapon type, etc. As to the "checklist", we never really used it perse but we usually did movement before combat and spell casting.
in your example one group goes through the entire check list. And then the next. My first assumption was that each group would do each step in initiative order. (so the goblins would move, then the party would move. The goblins would make missile attacks, the players make missile attacks. ETC. That would mean iniative still gave you the advantage of striking first, but would avoid the common downside of going first, by getting to move and not attack like what happens to the goblins in the first round.
The checklist does state in part B that the group that wins the initiative goes through each step. Then part C states the other side takes all their steps. So RAW seems quite clear. That said, like I mentioned in the video, nothing is really broken by mixing it up.
Thanks for the video, really appreciate the effort you put into these. I am currently reviewing a lot of these old rules, hoping to get back into playing BECMI after a long hiatus. A few things which I would like to comment on, as my interpretation differs somewhat and you never know, it might help. There is one key paragraph in the Rules Cyclopedia, on pg.102 at the very start of the chapter on combat. This makes it clear that you can only take one action in combat, you can move or you can attack, not both. While the combat sequence lists multiple possible actions, each character can only choose one of these each round. A multi talented elf could not move, fire an arrow, cast a spell and then make a melee attack, he must pick one each round and wait for his turn in the sequence. This paragraph does make reference to the free 5' step allowed in addition to an attack, but that's it. The 5' step is also mentioned in the fighting withdrawal maneuver on pg.104 This is really key to the flow of combat as the initial encounter may involve one group using missile weapons, while another uses their actions to move forward to engage in melee. With regards to magic my interpretation has always been to use the same rule as for missile weapons, i.e. spells cannot be used at all in melee (within 5'). I've never liked rules for disrupting spells as characters get so few as it is, its very harsh to waste one mid casting.
Hello. This comes up quite a bit. The rules you state are contradicted by the text under Movement (page 103). In the section about Encounter Speed: “A character or monster may move his full encounter speed movement (1/3 normal movement in one round) and still make his attacks this round.” It’s often missed, and sometimes disputed, but as with all things BECMI, do what’s right for your group. 🙂
@@becmiberserker lol Talk about contradictory, that is the opposite page! Gotta love these rules 😀 Thanks for this, I will have to test out both ways and see which works best. I remember being confused about this when I played BECMI as a kid. Not that it mattered, we found a system that worked and always had a great time. No one ever got bogged down in rules and technicalities.
I just want to say thanks again. My group runs Castles and Crusades, not BECMI, but I like to mine BECMI for added content, interesting systems and inspiration. I ran my weekly session last night (having watched this video earlier in the day) and used the Initiative Checklist with group initiative. I have 7 player characters in the party I DM for, and they each bring 1 or 2 henchmen, so we've got a pretty sizeable group, and even first time, combat ran smooth and quick. Using a declaration phase before rolling initiative was great for making it possible for magic to be interrupted, and since C&C has certain combat maneuvers (such as charge) that you're supposed to declare at the top of the round and are committed to. Overall, I found it implemented near seamlessly, and because I was just calling 'Movement, go ahead and position yourselves" we weren't waiting around, everyone just put themselves where they were going in under a minute. "Missile attacks, declare targets and roll attacks" again, Something like 20 PCs (counting the henchmen) had most of their turn resolved within a minute. Same for "Magic" with spells declared at the top now resolving, then "Melee attacks, roll 'em." Overall, we were able to get through a round of combat within a couple minutes flat, and everyone stayed more engaged with what was going on, because they knew I wasn't going to call their name and wait for them to tune back in. They knew what they wanted to do, and would have to pipe up when that phase was called. It ran so damn well. Once again, cannot thank you enough, and BECMI might not be my game/edition of choice, but damn if it doesn't provide great concepts and rules that adapt easily. "You're able to bend it plenty and it never seems to break" really does seem to describe it.
Would love to see examples of this combat in a video? Any chance you and your group would make a video? I am a visual learner and really need to see things not just be told/explained/read about them.
I think I was somewhat familiar with BECMI combat mostly from readying about B/X combat, or its OSR successors at least. At first I thought it wasI was a 'You go/I go' phases, which sounds really interesting. I got it in the example, but now I can't stop thinking about what D&D combat would look like if it was *all* combatants move first, then ranged, then melee, so on through those phases. Really balance out those 'clash points'. I think the only tweak I'd do would be ranged before movement, giving the archers a chance to shoot enemies on the charge, instead of enemies being in their face before the arrow shot might make it more pallatable. Your playthrough was cool; ever thought about Solo play and putting that up?
If I were using this, I might change the order so that the magic phase came after hand to hand. This way a melee attack also has the possibility of disrupting spells.
We are using both group and individual initiative simultaneously. I (dm) rolls in secret group init. And ask if any player wish to roll individual, this is if they have a high dex or want to give it a shot to be first. Then we play through the combat sequence as in group version. Even the individual initiative players do movement , then range , magic , combat in order. I also ask before any initiative if there will be any player casting spells and I also let the players know if any monster is staring to casts a spell. This to reflect the rules of concentration. I love the modular possibility of this combat system . And thank for an amazing video ❤
In my upcoming campaign I'm planning on using group initiative with a declaration phase. The one bit of home brewing I intend to through in, is in round one and only round one, I'm permitting the players a minute or two of 'Meta' battle planning, to reflect that they are a unit that is used to fighting together and they can decide on their tactics for the battle between themselves.
It's been decades since I last played BECMI, so it was quite nostalgic to see again those rules and tables. After all the experience I have accumulated in the meantime, I would like to make a couple adjustments to the action sequence, though. The first would be to move the melee part before ranged and magic: using ranged weapons requires more time than swinging a melee weapon and chanting for a magic spell is even slower, so to me that would make more sense. The other would be to remove the initiative penalty for two-handed weapons: the reason is that, why they are undoubtedly slower than one-handed ones, usually they have more reach and so they also have an advantage for striking first, balancing out the hindrance. Instead of the declaration for spellcasting, which I deem unfair, tactically speaking, I would use a homerule: a spellcaster who takes damage during the melee or ranged phase has to pass a save vs paralysis or lose the spell, if he tries to cast in the magic phase of the same round. This gives spellcasters the chance to adapt their actions to the developing situation without being the only ones that have to declare their action beforehand.
Thanks Berserker! You may have mentioned this but another house rule - Group initiative is determined only at the beginning of the first round. The back and forth is not as dynamic but may make the game more survivable at lower levels. Cheers!
IME the group initiative and combat sequence works best when each player declares their planned actions for the round first, then initiative is rolled. That allows for the interruption of spellcasting, setting weapons against charges, etc. As an aside: you can see the D&D roots of the Warhammer minis game (and derivatives) as WH40K still essentially uses group initiative with the combat sequence (Move/Shoot/Melee), while the derived Middle Earth minis game uses alternating within a phase (both players move, both shoot, both melee) with sequence in the phase by group initiative. Which make a bit of historical sense as the earlier D&D combat is derived from Chainmail, which was a miniatures game!
I use individual initiative, but I roll for the monsters in groups. Also, and here is my most controversial house rule...I use Charisma for initiative. They roll a d6 plus Charisma modifier. All ties break in order of action priority, Thieves always win initiative ties, after that it's by action type: move only > magic > ranged > melee. Further ties are broken by Dx score. I use charisma because it's a dump stat, but also because Dexterity is not at all what makes somebody react first in a crisis situation...keeping cool, and knowing what people around you are doing is more important, and Charisma comes closest to that.
Love this video. Forgive me but I would like to address a couple of points. Firstly, in my estimation the rules are clear about spell casting. If you refer to the Basic set, players book pg 23. " The character must be able to gesture and speak normally to cast a spell. While casting a spell the cleric must stand and concentrate. Spells cannot be cast while walking or running..." This is also repeated almost exactly as written on page 38 for magic users. Therefore we can conclude that an interruption is basically any activity other than standing still, gesturing, concentrating and chanting or incanting. Anything that prevents one of these four components would be an interrupt and stops the spell casting as its is clear all four activities must be fulfilled. Secondly. Monsters also roll for surprise, the only exception to this is undead monsters who can never be surprised. Remember surprise is not literally 'Dumbfounded, rabbit staring in headlights' but simply simulates everything from monsters ambushing the players, to them doing something else, to actual fear and terror. In Arnieson D&D The rules inform the narrative, they do not dictate, so game terms should not always be taken literally. Lastly when a player character dies (poor Clarion), the monsters STILL roll for morale. This may seem to not make sense, its called morale right? Again, its not supposed to be literal. It actually serves two important purposes. From a game perspective it gives players a chance to avoid party wipes. From a narrative stand point it can enhance the story. A carrion crawler/spiders/snakes etc may attempt to flee with the body. Goblins may want to run off and tell thier boss 'they got one'. Again Morale is just a system its not the narrative. It why Undead are supposed to be feared, because they never run/leave. As an aside, I stongly recommend doing some rpg archeology and reading about how dave arnieson (the inventor of D&D and modern roleplaying games) actually played the game. Many from that time played in groups of 20-30 (no kidding), this is why we have a caller and a mapper, and initiative is done by sides. Many of the rules oddities and the 'early games' apparent difficulty is because of this. It was intended that players from smaller groups (less than 10) where supposed to hire retainers. Hope this helps. Love your channel.
Thanks for the kind comment. Just to address your points, none of which I actually disagree with: Spell interruption: I wanted to specifically address interruption in combat which, simplified, is just getting hit, which I think would count towards the conditions for interruption that you list. Monster surprise: In the video, I state that the party have been spotted by the goblins, meaning the goblins spotted them first, so by the time the party are also aware of the goblins, the goblins are not surprised. I do mention that both parties roll when I talk about surprise earlier in the video. Morale: I know there are listed circumstances for the rolling of morale, but as you elude to, these don’t make sense in certain circumstances. Perhaps I should have mentioned that, but this is essentially why I didn’t robotically follow that format. It might have seemed ridiculous to players unfamiliar to old school games that the goblins run away when they are winning (the fact they ultimately lost is moot). RPG Archeology: If I had more time I’d like to do a PhD in it. 🙂 These points aside, I really appreciate your comment and attention to detail. I tried to at least make it interesting without getting too granular and I’m glad you’re enjoying them. Thank you so much for watching.
Very much enjoyed the video, although my current EZD6 campaign doesn't have anything like the formal combat phase chart in BECMI I have used similar with previous games (such as Hyperboria) and have found that--although it can take some bit a while to get their heads around it--the system works well and doesn't unduly slow down in combat. I've actually found it tends to speed it up, since--rather than having to think about all your actions at once on a turn--you just have to think about movement, magic, combat or whatever phase it is.
I was thinking you were referencing the Dungeon Minister. His middle child plays a halfling named Touchberry . He's running a becmi campaign with his family and does recap videos You should check him out.
I run an OSE/BX group and while we initially found the checklist a little stiff it soon became natural. Also compared to 5e combat is much MUCH quicker. Once you get it in to it you find old school DnD is actually really smooth and hyper flexible.
Ah, the time-honored practice of looting your fallen comrades!😂 Nothing personal, it's just business. 😉🔥👻 Great video! I've shared a link to this channel with my BECMI/RC group.😎
This was a great review of the earlier edition, and how the mechanics could affect the strategy and outcomes differently than in newer editions. I've proposed side initiative to speed things up in my regular 5e game when we only have a short session. I also have Identical initiatives go simultaneously, because that's a great but of realism. Mutual kills are very possible. Missile combat before magic makes it all the harder to be a magic-user, since it's one more thing that could go wrong an fizzle a spell. Thanks for the great job and clear explanations, it's a fun trip down the memory dungeon.
Ive been using 2nd ed rules for initiative since that was released. Its the same way i do it in 5e as well, but for Becmi you just use it without the speed factor. We basically use the last thing you mentioned, individual and abandon checklist, but we roll a d20 with a + or - based on Dex stat.
An interesting hybrid would be group initiative, but take turns with each section of the checklist. Feels less like an 18th century volley battle with gentlemenly opponents, but might speed up play.
Definitely a preference for me. Doing each part via initiative score, rather than the whole group going through the whole thing separately, adds a bit more to it. 1st group moves, 2nd group moves, 1st group ranged, 2nd group ranged, etc. Bit more fluid and the action feels less disjointed. Of course, everyone played their old-school stuff differently, depending on preference, and such things aren't unusual. Best thing about BX/BECMI is it's ease of house ruling such things without mucking up other facets in so doing.
I have recently come back to BECMI for a nostalgia kick so I couldn't help double-checking a few things. Note that on page 3 of the red box Dungeon Master's Rulebook, the "Order of events in combat" does indeed have "Intentions" as the first item. However I can't find it anywhere else which may be why it is considered a house rule. In BECMI, movement is a discrete action and cannot be combined with other actions in the same round (unless
Check out the text in the top right corner of pg 103 of the RC, under Encounter Speed. It always gets missed. Admittedly, it’s a contradiction to earlier instructions but it makes the game more fun, in my opinion.
BECMI combat, with group initiative, is extremely fast, efficient, and fun! Because no one has a full action to puzzle out for 10 minutes, nor is anyone trying to coordinate future actions with people who lack the same tactical expertise, everything moves smoothly. Since movement happens first and simultaneously for all PCs, the tactical guy can make sure everyone is where they need to be, and then the person who wants to take forever maximizing their turns gets a simple question: missile, magic, or melee? I can run full rounds of BECMI in seconds, 5e takes minutes.
I always want to try group initiative but the phases are resolved by both sides before the next. Example: goblins win the initiative for the round, so the move first, then the PCs move, then goblins do all their missile, followed by the PCs doing their missile, etc.
19:00 ah yes... Now, this is the problem with the bit of vagueness of the rules, both in B/X and BECMI. How does the combat procedure work, and how does one even "interrupt" someone from spellcasting? One interpretation would be, to play the steps of combat round in a way not unlike how the original wargame, Chainmail, had it done: in case of B/X and BECMI, it would basically mean that first the party with initiative moves, then the losing party moves, then the winning party shoots, etc. Also, maybe there could be the interpretation that, during the magic phase, a caster *starts* casting a spell, and it's done during the magic phase of the next round - giving the opposition one melee phase, and one shooting phase (and potentially one magic phase) to stop them. There's that funky combat example from the old B/X handbook - it shows many things happening in a way that aren't actually fully supported by the "rules as written", like the party losing initiative, but the party's archer shooting at the hobgoblins charging them. While the RAW reading of the sequence seems to indicate that one party does everything first, and then the other party does everything second, the "staggering" of phases makes the combat more realistic, makes it easier to maintain formation, avoids stuff like one party not being able to attack because of not having a target during their "turn" and then getting whacked, despite higher initiative being considered better, and also works quite nicely with the "declaration" method - at least as long, as the declaration is less about specific movement on the grid, and more about the general course of action in fiction. This approach was implied in ADnD2e (even if it drops phases), and explicitly used in RuneQuest's Classic and Glorantha editions. 25:05 now hooold on a minute. You said that the book said that, aside from the inititive being personal, the checklist works the same as with group initiative - and yet, while with group initiative you had the whole side go through the checklist before having the other side go, here you have all characters go through one step of the checklist before having them resolve the next step... this is basically the the opposite of working in the same way! ...I'd prefer the latter method, anyway, it smooths over some of the "turn-based bullshit" 26:28 well, just for clarity, even the first book for BECMI mentioned an optional rule that allows surviving into a few negative HP... ... not that it would save this guy, probably.
If it had come up in the example then I would have done. Essentially, if a spell caster has announced they are casting a spell and they are hit with an attack before they can act in the Magic phase, then the spell is ruined and they lose the memorisation of that spell, regardless of damage amount. That’s it in a nutshell. Oh, and that’s if they survive of course. Magic Users are crunchy. 🙂
@@becmiberserker They better watch out for those pesky ranged fighters then. I don't see how they could be interupted by melee combat without using a declaration phase, but then again, if you are a MU in a melee fight, you have other concerns.
I've been using group initiative as I really like the straightforwardness. I let character with the best initiative bonus to roll with the bonus and give monsters a bonus where appropriate. I'm fine with players having a bit of an advantage. We haven't played BECMI /BX/OSE that much and fought fairly rarely so all the intricacies haven't been relevant yet. I think the idea was to have spellcasters announce intent to cast before initiative is rolled. But no spells in combat yet. I currently also run a game of 5e where i use round by round group initiative rolled first by the fastest PC and then going around the table in consecutive rounds. But each side only gets one individual to act and turns go back and forth between the groups.
During movement of the goblins would you let the players know if one of them were going to cast a spell? Pretending they had a shaman. It seems to me that would not do anything for interrupting the spell as you have each side go completely through the combat list before the other group gets a chance. How would a caster ever get interrupted if everyone on there side gets to go missile, magic, melee before the other side gets to do the same? This is where you lost me. I was always under the impression that you rolled initiative. Group A (won initiative) does movement, group B does movement. Group A does missile, group B does missile, Group A does magic, group B does magic (if someone was trying to do magic but got hit by a missile attack they lost the spell and it was not cast). Group A does melee, group B does melee. End of round? I always found trying to run combats to be a bit confusing. Also playing a magic user and losing your spell without being able to cast it has to be the worst. Not bad enough that you have low hp, no armor, take forever to get a level, but you also only know one spell and if you're interrupted then you lose it and are completely useless to the group. It just felt so stacked against a magic user. How hated are they? Spend every gp you earn trying to copy spells into your spell book and making a backup in case it gets stolen, destroyed, etc. And if you have any gp left you try to make some scrolls that would be useful in a few situations but useful enough to memorize that spell every day. Anyway, love that you take the time to put out this info, you do a good job and I look forward to more videos with more information and having more questions and discussions. Thanks!
I'll be frank, the combat order checklist for me is only really interesting in simultaneous combat, or alternating activation like you show re individual combat. I never liked individual initiative. But I frequently try out rules from different editions. The other thing I often wonder about is spell interruption, I mean a wizard spends all night memorizing spells, they can't wear armour, they only have limited spells at low level, and they have very few hitpoints, so do they really need to suffer from spell interuption as well? But I've recently been playing around with time segments from ad&d which is interesting. And that second play through is how so many of my starting engagements go lol. Really good example.
In my experience group initiative with the combat sequence speeds up combat as all players reach in to move their figures instead of everyone sitting and waiting for their turn.
my main problem with the BECMI sequence is or was the fixed order of things.... in modern iterations there is this "move + attack" or "double move" thing.. that is very ingrained in my way of thinking.. it took me some time to do the single-action (move being one of them) variant.. otherwise that combat sequence shatters on impact with the chaos of combat and freedom of choice...
I thought surprise was optional. That is the DM decides if surprise is likely and then rolls otherwise no surprise roll. Or did we inadvertently house rule a compulsory surprise step away?
It depends on the circumstances. In the book i think it gives an example of the party trying to quickly get out of a dungeon, meaning they are moving faster than usual, and as they round a corner they encounter some goblins or something. This is a prime opportunity for the dm to decide if there is a need for a surprise roll. The other obvious one is stuff like planned ambushes or maybe a PC kicks a door in a dungeon open after a theif successfully listens to see if there are creatures beyond the door. If the party knows there are creatures in there but the creatures would never know a door kick is coming they would roll surprise.
Thanks for making this video. We almost always rolled individual initiative and abandoned the checklist. You have inspired me to use individual initiative WITH the checklist in the next adventure I DM. I recently purchased Foundry and the advanced old school essentials foundry module. which mods do you use for your BECMI games?
I pretty much just use the OSE SRD pack and then drag those elements into the Actor and Items sections before editing bits that deviate slightly from BECMI. There's been hardly anything to change of I'm honest. Just the odd bit of spell description text here and there.
Wasn't the intentions phase mandatory in the Basic DM's book? I've read that not copying it to the RC was an error by the author of the latter book, maybe I remember wrong. And... one of the few OSR combat example not using the theater of mind. I was always sold that the D&D game was always theater of the mind, but here you demonstrated a full gridded map combat. Now I'm pondering, how was played in the times, without dry-erase maps or VTTs? Graph paper from notebook and miniatures?
@@becmiberserker Oh, my comment was absolutely positive! I don't follow played games on streaming, but informative video on D&D. And this is one of the few I've seen where the positioning of the miniatures (virtual ones, but still miniatures) had relevance. I'm happy to have seen this! :D
This phased turn system using the Combat Sequence Checklist really harkens back to D&D wargame forebears. It's very interesting, though. One of these days, when I find the time, I'll get a group together to give BECMI a try, although I might have to tweak things for ascending AC just for clarity.
@@becmiberserker that's what I have missed. I never added dex bonus it's only been 30 years and probably alot of unnecessary deaths. 😬 Looked at rulebook, how did I miss this. A very big thank you for your videos.
Hi BECMI Beserker,question in the first round of attack you allow the giblin archers to fire arrows even thou the other goblins are in the way,do you normally make this ruling when running games?
@@BX_Disciple The illustration is abstract. One might ask how much they are actually in the way or not. I would allow it on the basis it’s less fun not to. Obviously, if there are circumstances that suggest this is not a good idea I would cater to the requirement in the moment. The rules are a guide, not a straight jacket. 🙂
@@BX_Disciple With old school games like BECMI, it's best to lean into the fun. There can be some ridiculous moments, but that's when you pull out the 'roll for something something check' and watch the group lean forward in anticipation of success, or sometimes more hilarious, abject failure. Have a great game!
I know this is older, Beserker, but do you allow holding actions, and if so how would holding move and/or holding attacking (missile or HTH) work in the Combat Sequence Checklist for you? Thnx 👊
TBH I would do the old school thing and play it by ear. If it seems sensible and adds to the scenario then I’ll let things slide here and there. The only reason I’d be less inclined to take this tact with 3.x to 5th is that so many other aspects are dependant on this kind of tactic that a wrong call could have greater consequences. It’s that house of cards element that the later systems have. Pull on one bit and it starts to affect the structure. Hope that helps.
Excellent video as always. I got my group away from 5e, which I consider a win. Sadly, Descending Armor Class broke some of the players heads, so we're playing some Basic Fantasy RPG which has ascending. Nevermind that the chart at the bottom of the character sheet negates the confusion of DAC... I consider this a great step away from WotC nonetheless. Thanks for the push to go to some old school games! Highly likely I'm stealing this combat sequence for my game.
QQ: Page 102 rules cyclopedia says “During a round, characters can do one thing: move, attack, cast a spell, drink a potion…” What did I miss in this? (There is some leeway for a 5 ft. Move) Ta
The two basically contradict each other, with the text coming from two sources. Editing obviously missed it. I go with the rules on page 103. More fun, imo.
I have to be honest and say it wasn’t, but it’s turned out to be. 🙂 The names I used were the example names used for these classes in the Basic Rules. Touchberry was the example Halfling, and I guess they made an appearance in the Dungeon Minister’s game.
I'm sorry, but there is no solid reason to use descending Armor Class, or THAC0... it is the 1 big Hang Up I have with BECMI. I will however say I Love the Flavor, and many of the other Mechanics of BECMI, as well as All of your Videos
In your example combat you mention that squares are 5 feet each with the goblins moving 30 feet each. But if you look at many modules from the BECMI era, like Caves of Chaos from KOTBLs, the squares on all the maps are listed as 10 feet each, meaning they would only move 3 squares a round on the movement phase. How would you run /resolve that? Maybe a future video idea.
The map I used is 5’ per square and is still the same size as the map in the B2 module. So, 3 squares on the old map is the same distance as 6 squares on the new.
@@becmiberserker that certainly makes sense, it’s just resizing the grid, I’ve done this as well. But I was speaking more to the original design intentions of the game makers. How would you run it if you had to go “by the book” and not resize the grid? Would one character standing in the center of a square in a 10’ wide hall way now block that hallway so no monsters could pass him without fighting? Or would 4 characters be able to fill up one square in a sort of tight formation, with spears in the back row able to attack what is in ahead of the front row like the pole arm rules seem to imply? I’ve always just sort of winged these things as best I could, but there is always still confusion for me and my players.
@@danbrauch4174 I think the 10’ spacing thing is a legacy of D&D’s wargaming origins. However, as the game was played mostly theatre of the mind back then, character positioning was very much at the fiat of the DM, with input from the players. This led to the kind of gridless game I alluded to in my video and why I don’t even use 5’ spacing in BECMI when using a VTT. If I think a creature can fit in a space then I allow it. Without the need to satisfy 5’ spacing in the game, unlike 5e, then it isn’t really an issue. The only thing I insist on is that melee means being within 5’ of a foe, except for things like pole arms. But again, I judge things in the moment. Hope this helps.
@@becmiberserker I’ve always done something similar to what you describe. But I always assumed I must be missing something. Imagine how confusing all this must be for a kid in the 80s, with no frame of reference except for what the book in their hand had to say, to try and figure all this out. I really appreciate you discussing this with me and giving your thoughts. Thank you very much indeed.
@@danbrauch4174 😀 You know what? The funny thing is that without the internet or anyone else but your friends to help, you kind of figured it out. When things felt like they weren’t working then you changed them. It was kind of liberating really. No one told you that you were doing it wrong. You just got on with it and had fun. Nowadays we’re a little bit obsessed with the ‘right way to play’ that we forget we could just play how we want. No worries about answering your questions. I hope I helped.
23:26 BECMI doesn’t have guidelines for morale? Thought it was first hit, first death and every time there is a critical - but wouldn’t be surprised if I picked that up somewhere else.
You’re right that there are circumstances specified that dictate when to make a morale check, but the RC actual has Morale as an optional rule. I just used it to demonstrate use within the checklist. Hopefully, it still helped.
As far as magic been interrupted, I always assumed that magic goes at the same time as two -handed weapons. So as long as you do not have a two-handed weapon you attack before magic.
I think the idea is that, within the combat sequence checklist occurring in one round, you _are_ attacking and moving in the same round. It’s just divided up to account for the speed of different actions.
@@0den You can never move and cast a spell. Spellcasting requires you to stay in one place in BECMI. However, you may move and shoot an arrow, or move and attack with melee. Page 103 of the RC details this under the paragraph describing Encounter Speed.
This is clarified on page 103 of the RC under Encounter Speed. You can move up to your full Encounter Speed and attack. Movement in BECMI is often shown as 120’(40’) for example. The value in brackets is your Encounter Speed, which is 1/3 of your Normal Speed. Hope this helps.
Depending on which version of rules you use, this can happen. the 90s box set is explicit that you can't move and attack in the same round, but the BECMI rule books say you can. The Rules Cyclopedia puzzlingly has *both* rules in the same book contradicting each other.
@@Agell I thought that, until I spotted that it states you cannot “run” and do something else. It then stupidly mentions running only 20’ which causes the confusion I think. I stuck with the info on 103 as it makes for a better game, imo.
@@becmiberserker my group just found it not very fun that faster things can endlessly kite slower things. It almost begs the game to add combat maneuvers like "move and attack gives you -2 to hit" or whatever. We have had a fine time playing with the 5' movement maximum of you are going to melee/missile/magic.
As one of the developers for the OSE system for Foundry, I always feel a little flutter of pride when I see folks out in the wild putting it to use. I hope it's helped make your games easier and more fun to run!
Hey! Thank you for dropping by. Love the system. It works great when I want to play BECMI online. Please pass on my gratitude to the rest of your team.
Is there a Whitebox system for Foundry?
@@rolanejo8512 Not that I'm seeing, but depending on how similar Whitebox is to OSE, that might not be true for long. Once we're wrapped up with our v2.0 release for OSE, I *think* we're finally moving ahead on our plans to extract OSE out into a set of tools to create most any system that uses D&D's six stats and five saves :)
Just a quick note to expand on my explanation of announcing spellcasting in the Movement Phase. What I meant to add is that it’s most relevant to Simultaneous Combat in Group Initiative, and Individual Initiative that uses the Combat Sequence Checklist, as these are the circumstances in which a spellcaster may best be interrupted.
EDIT: It’s been brought to my attention that the Intentions (Declaration) phase is in the combat sequence checklist shown in the Basic DM’s Handbook on page 3. This is correct. I guess I knew there was a reason I mentioned I was using the RC. 😉
Thanks for watching!
Appreciate this clarification - I was gonna ask about how exactly an interrupted/lost spell casting would happen in Group Initiative but hadn't considered an initiative tie.
Spellcasting should be declared before initiative is rolled in the phase before initiative: Declare intentions. Basic DM book, page 3
:D
@@Agell I knew there was a reason for stating me using the RC rules. I don’t think Intentions ever really took off for the reasons I give in the video, which is why, I think, it’s absent from the RC. Again though. Nothing is broken either way.
I love this game. ❤️
You're right to have the declaration for casters, even if not mentioned directly in the rules. Otherwise, it becomes the 5e uninterruptable spell-caster syndrome. While a hindrance for the spell-casting player characters, they'll thank you when they're up against a cadre of evil, spell-casting wizards. heh
I’ve always liked the combat order checklist as a concept but declarations in large groups are a complete nightmare in my experience, for 3 big reasons. 1. Keeping track of what everyone says is obnoxious. 2. Telling a player “sorry you can’t do that because it’s not what you said in the declarations phase” is even more obnoxious. 3. Whenever I ask new players what they intend to do, their instinct is to do it (e.g. move their tokens); so I’ve found myself telling them “Wait! Don’t do it yet.” Also obnoxious.
Finally, tbh, if one side is taking its entire turn before the other side, the checklist is completely moot. In your example, you cited the tactical problem of one goblin getting in the goblin archer’s way during the movement phase. But since it’s still the movement phase of the goblins’ turn, the archer could just move, himself. Heck, since it’s still the movement phase, the first goblin could just be “re-moved” before the phase ends without violating any rules.
(Edit - Sorry for the long comment). I think FM’s addition of “declare intentions” in the Set 1 Dungeon Master’s Rulebook is not intended to be an actual rule. Note that it’s not mentioned anywhere else in either of the basic set books, it’s just at the top of that one table. And it was also omitted from the RC.
My only real question is are you supposed to follow the checklist if you’re doing paired combat? RC says to follow the checklist even in the event of a tie, but is silent on paired combat.
I do like the group initiative method to make the fight less predictable and potentially more dangerous.
On a different note, I'd like to see a deep dive of BECMI magic in comparison to modern editions. I know it was mentioned in earlier videos, but would be interesting as well as some adjustments in those rules.
I would also love a deep dive into magic. More magic user than cleric but magic in general.
Less slots, potent and versatile spells without the combat focus.
An interesting thing about reaction rolls using 2d6 is that you should have more neutral encounters than hostile encounters. This is a stark contrast to the myth of old school D&D as hack and slash.
That’s a really good point.
A major thing i noticed in the basic rules is that many of the monsters have information on their typical dispositions, and both intelligent monsters and animals are unlikely to seek violence mindlessly. For this reason, mindless monsters can often be more dangerous, but are often weaker or appear in low numbers.
Your love and respect for this rules set really shines through.
I know I'm just some wing nut out there on the internet but you really bring it with your videos.
Well done.
I appreciate that
“This Clarion’s gone quiet” 👏
Wow... nice job! Gotta love the nod to the Dungeon Minister there! Cool 😎 🤓👍
I was going through the comments to see if anyone else noted that too :)
@@vastlyblank Only one way to make it better....
Torchberry and make him attack with a flaming arrow.
Same i was about to put it .. His nickname is Torch berry now lol
Group initiative on the player side really allows for some nice strategies to be developed at the table. I like individual initiative too but sometime going that way means a loss of tactical discussion as you're more beholden to the dice rolls determining order for each PC.
Have you considered having both sides act in each phase, with the winning side acting first in that phase? Rather than alternating after the entire phase progression, I mean. Maybe this is how they intended the magic user to be able to be interrupted before the magic phase. The uncertainty of what might happen betweeen movement and your combat phase might also create interesting play too.
Thanks for the videos!
This is exactly what I was thinking as soon as the combat started!
Another great video BB.
This channel is the best BECMI channel on YT. Looking forward to your next one!
That means a lot. Thank you.
Back in the day, we pretty much ignored the checklist (it seemed complex, and confounded my pre-teen comprehension) and did individual initiative taking full actions on each turn, much as done in modern D&D. I have to say however, seeing this example, and being able to wrap my head around it now, I can really appreciate the tactical potential in it, and will likely use group initiative with the combat checklist in the BECMI installment of my crazy "through the editions" mega campaign! Thanks for another excellent installment!
Some house rules if anyone is interested
Crossbows: can fire before initiative if loaded and readied (Gygax ad&d) I also add the range modifier to damage, making crossbow bolts more powerful in close range by +1 and weaker at long range by -1
Duel wielding: roll 2d6 for damage. Drop the lowest
Polearms: can be used to attack from the 2nd rank. Such as a phalanx formation.
Shields: can "sunder". Players/DMs can choose to negate incoming damage by sacrificing their characters shield.
I have never played with these rules, but it seems very cool. One change I would consider is maybe have the movement phase after all the attacks. Which has two effects: making blindly charging an opponent a bit more dangerous, and making escaping a bit more too, without adding some sort of attack of opportunity. If the players find the combat going wrong from them and try to escape, they still have to survive through a whole round before getting away.
I recognize that my method isn’t by-the-books, but it works for me.
1) I decide privately what monsters will do, including surprise and morale
2) players give me their intentions
3) each player character rolls 2d6 for their initiative check. Monsters are almost always considered to have an initiative of 7. Halflings get +1 to this roll.
4) players who rolled 8 or higher resolve their intentions
5) monsters and players who rolled 7 resolve their intentions simultaneously
6) players who rolled 6 and lower resolve their intentions
Fantastic job! This is what I remember from way, way back in the day, when I was in middle school.
Fantastic video, have been wanting to learn about how to play BECMI for ages and stumbling onto your channel has been a huge stroke of luck.
You’re welcome.
I moved my 5e game over to group initiative (we use a d10). It works brilliantly. The players love it and so do I - it's fast, they can use team work, and the repeat turns makes it dangerous.
The Combat Sequence Checklist is cool too but my players didn't like the less flexible movement.
Thanks for your fantastic content too - love it!
cheers
You’re welcome!
In my stripped down 5E game we use a D6, more chance of a tie and simultaneous combaat.
Ha! My party just cleared this section of the caves this weekend gone…. Another great video, reinforcing that I am running BECMI right after a 30 year hiatus. Thank You for uploading.
You’re welcome!
What I found interesting was that you rolled your morale checks for the goblins individually. I’ve always read that as a group roll
A few people have said that. Whatever works I guess. 🙂
My Cyclopedia is my go to game in the D&D games...
Your approch is what I like about this game (no bonus action, you dead when at zero, etc.)
Nice video. Many thanxx
You’re more than welcome.
not even a Save vs Death. Harsh. ;)
I strictly enforce line of sight for spells and missles so they can't just shoot through their own lines. Also shooting into melee has a chance of hitting anyone in that chaotic scrum, larger monsters may count as two or more. I can't remember if that was in BECMI, but its in the OSE rules I run. But however anyone does it is fine as long as everyone is having fun. Also I find group inititative better just for less time worrying about initiaitve order each round. Great video.
Line of sight is critical if one is using minis or a VTT such as in this video. Otherwise the precise locations of each PC & NPC is irrelevant. This is also born out by the round sequence itself; it is WHY movement precedes missile combat (and magic). There are implications obvious to seasoned gamers. I don't recall if Moldvay B/X mentions line of sight and I never had Holmes. However, AD&D core books were released BEFORE Moldvay/Cook B/X. The history of D&D is public knowledge. M/C B/X was intended to introduce people, whether war-gamers or not, to this new thing called role-playing. Without minis (computers didn't exist) it was impossible to manage complex combats with a high degree of accuracy or "realism." This is why, it seemed to me, the phases were written as such in M/C B/X. A beginner learned the concepts and then developed from there. Again, AD&D was available for when players were ready and able to handle more mechanics for combat. Having acquired AD&D a year before M/C B/X was released there was no way my friends and I could "go backward." Part of the fun was the challenge. That's right! We strove to read and try to understand the "high Gygaxian" and were proud of it though often humbled in our attempts. Having such VTTs and NOT using line of sight is counter-intuitive at best. Although fantasy, the availability of the VTT then DETRACTS from the experience if one ignores line of sight. Would one ignore the area of effect of sleep or fire-ball?
.
I was never a fan of hitting your own when shooting into melee, with the possible exception of critical misses if using them. Despite the arguments for chaos of battle and scrum and all, I find that it hampers and frustrates missile focused characters and subtracts rather than adds fun m
@@kontrarien5721 It definitely requires characters to be prepared for both up close and ranged combat.
Great overview of the rules and options. Thanks for putting this together!
You’re welcome.
I think my preference would be to use the Group Initiative (at least for the monsters), but run each phase for both groups consecutively rather than one side all phases first. I would likely run the whole scene with the original initiative rolls, too, to prevent a sudden double action opportunity.
For instance, in Movement Phase, first group moves and then the other. So in the case of the goblins rushing towards the PCs, the PCs have to rush to counter the goblins or to stay put (using missile weapons) and hence give the goblins the possibility of swarming them in the more open intersection the following round. Once moving to the Melee Phase, the Goblins would get their attacks first (since they won the initiative), and the PCs only afterwards. This also gives the goblins a chance to interrupt the spell casting, as I would insist on it being declared at the beginning of the movement phase, so the enemy's missile phase comes before the spell-casting. To be honest, I would probably move the spell-casting to be contemporaneous with the melee, so that if the spellcaster loses initiative, even melee opponents can ring his bell before the spell goes off.
I was running it that way when running S&W but OSE was back to side by side. So I may house rule that when my game starts back up.
Yes, that's how Swords & Wizardry does it.
Concerning spell interruption: announcing spell casting is one thing I always require before the initiative is rolled. And it's assumed that they begin the act of casting immediately. If the group loses initiative then that's when there's a chance for an interruption.
I ran a Swords and Wizardy campaign last year (OD&D) and loved the initiative system. It's similar to the combat checklist but the combat checklist actually mattered (unlike in BECMI) because the sides alternated through each phase. First the winners moved, then the losers. Then the winners fired missiles, then the losers, etc. Spells and melee were simultaneous.
That's HUGE because of how deadly spells are in combat. Spellcasters have to declare their intention to cast a spell at the beginning of the round, and everyone can see them doing it. That draws missile fire like crazy because damage disrupts the spell.
If you lose that, then your entire third-level party can suffer a TPK to a single first-level magic-user with a sleep spell. The fate of your entire party relies on two rolls: initiative, and the MU rolling to see the total HD affected.
I love my BECMI but without the alternating phases, the impact of the combat checklist is very watered down. Group initiative with BECMI was simple and fast (and it was Basic D&D, after all) but I prefer the Swords and Wizardry version.
That was a great comparison.
Fantastic video. Envious of your ability to present so much information cleanly and present it on screen!
I really appreciate that. Thank you.
Once again you give me lots of ideas to reflect upon. What was once old will be new again!
Hey, ITSaTrap. Hope you’re well.
@@becmiberserker Yeah i am doing well, still working on my TTRPG, these videos you make help alot with thinking about game concepts. How are you these days?
@@ITSaTRAP0001 Happy with how the channel is growing and the community it's building. I get a lot of positive comments about the viking portrait. :)
@@becmiberserker Thats great to hear. Im very happy to watch this channel grow and be a part of its journey.
Amazing! I'm trying figure out a combat sequence like The One Ring model in Old-School. There is a perfect solution. Thank you.
Glad it helped!
My initiative house rule was and is:
Roll once for each side and then apply dex or halfling bonus (or fast monster). This is IMO a happy medium of efficiency for the table, while not nerfing the already weak Thief and Halfling. It means a thief actually has a prayer of getting their backstab off. Anyway, great video!
In the early days we used standard initiative rules. Only occasionally using individual initiative for larger battles and even those were mostly small groups controlled by the PC.
Later with AD&D we started using a D10 and dexterity modifiers which meant with 10 segments you went on the segment you rolled. The DM would decide how he wanted to group the monsters initiative. Possibly by weapon type, etc.
As to the "checklist", we never really used it perse but we usually did movement before combat and spell casting.
in your example one group goes through the entire check list. And then the next. My first assumption was that each group would do each step in initiative order. (so the goblins would move, then the party would move. The goblins would make missile attacks, the players make missile attacks. ETC.
That would mean iniative still gave you the advantage of striking first, but would avoid the common downside of going first, by getting to move and not attack like what happens to the goblins in the first round.
The checklist does state in part B that the group that wins the initiative goes through each step. Then part C states the other side takes all their steps. So RAW seems quite clear. That said, like I mentioned in the video, nothing is really broken by mixing it up.
Thanks for the video, really appreciate the effort you put into these. I am currently reviewing a lot of these old rules, hoping to get back into playing BECMI after a long hiatus.
A few things which I would like to comment on, as my interpretation differs somewhat and you never know, it might help.
There is one key paragraph in the Rules Cyclopedia, on pg.102 at the very start of the chapter on combat. This makes it clear that you can only take one action in combat, you can move or you can attack, not both. While the combat sequence lists multiple possible actions, each character can only choose one of these each round. A multi talented elf could not move, fire an arrow, cast a spell and then make a melee attack, he must pick one each round and wait for his turn in the sequence.
This paragraph does make reference to the free 5' step allowed in addition to an attack, but that's it. The 5' step is also mentioned in the fighting withdrawal maneuver on pg.104
This is really key to the flow of combat as the initial encounter may involve one group using missile weapons, while another uses their actions to move forward to engage in melee.
With regards to magic my interpretation has always been to use the same rule as for missile weapons, i.e. spells cannot be used at all in melee (within 5'). I've never liked rules for disrupting spells as characters get so few as it is, its very harsh to waste one mid casting.
Hello. This comes up quite a bit. The rules you state are contradicted by the text under Movement (page 103). In the section about Encounter Speed: “A character or monster may move his full encounter speed movement (1/3 normal movement in one round) and still make his attacks this round.”
It’s often missed, and sometimes disputed, but as with all things BECMI, do what’s right for your group. 🙂
@@becmiberserker lol Talk about contradictory, that is the opposite page! Gotta love these rules 😀
Thanks for this, I will have to test out both ways and see which works best.
I remember being confused about this when I played BECMI as a kid. Not that it mattered, we found a system that worked and always had a great time. No one ever got bogged down in rules and technicalities.
This is the best thing I ever saw.
I just want to say thanks again. My group runs Castles and Crusades, not BECMI, but I like to mine BECMI for added content, interesting systems and inspiration. I ran my weekly session last night (having watched this video earlier in the day) and used the Initiative Checklist with group initiative. I have 7 player characters in the party I DM for, and they each bring 1 or 2 henchmen, so we've got a pretty sizeable group, and even first time, combat ran smooth and quick. Using a declaration phase before rolling initiative was great for making it possible for magic to be interrupted, and since C&C has certain combat maneuvers (such as charge) that you're supposed to declare at the top of the round and are committed to.
Overall, I found it implemented near seamlessly, and because I was just calling 'Movement, go ahead and position yourselves" we weren't waiting around, everyone just put themselves where they were going in under a minute. "Missile attacks, declare targets and roll attacks" again, Something like 20 PCs (counting the henchmen) had most of their turn resolved within a minute. Same for "Magic" with spells declared at the top now resolving, then "Melee attacks, roll 'em." Overall, we were able to get through a round of combat within a couple minutes flat, and everyone stayed more engaged with what was going on, because they knew I wasn't going to call their name and wait for them to tune back in. They knew what they wanted to do, and would have to pipe up when that phase was called. It ran so damn well.
Once again, cannot thank you enough, and BECMI might not be my game/edition of choice, but damn if it doesn't provide great concepts and rules that adapt easily.
"You're able to bend it plenty and it never seems to break" really does seem to describe it.
You’re more than welcome. Thanks for watching.
Would love to see examples of this combat in a video? Any chance you and your group would make a video? I am a visual learner and really need to see things not just be told/explained/read about them.
I think I was somewhat familiar with BECMI combat mostly from readying about B/X combat, or its OSR successors at least. At first I thought it wasI was a 'You go/I go' phases, which sounds really interesting. I got it in the example, but now I can't stop thinking about what D&D combat would look like if it was *all* combatants move first, then ranged, then melee, so on through those phases. Really balance out those 'clash points'. I think the only tweak I'd do would be ranged before movement, giving the archers a chance to shoot enemies on the charge, instead of enemies being in their face before the arrow shot might make it more pallatable.
Your playthrough was cool; ever thought about Solo play and putting that up?
Time! I need more time!!
Kudos for using Foundry. Having DMed in multiple VTTs, Foundry is my favorite by far.
It takes a bit of getting used to in terms of modules etc, but it’s my favourite, most of all because it’s subscription free.
If I were using this, I might change the order so that the magic phase came after hand to hand. This way a melee attack also has the possibility of disrupting spells.
We are using both group and individual initiative simultaneously. I (dm) rolls in secret group init. And ask if any player wish to roll individual, this is if they have a high dex or want to give it a shot to be first. Then we play through the combat sequence as in group version. Even the individual initiative players do movement , then range , magic , combat in order.
I also ask before any initiative if there will be any player casting spells and I also let the players know if any monster is staring to casts a spell. This to reflect the rules of concentration.
I love the modular possibility of this combat system .
And thank for an amazing video ❤
You’re more than welcome. Thanks for coming back to watch.
In my upcoming campaign I'm planning on using group initiative with a declaration phase. The one bit of home brewing I intend to through in, is in round one and only round one, I'm permitting the players a minute or two of 'Meta' battle planning, to reflect that they are a unit that is used to fighting together and they can decide on their tactics for the battle between themselves.
It's been decades since I last played BECMI, so it was quite nostalgic to see again those rules and tables.
After all the experience I have accumulated in the meantime, I would like to make a couple adjustments to the action sequence, though. The first would be to move the melee part before ranged and magic: using ranged weapons requires more time than swinging a melee weapon and chanting for a magic spell is even slower, so to me that would make more sense.
The other would be to remove the initiative penalty for two-handed weapons: the reason is that, why they are undoubtedly slower than one-handed ones, usually they have more reach and so they also have an advantage for striking first, balancing out the hindrance.
Instead of the declaration for spellcasting, which I deem unfair, tactically speaking, I would use a homerule: a spellcaster who takes damage during the melee or ranged phase has to pass a save vs paralysis or lose the spell, if he tries to cast in the magic phase of the same round. This gives spellcasters the chance to adapt their actions to the developing situation without being the only ones that have to declare their action beforehand.
Thanks Berserker! You may have mentioned this but another house rule - Group initiative is determined only at the beginning of the first round. The back and forth is not as dynamic but may make the game more survivable at lower levels. Cheers!
Yup. I’ve seen people do this.
IME the group initiative and combat sequence works best when each player declares their planned actions for the round first, then initiative is rolled. That allows for the interruption of spellcasting, setting weapons against charges, etc.
As an aside: you can see the D&D roots of the Warhammer minis game (and derivatives) as WH40K still essentially uses group initiative with the combat sequence (Move/Shoot/Melee), while the derived Middle Earth minis game uses alternating within a phase (both players move, both shoot, both melee) with sequence in the phase by group initiative. Which make a bit of historical sense as the earlier D&D combat is derived from Chainmail, which was a miniatures game!
In group initiative would slow weapon welders go at the same time as their side or would they all act simultaneously at the end?
There is no such thing as slow weapons when using group initiative. Two-handed (slow) weapons only become a factor when using Individual initiative.
I use individual initiative, but I roll for the monsters in groups. Also, and here is my most controversial house rule...I use Charisma for initiative. They roll a d6 plus Charisma modifier.
All ties break in order of action priority, Thieves always win initiative ties, after that it's by action type: move only > magic > ranged > melee. Further ties are broken by Dx score.
I use charisma because it's a dump stat, but also because Dexterity is not at all what makes somebody react first in a crisis situation...keeping cool, and knowing what people around you are doing is more important, and Charisma comes closest to that.
Love this video. Forgive me but I would like to address a couple of points.
Firstly, in my estimation the rules are clear about spell casting. If you refer to the Basic set, players book pg 23. " The character must be able to gesture and speak normally to cast a spell. While casting a spell the cleric must stand and concentrate. Spells cannot be cast while walking or running..." This is also repeated almost exactly as written on page 38 for magic users. Therefore we can conclude that an interruption is basically any activity other than standing still, gesturing, concentrating and chanting or incanting. Anything that prevents one of these four components would be an interrupt and stops the spell casting as its is clear all four activities must be fulfilled.
Secondly. Monsters also roll for surprise, the only exception to this is undead monsters who can never be surprised. Remember surprise is not literally 'Dumbfounded, rabbit staring in headlights' but simply simulates everything from monsters ambushing the players, to them doing something else, to actual fear and terror. In Arnieson D&D The rules inform the narrative, they do not dictate, so game terms should not always be taken literally.
Lastly when a player character dies (poor Clarion), the monsters STILL roll for morale. This may seem to not make sense, its called morale right? Again, its not supposed to be literal. It actually serves two important purposes. From a game perspective it gives players a chance to avoid party wipes. From a narrative stand point it can enhance the story. A carrion crawler/spiders/snakes etc may attempt to flee with the body. Goblins may want to run off and tell thier boss 'they got one'. Again Morale is just a system its not the narrative. It why Undead are supposed to be feared, because they never run/leave.
As an aside, I stongly recommend doing some rpg archeology and reading about how dave arnieson (the inventor of D&D and modern roleplaying games) actually played the game. Many from that time played in groups of 20-30 (no kidding), this is why we have a caller and a mapper, and initiative is done by sides. Many of the rules oddities and the 'early games' apparent difficulty is because of this. It was intended that players from smaller groups (less than 10) where supposed to hire retainers.
Hope this helps. Love your channel.
Thanks for the kind comment. Just to address your points, none of which I actually disagree with:
Spell interruption: I wanted to specifically address interruption in combat which, simplified, is just getting hit, which I think would count towards the conditions for interruption that you list.
Monster surprise: In the video, I state that the party have been spotted by the goblins, meaning the goblins spotted them first, so by the time the party are also aware of the goblins, the goblins are not surprised. I do mention that both parties roll when I talk about surprise earlier in the video.
Morale: I know there are listed circumstances for the rolling of morale, but as you elude to, these don’t make sense in certain circumstances. Perhaps I should have mentioned that, but this is essentially why I didn’t robotically follow that format. It might have seemed ridiculous to players unfamiliar to old school games that the goblins run away when they are winning (the fact they ultimately lost is moot).
RPG Archeology: If I had more time I’d like to do a PhD in it. 🙂
These points aside, I really appreciate your comment and attention to detail. I tried to at least make it interesting without getting too granular and I’m glad you’re enjoying them. Thank you so much for watching.
Very much enjoyed the video, although my current EZD6 campaign doesn't have anything like the formal combat phase chart in BECMI I have used similar with previous games (such as Hyperboria) and have found that--although it can take some bit a while to get their heads around it--the system works well and doesn't unduly slow down in combat. I've actually found it tends to speed it up, since--rather than having to think about all your actions at once on a turn--you just have to think about movement, magic, combat or whatever phase it is.
I love that you added Touchberry to your video! But what about Fauxfire, Bob Johnny, and Fleetwood?😉
Touchberry is the halfling in the Basic Player’s Manual. Felonius, Clarion, Rolf and Belrain are also represented in that book.
I was thinking you were referencing the Dungeon Minister. His middle child plays a halfling named Touchberry . He's running a becmi campaign with his family and does recap videos
You should check him out.
@@henrycaltagirone3959 Oh I do. Great fun and lots of enthusiasm. 🙂
@@becmiberserkerYou had me at Felonius...
I run an OSE/BX group and while we initially found the checklist a little stiff it soon became natural. Also compared to 5e combat is much MUCH quicker. Once you get it in to it you find old school DnD is actually really smooth and hyper flexible.
Ah, the time-honored practice of looting your fallen comrades!😂 Nothing personal, it's just business. 😉🔥👻 Great video! I've shared a link to this channel with my BECMI/RC group.😎
Thanks for that. 🙂
Thanks for doing this bud. Very helpful.
Glad to help.
Great video. Thanks!
Another good and controversial theme is, time/movement/encumbrance, of you want a topic for more videos like this 😀
This was a great review of the earlier edition, and how the mechanics could affect the strategy and outcomes differently than in newer editions. I've proposed side initiative to speed things up in my regular 5e game when we only have a short session. I also have Identical initiatives go simultaneously, because that's a great but of realism. Mutual kills are very possible. Missile combat before magic makes it all the harder to be a magic-user, since it's one more thing that could go wrong an fizzle a spell. Thanks for the great job and clear explanations, it's a fun trip down the memory dungeon.
Thanks and you’re welcome.
That was of my teenage self in battle.... lack of planning and living on wits alone was my style and doom.😅
Nice example of system combat.
Thank you!
I would have done a sigle morale check for the entire group.
Ive been using 2nd ed rules for initiative since that was released. Its the same way i do it in 5e as well, but for Becmi you just use it without the speed factor. We basically use the last thing you mentioned, individual and abandon checklist, but we roll a d20 with a + or - based on Dex stat.
An interesting hybrid would be group initiative, but take turns with each section of the checklist. Feels less like an 18th century volley battle with gentlemenly opponents, but might speed up play.
Definitely a preference for me. Doing each part via initiative score, rather than the whole group going through the whole thing separately, adds a bit more to it. 1st group moves, 2nd group moves, 1st group ranged, 2nd group ranged, etc. Bit more fluid and the action feels less disjointed. Of course, everyone played their old-school stuff differently, depending on preference, and such things aren't unusual. Best thing about BX/BECMI is it's ease of house ruling such things without mucking up other facets in so doing.
I have recently come back to BECMI for a nostalgia kick so I couldn't help double-checking a few things. Note that on page 3 of the red box Dungeon Master's Rulebook, the "Order of events in combat" does indeed have "Intentions" as the first item. However I can't find it anywhere else which may be why it is considered a house rule.
In BECMI, movement is a discrete action and cannot be combined with other actions in the same round (unless
Check out the text in the top right corner of pg 103 of the RC, under Encounter Speed. It always gets missed.
Admittedly, it’s a contradiction to earlier instructions but it makes the game more fun, in my opinion.
Cool, thanks for pointing that out. That's a pretty big contradiction.
BECMI combat, with group initiative, is extremely fast, efficient, and fun! Because no one has a full action to puzzle out for 10 minutes, nor is anyone trying to coordinate future actions with people who lack the same tactical expertise, everything moves smoothly. Since movement happens first and simultaneously for all PCs, the tactical guy can make sure everyone is where they need to be, and then the person who wants to take forever maximizing their turns gets a simple question: missile, magic, or melee? I can run full rounds of BECMI in seconds, 5e takes minutes.
I always want to try group initiative but the phases are resolved by both sides before the next. Example: goblins win the initiative for the round, so the move first, then the PCs move, then goblins do all their missile, followed by the PCs doing their missile, etc.
19:00 ah yes...
Now, this is the problem with the bit of vagueness of the rules, both in B/X and BECMI. How does the combat procedure work, and how does one even "interrupt" someone from spellcasting?
One interpretation would be, to play the steps of combat round in a way not unlike how the original wargame, Chainmail, had it done: in case of B/X and BECMI, it would basically mean that first the party with initiative moves, then the losing party moves, then the winning party shoots, etc. Also, maybe there could be the interpretation that, during the magic phase, a caster *starts* casting a spell, and it's done during the magic phase of the next round - giving the opposition one melee phase, and one shooting phase (and potentially one magic phase) to stop them.
There's that funky combat example from the old B/X handbook - it shows many things happening in a way that aren't actually fully supported by the "rules as written", like the party losing initiative, but the party's archer shooting at the hobgoblins charging them.
While the RAW reading of the sequence seems to indicate that one party does everything first, and then the other party does everything second, the "staggering" of phases makes the combat more realistic, makes it easier to maintain formation, avoids stuff like one party not being able to attack because of not having a target during their "turn" and then getting whacked, despite higher initiative being considered better, and also works quite nicely with the "declaration" method - at least as long, as the declaration is less about specific movement on the grid, and more about the general course of action in fiction. This approach was implied in ADnD2e (even if it drops phases), and explicitly used in RuneQuest's Classic and Glorantha editions.
25:05 now hooold on a minute. You said that the book said that, aside from the inititive being personal, the checklist works the same as with group initiative - and yet, while with group initiative you had the whole side go through the checklist before having the other side go, here you have all characters go through one step of the checklist before having them resolve the next step... this is basically the the opposite of working in the same way!
...I'd prefer the latter method, anyway, it smooths over some of the "turn-based bullshit"
26:28 well, just for clarity, even the first book for BECMI mentioned an optional rule that allows surviving into a few negative HP...
... not that it would save this guy, probably.
I always read it as the magic can be interrupted to mean that each phase does both sides by order of initiative.
Interesting video, I just wish you'd covered the spell interruption.
If it had come up in the example then I would have done. Essentially, if a spell caster has announced they are casting a spell and they are hit with an attack before they can act in the Magic phase, then the spell is ruined and they lose the memorisation of that spell, regardless of damage amount. That’s it in a nutshell. Oh, and that’s if they survive of course. Magic Users are crunchy. 🙂
@@becmiberserker They better watch out for those pesky ranged fighters then. I don't see how they could be interupted by melee combat without using a declaration phase, but then again, if you are a MU in a melee fight, you have other concerns.
I've been using group initiative as I really like the straightforwardness. I let character with the best initiative bonus to roll with the bonus and give monsters a bonus where appropriate. I'm fine with players having a bit of an advantage. We haven't played BECMI /BX/OSE that much and fought fairly rarely so all the intricacies haven't been relevant yet. I think the idea was to have spellcasters announce intent to cast before initiative is rolled. But no spells in combat yet.
I currently also run a game of 5e where i use round by round group initiative rolled first by the fastest PC and then going around the table in consecutive rounds. But each side only gets one individual to act and turns go back and forth between the groups.
Sounds great fun!
During movement of the goblins would you let the players know if one of them were going to cast a spell? Pretending they had a shaman.
It seems to me that would not do anything for interrupting the spell as you have each side go completely through the combat list before the other group gets a chance. How would a caster ever get interrupted if everyone on there side gets to go missile, magic, melee before the other side gets to do the same? This is where you lost me.
I was always under the impression that you rolled initiative. Group A (won initiative) does movement, group B does movement. Group A does missile, group B does missile, Group A does magic, group B does magic (if someone was trying to do magic but got hit by a missile attack they lost the spell and it was not cast). Group A does melee, group B does melee. End of round?
I always found trying to run combats to be a bit confusing. Also playing a magic user and losing your spell without being able to cast it has to be the worst. Not bad enough that you have low hp, no armor, take forever to get a level, but you also only know one spell and if you're interrupted then you lose it and are completely useless to the group. It just felt so stacked against a magic user. How hated are they? Spend every gp you earn trying to copy spells into your spell book and making a backup in case it gets stolen, destroyed, etc. And if you have any gp left you try to make some scrolls that would be useful in a few situations but useful enough to memorize that spell every day.
Anyway, love that you take the time to put out this info, you do a good job and I look forward to more videos with more information and having more questions and discussions. Thanks!
I'll be frank, the combat order checklist for me is only really interesting in simultaneous combat, or alternating activation like you show re individual combat. I never liked individual initiative. But I frequently try out rules from different editions. The other thing I often wonder about is spell interruption, I mean a wizard spends all night memorizing spells, they can't wear armour, they only have limited spells at low level, and they have very few hitpoints, so do they really need to suffer from spell interuption as well? But I've recently been playing around with time segments from ad&d which is interesting. And that second play through is how so many of my starting engagements go lol. Really good example.
In my experience group initiative with the combat sequence speeds up combat as all players reach in to move their figures instead of everyone sitting and waiting for their turn.
my main problem with the BECMI sequence is or was the fixed order of things.... in modern iterations there is this "move + attack" or "double move" thing.. that is very ingrained in my way of thinking.. it took me some time to do the single-action (move being one of them) variant.. otherwise that combat sequence shatters on impact with the chaos of combat and freedom of choice...
A great video. Thank you!
You are welcome!
Thanks for the share!!
I thought surprise was optional. That is the DM decides if surprise is likely and then rolls otherwise no surprise roll. Or did we inadvertently house rule a compulsory surprise step away?
It depends on the circumstances. In the book i think it gives an example of the party trying to quickly get out of a dungeon, meaning they are moving faster than usual, and as they round a corner they encounter some goblins or something. This is a prime opportunity for the dm to decide if there is a need for a surprise roll. The other obvious one is stuff like planned ambushes or maybe a PC kicks a door in a dungeon open after a theif successfully listens to see if there are creatures beyond the door. If the party knows there are creatures in there but the creatures would never know a door kick is coming they would roll surprise.
Thanks for making this video. We almost always rolled individual initiative and abandoned the checklist. You have inspired me to use individual initiative WITH the checklist in the next adventure I DM. I recently purchased Foundry and the advanced old school essentials foundry module. which mods do you use for your BECMI games?
I pretty much just use the OSE SRD pack and then drag those elements into the Actor and Items sections before editing bits that deviate slightly from BECMI. There's been hardly anything to change of I'm honest. Just the odd bit of spell description text here and there.
Wasn't the intentions phase mandatory in the Basic DM's book? I've read that not copying it to the RC was an error by the author of the latter book, maybe I remember wrong.
And... one of the few OSR combat example not using the theater of mind. I was always sold that the D&D game was always theater of the mind, but here you demonstrated a full gridded map combat. Now I'm pondering, how was played in the times, without dry-erase maps or VTTs? Graph paper from notebook and miniatures?
I considered trying telepathy for this video but had to resort to a VTT. My apologies. 😉
Minis have always been around in D&D :)
@@becmiberserker Oh, my comment was absolutely positive! I don't follow played games on streaming, but informative video on D&D. And this is one of the few I've seen where the positioning of the miniatures (virtual ones, but still miniatures) had relevance. I'm happy to have seen this! :D
@@TheAlby87Project I know it was. 🙂 I was just playing along. I really appreciate your feedback.
Our group has always played using graph paper with symbols drawn on the map for each character; a very slightly modified theater of the mins approach.
This phased turn system using the Combat Sequence Checklist really harkens back to D&D wargame forebears. It's very interesting, though. One of these days, when I find the time, I'll get a group together to give BECMI a try, although I might have to tweak things for ascending AC just for clarity.
OSE May be what you're looking for in that case
@@roberthartley8516 Does OSE retain that same turn structure?
@@HoltzWorks yes it does, and you can choose between Ascending and Decending AC.
Why AC of 1? Thought plate mail and shield was the lowest AC of 3 - 1 (2}you could get, what have I missed or got wrong?
Platemail is AC3. A shield makes this AC2. Then he had a Dex bonus of 1 making it AC1.
@@becmiberserker that's what I have missed. I never added dex bonus it's only been 30 years and probably alot of unnecessary deaths. 😬 Looked at rulebook, how did I miss this. A very big thank you for your videos.
I prefer RAW for combat initiative/operations. It keeps the players more focused on the action rather eating for their number to come to act.
Hi BECMI Beserker,question in the first round of attack you allow the giblin archers to fire arrows even thou the other goblins are in the way,do you normally make this ruling when running games?
@@BX_Disciple The illustration is abstract. One might ask how much they are actually in the way or not. I would allow it on the basis it’s less fun not to. Obviously, if there are circumstances that suggest this is not a good idea I would cater to the requirement in the moment. The rules are a guide, not a straight jacket. 🙂
@becmiberserker awesome! I am new DM and still grasping the balance between rules as written and leaning into having fun.
@@BX_Disciple With old school games like BECMI, it's best to lean into the fun. There can be some ridiculous moments, but that's when you pull out the 'roll for something something check' and watch the group lean forward in anticipation of success, or sometimes more hilarious, abject failure. Have a great game!
I forgot when you say "Afternoon " that means morning for me
I know this is older, Beserker, but do you allow holding actions, and if so how would holding move and/or holding attacking (missile or HTH) work in the Combat Sequence Checklist for you? Thnx 👊
TBH I would do the old school thing and play it by ear. If it seems sensible and adds to the scenario then I’ll let things slide here and there. The only reason I’d be less inclined to take this tact with 3.x to 5th is that so many other aspects are dependant on this kind of tactic that a wrong call could have greater consequences. It’s that house of cards element that the later systems have. Pull on one bit and it starts to affect the structure. Hope that helps.
What page for the morale chart please?
Excellent video as always.
I got my group away from 5e, which I consider a win. Sadly, Descending Armor Class broke some of the players heads, so we're playing some Basic Fantasy RPG which has ascending. Nevermind that the chart at the bottom of the character sheet negates the confusion of DAC...
I consider this a great step away from WotC nonetheless. Thanks for the push to go to some old school games! Highly likely I'm stealing this combat sequence for my game.
Glad to be of help. Hope your game goes well.
How did you get the OSE game pack? I installed game world but it is empty of monsters templates…!?
They should be found in the compendium area.
@@becmiberserker it is empty. Did you matbe install a module with the monstwr compendium!?
@@poodlefilmstrailer Looks like I did! It was a while ago. It’s called Old School Essentials SRD Content. Hope this helps.
QQ: Page 102 rules cyclopedia says
“During a round, characters can do one thing: move, attack, cast a spell, drink a potion…”
What did I miss in this? (There is some leeway for a 5 ft. Move)
Ta
Page 103, third column about Encounter Speed.
The two basically contradict each other, with the text coming from two sources. Editing obviously missed it. I go with the rules on page 103. More fun, imo.
I thought that simultaneous combat also applies with individual initiative (ie ties need not be rerolled).
Is Touchberry a nod to The Dungeon Minister?
I have to be honest and say it wasn’t, but it’s turned out to be. 🙂 The names I used were the example names used for these classes in the Basic Rules. Touchberry was the example Halfling, and I guess they made an appearance in the Dungeon Minister’s game.
I'm sorry, but there is no solid reason to use descending Armor Class, or THAC0... it is the 1 big Hang Up I have with BECMI. I will however say I Love the Flavor, and many of the other Mechanics of BECMI, as well as All of your Videos
In your example combat you mention that squares are 5 feet each with the goblins moving 30 feet each. But if you look at many modules from the BECMI era, like Caves of Chaos from KOTBLs, the squares on all the maps are listed as 10 feet each, meaning they would only move 3 squares a round on the movement phase. How would you run /resolve that? Maybe a future video idea.
The map I used is 5’ per square and is still the same size as the map in the B2 module. So, 3 squares on the old map is the same distance as 6 squares on the new.
@@becmiberserker that certainly makes sense, it’s just resizing the grid, I’ve done this as well. But I was speaking more to the original design intentions of the game makers. How would you run it if you had to go “by the book” and not resize the grid? Would one character standing in the center of a square in a 10’ wide hall way now block that hallway so no monsters could pass him without fighting? Or would 4 characters be able to fill up one square in a sort of tight formation, with spears in the back row able to attack what is in ahead of the front row like the pole arm rules seem to imply? I’ve always just sort of winged these things as best I could, but there is always still confusion for me and my players.
@@danbrauch4174 I think the 10’ spacing thing is a legacy of D&D’s wargaming origins. However, as the game was played mostly theatre of the mind back then, character positioning was very much at the fiat of the DM, with input from the players. This led to the kind of gridless game I alluded to in my video and why I don’t even use 5’ spacing in BECMI when using a VTT. If I think a creature can fit in a space then I allow it. Without the need to satisfy 5’ spacing in the game, unlike 5e, then it isn’t really an issue. The only thing I insist on is that melee means being within 5’ of a foe, except for things like pole arms. But again, I judge things in the moment. Hope this helps.
@@becmiberserker I’ve always done something similar to what you describe. But I always assumed I must be missing something. Imagine how confusing all this must be for a kid in the 80s, with no frame of reference except for what the book in their hand had to say, to try and figure all this out. I really appreciate you discussing this with me and giving your thoughts. Thank you very much indeed.
@@danbrauch4174 😀 You know what? The funny thing is that without the internet or anyone else but your friends to help, you kind of figured it out. When things felt like they weren’t working then you changed them. It was kind of liberating really. No one told you that you were doing it wrong. You just got on with it and had fun. Nowadays we’re a little bit obsessed with the ‘right way to play’ that we forget we could just play how we want.
No worries about answering your questions. I hope I helped.
Awesome video. Cheers
Thank you! Cheers!
Touchberry! Nice deep cut!
There's two type of combat in BECMI:
Ranged and suicide.
great stuff
Great helpful video ty
Glad it was helpful!
23:26 BECMI doesn’t have guidelines for morale? Thought it was first hit, first death and every time there is a critical - but wouldn’t be surprised if I picked that up somewhere else.
You’re right that there are circumstances specified that dictate when to make a morale check, but the RC actual has Morale as an optional rule. I just used it to demonstrate use within the checklist. Hopefully, it still helped.
@@becmiberserker 👍
Touchberry aka Torchberry
I switch to side initiative when I switched to BX and I'm not switching back.
As far as magic been interrupted, I always assumed that magic goes at the same time as two -handed weapons. So as long as you do not have a two-handed weapon you attack before magic.
I think it is interesting that in some systems I run group initiative and in some I run individual, but neither of them are like this.
BECMI 101: You do you. 🙂
Thanks for watching and commenting.
Is it possible to attack and move at the same round like in 3E and 5E?
I think the idea is that, within the combat sequence checklist occurring in one round, you _are_ attacking and moving in the same round. It’s just divided up to account for the speed of different actions.
@@becmiberserker So, does it mean you can move and cast a spell at the same round, or shoot a missile and use hand-to-hand combat on the same round?
@@0den You can never move and cast a spell. Spellcasting requires you to stay in one place in BECMI. However, you may move and shoot an arrow, or move and attack with melee. Page 103 of the RC details this under the paragraph describing Encounter Speed.
I thought only Ethengar warriors can move while shooting. Thanks for referring me to the right page 🙏
Halflings get a +1 bonus to individual initiative.
I think Foundry took care of that.
@@becmiberserker just pointing it out as you didnt mention it.
the last few years I've been on a real odnd kick, but I think the next 18mo. will be BECMONTHS
I
Huh. We always play that if you move you cant missile or melee or magic. Didnt realize you let everyone move and attack in the same round.
This is clarified on page 103 of the RC under Encounter Speed. You can move up to your full Encounter Speed and attack. Movement in BECMI is often shown as 120’(40’) for example. The value in brackets is your Encounter Speed, which is 1/3 of your Normal Speed. Hope this helps.
Depending on which version of rules you use, this can happen. the 90s box set is explicit that you can't move and attack in the same round, but the BECMI rule books say you can. The Rules Cyclopedia puzzlingly has *both* rules in the same book contradicting each other.
@@Agell I thought that, until I spotted that it states you cannot “run” and do something else. It then stupidly mentions running only 20’ which causes the confusion I think. I stuck with the info on 103 as it makes for a better game, imo.
What’s more, if I mentioned all these contradictions, I’d be editing this video for years! 🙂
@@becmiberserker my group just found it not very fun that faster things can endlessly kite slower things. It almost begs the game to add combat maneuvers like "move and attack gives you -2 to hit" or whatever. We have had a fine time playing with the 5' movement maximum of you are going to melee/missile/magic.