AD&D: Using Miniatures and Scale

In the very beginning of the DUNGEON MASTERS GUIDE (page 10) there is an interesting section on the use of miniatures. Since D&D (and later AD&D) evolved from miniature wargames where one figure represented a number of individuals in a formation, some explanation of the scales used needed to be done. HO scale (which is used for some wargaming) is 25 mm. This is representative of 6 scale feet and six feet is the average height of a human male (at least in AD&D fantasy, not so in real life), so Man-size is represented at this scale. Gygax has the following to say on the matter:

The special figures cast for ADVANCED DUNGEON & DRAGONS add color to play and make refereeing far easier. Each player might be required to furnish painted figures representing his or her player character and all henchmen and/or hirelings included in the game session. Such distinctively painted figures enable you to immediately recognize each individual involved. Figures can be placed so as to show their order of march, i.e., which characters are in the lead, which are in the middle, and which are bringing up the rear. Furthermore, players are more readily able to visualize their array and plan actions while seeing the reason for your restrictions on their actions. Monster figures are likewise most helpful, as many things become instantly apparent when a party is arrayed and their monster opponent(s) placed. Furnishing such monsters is probably best undertaken as a joint effort, the whole group contributing towards the purchase of such figurines on a regular basis. Be very careful to purchase castings which are in scale! Out of scale monsters are virtually worthless in many cases. As a rule of thumb, HO scale is 25 mm = 1 actual inch = 6' in scale height or length or breadth.

I have often stated that miniatures add a dimension to the game that is almost necessary to visualize what is happening during combat. It's hard to imagine all the variables going on in combat, and rooms on a map are not just big open spaces - they are usually cluttered with furniture, dead bodies, piles of debris, pools of water, etc. It is much easier for player characters to interact with their environment when the physical aspects don't have to be explained every five minutes. A scale visual representation of a room, cave, corridor, or chamber is also useful to have with those miniatures, as Gygax explains below:

Figure bases are necessarily broad in order to assure that the figures will stand in the proper position and not constantly be falling over. Because of this, it is usually necessary to use a ground scale twice that of the actual scale for HO, and squares of about 1 actual inch per side are suggested. Each ground scale inch can then be used to equal 3-1/3 linear feet, so a 10' wide corridor is 3 actual inches in width and shown as 3 separate squares. This allows depiction of the typical array of three figures abreast, and also enables easy handling of such figures when they are moved. While you may not find it convenient to actually use such figures and floor plans to handle routine dungeon movement, having sheets of squares for  encounter area depiction will probably be quite helpful. If you do so, be certain to remember that ground scale differs from figure scale, and when dealing with length, two-man-sized figures per square is quite possible, as the space is actually 6 scale feet with respect to length. This is meaningful when attacking a snake, dragon, etc. if characters are able to attack the creature's body length. With respect to basically bipedal, erect opponents, scale will not be a factor.

So, basically, Gygax is saying that, when dealing with bipedal (humanoid) creatures, you can use 1 square = 3-1/3 feet, so 10' = 3 squares. However, when dealing with a dragon, purple worm, or other long creature, you should revert back to 1 square = 6' scale (or use a bigger miniature to represent its length). 

Later editions change the scale to allow for an easier estimation of distance; use of 5-foot squares became common at the end of 2nd edition and were set in stone by 3rd edition. Obviously, this means that we're no longer using HO scale, but some other arbitrary scale. Also, today's miniatures are much larger than those used by 1st edition players. Some of this has to do with the enlargement of the creatures in the MONSTER MANUAL. Giants and dragons were seriously increased in size between the 1st and 2nd editions, and later enlarged again in later editions (sometimes to the point of ridiculousness with some of the dragons).

I've often wondered how a combat would play out using the 3-1/3 foot scale that Gygax suggests. Obviously, it would make figuring ranges a bit more challenging. Then again, using the 1 inch square = 6' scale is just as challenging. All the maps in AD&D were drawn to a scale of 1 square = 10'. It's hard to break that down easily during combat into 6' scale inches. However, if one realizes that dungeon walls were typically 1' thick, and that the space indicated on the map is only floor, then each square by a wall is only really 5' wide (that a character could stand on). However, central floor squares not near a wall are problematic, since they represent 6' of space. Thus, a 30' square room at this scale is 5 squares by 5 squares (instead of being a 25' square room). This could get very confusing. Also, miniatures are made to a scale (with the base) as stated above but there is no way to handle them in 6' scale inches because two miniature bases will not fit in a single square. Gygax obviously pondered this and offered his advice on the subject by exaggerating the ground scale, but again, as he noted, this distorts longer creatures, making them appear larger than they really are.

 

So how does one do away with the distortion? Obviously, the miniatures are sized to be exactly the length they are according to their description, and scaled so that the humanoid (character) figures and monsters are in the same scale. So, when dealing with this exaggerated scale, one either uses a different size miniature to represent the creature (which may detract from the enjoyment of the combat), or switch to the larger sized squares for that particular combat. In essence, you could revert to the later scale of 1 square = 5 feet and it works just as well (so long as the creature isn't crazy long).

My groups have used other markers to represent battles in the past. My first large group (in which I was a player, not a DM) had a felt board with letters cut out to represent the party, and various shapes to represent monsters. The room shapes were not outlined, but the general area of the battle and positioning of the combatants could readily be determined. We also used graph paper tablets to run combat, with pencil and erasers to indicate positions and movement. This allowed us to represent the rooms, caves, and corridors easily since most maps were also done on graph paper. It also gave the characters a better idea of what the environment was like in a 2-D representation. Ceiling heights are rarely worried about unless dealing with low-ceilings, vertical movement like flight and levitation, or when missile fire is an issue. After all, bows require more of an arc to target distant opponents, while crossbows are more of a direct-line. This is why drow use hand crossbows in their underground realms - these weapons are close-combat, direct-line projectiles. It's hard to find wide-open spaces in the underdark, and even harder to see beyond short range for most missile weapons. Plus, ceiling heights underground vary and may have stalactites that get in the way of bow-shots. During the 2nd edition era, while in college, we used blackboards in empty classrooms to depict battles. These were drawn to rough scale, but again the locations of the combatants could readily be determined, with ranges estimated by descriptions given by the DM.

One of the better ways to represent combat is with a complete diorama-style which indicates all 3 dimensions of the battle field. This is cost restrictive, but the best for visualization. After all, high-level campaigns have flying mounts, spells or magic items that permit flying, and some monsters have flight capability as well (particularly dragons). Representing 3 dimensions also allows for vertical positioning for better shots with missile weapons, determining what happens when someone is knocked off a narrow bridge above the chasm below, etc. Consider Lord of the Rings with the 3-D components of the bridges and stairways in Moria and the orcs crawling up or down the massive columns! Using 3-dimensions makes for a more exciting adventure, but its also more of a headache when using miniatures. Suddenly, you need to track elevation as well as position, and determining distances and angles may not be exact without a ruler or tape measure.

I find that many players use the map grids of today as a crutch. Early gamers would ask their DMs if they were in range, and most DMs would reply "you seem to be, want to try it?" Nowadays the players simply count squares and place spell effects so they end directly in front of their front ranks. Such metagaming has existed in my games as well, but when dealing with a magic-user with an 16+ Intelligence, I let it slide. Such characters are much more intelligent than the common man and should be cut some slack when dealing with spell positioning. After all, they could probably estimate probabilities and calculate ranges faster than the player who is playing them anyways.

I myself no longer cart around boxes of minis, rolled up vinyl maps, or 1' square display pads anymore. I have too much other material that I need to transport. Now I simply create a map using GameTable on my laptop and connect to a monitor via wifi to display the positions of the characters in the game. Sure, I use the 5' squares of later versions, but it's simply easier, and the players don't mind all that much. Is it realistic to say that only two people can be in the front rank in a 10'-wide corridor? I think it is, given that most of those folks are armed with weapons that they have to swing (and probably want to avoid hitting their compatriots) so the extra space is not really "open" during a melee. Three men abreast down a 10' wide corridor is great if they are formed into a military formation, locking shields and using thrusting weapons like spears or polearms). I just don't see many AD&D parties operating like that, especially with a thief checking for traps, or spellcasters using spells or items to detect pits, traps, or secret doors as they go. Some people may argue against this point, but in my groups the 5' space works best.

If you have never played a game with miniatures, I would suggest trying it, just once. It adds a whole new dimension to the experience and really helps the players (and the DM) make the right calls and decisions in the heat of combat! Actual figures are not even necessary. You could use paper chits, game tokens, dice, coins, or anything else. We used to use "M&M" candies in our kid game - when you killed a creature you got to eat the 'm' (which, of course, stood for 'monster'....). If you don't use minis, consider visual aids to help the players make decisions about their environment. If a wizard is going to cast fireball but can't visualize the area of effect, that's a big problem (for the party and likely himself as well)! Of course, if you happen to be a fan of "theater of the mind," and your players can all locate themselves precisely in a virtual mind space, then none of this really matters anyway. It all comes down to how detailed you get with your descriptions and how good your players are at visualizing their surroundings.

AD&D Magic Items: Magical Armor and Shields

Potions and scrolls are among the most commonly found items in low level adventures. However, the next most commonly found items in early adventures are magical arms and armor. That +1 shield, +1 suit of armor, or +1 weapon really help out lower level characters, and also are sometimes required to hit certain creatures. This article will focus on the armor and shields that one can find. The next article in this series will focus on non-sword magical weapons.

Magical armor and shields are found 15% of the time, according to Table III Magic Items in the DMG. These items are very important to fighters and clerics; not so much for thieves, and not at all for magic-users. In fact, since thieves cannot use shields, and may only wear leather, they are the least likely to benefit from this table since the only item on the list they could use has an 8% chance of being included (and is only of +1 value regardless). It's curious to note that most armor has only a magical bonus - only two sets of armor have any other abilities, both are plate mail, and one of these is cursed. Only two shields have abilities other than the magical bonus (and one of these is cursed!).

Magical armor does not drastically, magically size itself to the wearer as it does in later editions of the game. Certainly, it does adjust somewhat to the wearer, but a halfling cannot use a human-sized suit of armor any more than a dwarf or elf could. In fact, there are but 4 sizes of armor: man-sized (65%), elf-sized (20%), dwarf-sized (10%), and gnome/halfling sized (5%). It's important to note that one must take this into consideration when seeking treasure - it's more likely for a human to find magic armor in a treasure trove than a dwarf (unless, of course, the dungeon is an ancient dwarf mine, elven stronghold, or gnomish lair). Mind you, most treasures should be placed by the DM, but most modules will list randomly generated treasures, so keep this in mind when deciding what class to play.

Magical Armor

The plus of the magic armor makes it better by lowering the armor class. Thus a +2 suit of armor lowers the AC by 2 places. Magic shields do the same. This might be counter-intuitive to a new player, so make sure that they realize that lower armor class ratings are better than higher ones. Gygax even explains on page 164 that he kept the old system of decreasing armor ratings for the sake of continuity and familiarity. If only he had switched them at this early stage.... Conversely, cursed armor makes one easier to hit. Thus, cursed chain mail -1 would make your AC one place higher (for a base AC of 6). There are no cursed armors listed on the chart (other than one, see below), even though such suits existed in many modules of the time.

The lighter the armor, the less likely it is to be very enchanted. Thus, leather, ring mail, and studded leather armors are only of +1 enchantment. Scale mail goes no higher than +2 enchantment, chain mail  no higher than +3 enchantment, and splint mail no higher than +4 enchantment. Plate mail and shields, however, can be fully enchanted to +5 value! Curiously, there is no enchanted banded mail or padded armors. A player using these types of armors will apparently never find one that is enchanted!

Armor of +3 bonus is made from special meteoric iron steel. Armor of +4 value is mithral-steel alloy. Armor of +5 bonus is adamantite-steel alloy. I'm not sure that really means much to the user of the armor, but it makes a big deal to those seeking to manufacture such magic items. Mithral and adamantite are rare metals to surface dwellers (although the dark elves are known to trade adamantite bars in the underworld trade routes). So keep in mind that if you are a magic-user seeking to enchant some armor for a fellow party member or loyal henchman, you'll need to locate these rare metals in quantities large enough to create a suit of armor! The downside is that all these metals incorporate iron (steel) in some fashion, so all are susceptible to a heat metal or transmute metal to wood spell from a druid (although magic armors allow a saving throw).

The only suits of armor with special powers are both plate mail, and one of these is a cursed item. The "good" suit is plate mail of etherealness. This +5 enchanted armor enables the wearer and all non-living things carried by him to become ethereal. While in that state, the wearer cannot attack or be attacked by anything on the material plane, but may travel through physical obstacles as if they were not there, just like oil of etherealness. In essence, it makes the wearer a ghost (and would allow such a person to fight a ghost on its own ground!). The armor has charges, and each shift to the ethereal state uses one of those charges. It does not specifically state how long the character can remain ethereal, but it does say it functions just as if oil of etherealness had been used (so I assume that the duration of the oil - 4 + 1d4 turns - would be the duration of the effect). It is also interesting to note that ethereal beings and objects are considered invisible to those on the material plane. Since the armor is producing the effect, the user is effectively stuck in the ethereal state until the charge wears off; this could be bad if all he or she wanted to do was get on the other side of a locked door to open it for his party, or went off to face a ghost by himself. The armor's charges are initially set at 20 (if none had been previously used before it is found), and the armor bonus decreases by 1 for every five charges used. Thus, if a suit has 20 charges, once it has used 5 charges, it now has 15 charges and is plate mail of etherealness +4. Once all the charges are used, the suit is a normal suit of plate mail +1 and cannot be recharged. The only other weakness of the armor is the fact that a phase door spell will negate the ethereal state and prevent the armor from functioning again for 1 day. Now, how does one target an ethereal person with a spell when they aren't in this plane? For that matter, the caster would have to see the invisible ethereal target somehow in order to cast the spell. Thirdly, it has to be cast at a section of wall and attunes the caster's body to pass through that section of wall. This seems to be a strange effect of the spell. Does it mean to say that if an ethereal person tries to follow a magic-user through his or her phase door, it will render the ethereal person material again? Seems a round-about way of saying that. And, as usual, is such a case-specific thing, that it really should not have been included in the description (and is not even mentioned in the spell). A 7th level spell can only be cast by a high-level wizard in any case - so be careful when attacking liches in an ethereal state, I guess.

The other suit of armor with special properties is plate mail of vulnerability. This suit of armor appears to every test to be magical  +1, +2, or +3 armor, but in reality it is cursed plate mail -2, -3, or -4! This vulnerability will not be revealed as such until the wearer is attacked by some creature in anger or with intent to harm or kill. On a natural 20 to hit, the armor falls to pieces. This really isn't all that terrible of a cursed item (I've seen much worse). Sure, you could be subjected to hits as if wearing chain mail, scale mail, or even studded leather, but the armor TYPE is still plate mail. Does the hit with a natural 20 remove the curse of the armor? This is not stated. Most cursed items cannot be removed; it seems that the only way to remove this cursed suit (other than a remove curse spell) is to be subjected to a hit of natural 20! Are the pieces still magical? Is the curse still in effect? Nothing is stated in the DMG - however, if I were adjudicating this, I would say that the armor's curse is effectively broken on that character. Of course, the poor character is now totally defenseless, and probably poorly dressed, to continue in combat. Once the armor falls off, he or she is struck as if wearing no armor at all (which gives a lot of weapons bonuses to hit).

A curious note (and one that I discussed in a previous article) is that magical armor either 1) weighs nothing and has no effect on movement rate; or 2) increases the normal speed by 3" (up to normal unarmored movement rate). It is stated both ways in the same book (DMG). Magical shields, however, do not have a weight reduction and don't normally affect speed in any case. How this affects magic armor in your campaign is up to DM decision. I, for one, have a hard time explaining how someone in plate mail can tread water, so I use option 2 in my campaigns.

One little-remembered aspect of magic armor is that such suits actually protect against more than just weapon blows or monster attacks. These items also help with saving throws against certain attack forms. Magic armor, however, cannot assist against gas attacks, poison, or spells which do not cause physical damage (like petrification, polymorph, charms, etc.). However they DO allow the magical bonus of the armor to affect saving throws against acid (unless immersed), disintegration, falling damage, fire attacks (magical or otherwise), and spells that cause physical damage (with the exception of electrical attacks against metallic armor). Naturally, if no saving throw is permitted, then the armor would not help, magical or not (against magic missiles, for example).

 Magical Shields

Magical shields have bonuses of +1 to +5, and there are two special shields that affects missiles:

The first of these is the shield +1, +4 vs. missiles. This large shield is much better at protecting the user against hand-hurled and mechanically launched missiles of all sorts. It also has a 20% chance of negating magic missiles from the front arc. This is a tremendous boon to all clerics and fighters squaring off against magic-users, and is only 1 of 3 ways to foil these usually unavoidable magical attacks. It says nothing about boulders hurled by a giant; however, I suppose this is a "hand-hurled" missile of sorts. Since siege engines treat all targets as AC 0, and ballistae treat all targets as AC 10 regardless of armor worn, this shield would not be much help against such missiles.

The other magical shield is a cursed item, the shield -1 missile attracter. This item thus acts as if the user isn't even carrying a shield. The cursed part about attracting missiles only works if the DM follows the intent of the rules as written. It is explained in the combat chapter that firing a missile into a melee causes all participants in that melee to become random targets. Each target is then assigned a probability of being hit based on size. If this shield is being used by one of those combatants, it doubles or triples the chance that the wearer is targeted. I've seen quite a few DMs ignore the above rule about firing into melee. If that's the case, then the curse of the shield is useless since the chance to be hit is ignored. In order for this magic item to work, then, requires the DM to follow the rules exactly as written!

The end of the section on magical armors (page 165) includes a description of armor types (which were already fully described on page 27), and is the first place where Gygax describes the difference between plate mail armor and plate armor (which is lighter and more mobile). This was a Renaissance invention and cost 2-3 times more than plate mail armor; it was later inserted (as full plate along with field plate) in the UNEARTHED ARCANA.

UNEARTHED ARCANA Magical Armors and Shields

Speaking of that oft-maligned tome of knowledge, the armors were expanded in UNEARTHED ARCANA to include bronze plate (of +1 or +2 bonus), bucklers (up to +3 bonus), magical elfin chain mail (which Gygax swore up and down in the DMG did not exist), leather armor of +2 or +3 bonus, magical field plate (up to +5 bonus) and full plate (up to +4 bonus), ring mail +2, scale mail +3, and studded leather +2. Again, banded mail and padded armor was given the shaft and not even mentioned!

Another special armor was included in this section - anything armor. Such armor can be any type from leather to plate, originally appearing to have but a +1 bonus. Upon command it becomes any sort of other normal magical armor. For example, anything armor that appears as leather can change into plate, or vice versa. However it will never form into a specific type of armor more than once. A change into a specific type of armor will last for 1 day (24 hours) before the anything armor reverts to its usual +1 status. This change can include special armor types when commanded, but special armors only last for 1 hour. After commanded to change 3 different times, the armor loses all of its magical properties.

A note on the magical elfin chain mail indicates that it will rarely fit anyone who is not an elf or half-elf (but there IS a table one can roll on to see if the size was made for another race). There is only a 15% chance of it being made for a smaller race, and only 20% chance of it being made for an average or tall/muscular human (or half-orc). The great benefit of this armor is that a thief can wear it with minimal effect to his or her Thief Abilities, and can be concealed beneath clothing. Such a suit is also a boon for fighter/magic-users (who can only be elves or half-elves anyway).

Magical plate armor will conform perfectly to exactly fit the wearer who puts it on (but the size type must still be rolled on the table). Non-magical plate armor (and most other armors) are by necessity custom made to the wearer, because poorly-fitted armor actually hampers combat ability, movement, and causes chafing and pains when worn. Magical armor could not be altered to fit someone other than the person it was made for, thus magical armors now adjusted to fit the person wearing it so long as they are the same race/general size. Non-magical field plate and full plate typically had to be made to exactly fit their wearer, but now magical versions adjusted to fit the wearer with the same restriction listed above. In addition, these armors actually absorb damage, and each plus increases the amount of damage these armors can absorb. This was a critical departure from traditional AD&D in which armor did not mean much except to keep you from getting hit. Of course, with this damage absorption, one now needed to worry about armor repairs (also never considered when dealing with armors in the past). Apparently magical field and full plate may be repaired, but only by a specialist in magical armors (and the price of such repairs is quite costly and time consuming). Really, though, this is just another stat that has to be tracked on the character sheet along with hit points, XP, gold totals, etc. Still, this really affects the survivability of fighters, paladin, rangers, cavaliers, and clerics! And it seems that the only reason to include this armor in the game is to give cavaliers something else to make them better than fighters (since cavaliers always needed to obtain the best armor available).

Please be aware that all the rules regarding armor on page 27 of the DMG and pages 75-76 of the UA still apply to magical armors (except weight, of course). All the rules that apply to shields and the number of attacks they can block per round are also still in effect for their magical counterparts. For example, a magical buckler can still only be used against one attack each round, regardless of enchantment bonus.

The final addition to the armors section in the UNEARTHED ARCANA was the introduction of magical barding for mounts. Since cavaliers are, by definition, riders of mounts, their mounts needed magical protections as well! I won't go into this in much detail other than to state that this really is unnecessary when dealing with a traditional dungeon crawl, and comes into play only if the party spends most of its time in the wilderness with a cavalier in the party, or at a jousting tournament. Either way, it should rarely come into play during a traditional AD&D game.

AD&D: Creature Multiple Attacks

 In my previous post, I came across something that I found peculiar in the MONSTER MANUAL - namely, the nature of multiple attacks and how many targets a creature may attack each round with these attacks. I never really considered this aspect before, but the wording of some monsters seems to imply that most creatures use ALL their attacks on a single opponent. Thus, unless the creature description says otherwise, a monster attacking with multiple attack forms as its "attack routine" will direct ALL of those attacks at the same target.

Take the lowly black bear as a prime example of a normal creature with multiple attacks each round. Since these attacks are not true multiples, they can all be used at the same time on their initiative in combat (unlike a fighter using the same weapon 2 or more times in a round to make attacks). A bear attacks with 2 claws and a bite. Assuming they all hit their target, the bear causes 1-3/1-3/1-6 points of damage to its target. If a claw hits with a roll of 18+, then the bear also gets a hug attack for 2-8 additional damage. Most bears select a single target to attack and direct all their attention on that target to subdue/kill it and eat it. Thus, if the target is a human, other humans nearby may attempt to distract the bear and lure it away from the target to attack them instead, allowing the injured target to crawl away to safety or allow others to help them get away. This is a prime example of what seems to be the expected view of monsters and how they attack. All attacks are essentially directed at one target per round. The same can be said of other creatures like great cats, dragons, and most other creatures that attack with claws and bite, horns, tails, or other natural attack forms.

However, certain creatures in the MONSTER MANUAL specifically state that they can split their attack routine against multiple opponents! This implies that most other creatures (and possibly characters) cannot do so! Demons, devils, and trolls specifically mention this ability. I found it strange that it was not listed under dragons - but later editions allow dragons to have more attacks (wing buffet, tail slap, rear claw kick, etc.) and thus allow them to attack different targets depending on where they are attacking the dragon from. Then again, dragons and giants got much bigger and meaner in later editions anyway...

I'm not really sure how many creatures have this ability of being able to attack multiple targets, but it seems like it's such a big deal that it was listed specifically under the monster description for those creatures that do have this ability. I'm sure it makes sense - after all, one wonders how creatures would be able to attack different opponents with each of their attacks when nature shows that creatures typically focus on one target at a time.

Ettins, which I would assume would have this ability, are not specifically listed as being able to attack different opponents at once (which seems odd to me) - I would allow them to do so. Chimeras also are not listed with this ability to attack multiple opponents in the same round. Is this not stated because it is common sense? Hydras on the other hand specifically state that they can attack multiple opponents at once, with up to 4 heads being able to attack a single opponent simultaneously. This of course makes perfect sense. The mammoth, with 5 attack forms (two tusks, trunk, and front legs) states that in general cannot apply more than 2 attacks versus a single opponent. The same can be said of the elephant and mastodon, which all can attack multiple opponents with their attacks and are, in fact, limited when attacking a single opponent to no more than 2 attacks. In a roundabout way, the giant octopus is stated to attack one creature with each of its 6 tentacles (2 are held in reserve for anchoring it to a ship or rock) and the beak if a target is close by. However, an otyugh does not list the ability to attack multiple targets in a single round despite having two slashing tentacles. Although not specified, it is assumed that the purple worm can bite and sting separate opponents, since it states that the sting is used only to fight in rear defense, or when fighting large or numerous opponents in a large open space. Sahuagin do not possess the ability to attack multiple targets in a single round, despite having multiple attacks and high intelligence. Giant squids, of course, attack as do octopi, with each free tentacle attacking a different target (however, in nature, a squid attacks with only 2 large grasping tentacles and uses the other smaller tentacles to secure prey in order to feed). Trolls have already been stated as attacking up to 3 different targets per round. Wind walkers are strange creatures with an area of attack that causes damage to all creatures in a 1" radius who are hit. Wyverns are stated as biting and stinging at one or two opponents per round. Of course, demons and devils also may attack multiple targets per round. I assume that daemons in the MONSTER MANUAL II have a similar combat ability.

So it seems that this is an actual unstated rule that I've somehow missed after decades of play. It definitely makes some creatures more fearsome and unpredictable, but at the same time makes others that must attack a single opponent more deadly as well! A dragon attacking a single opponent with all 3 attacks is likely to kill them in one or two rounds! The same could be said of a sabre-toothed tiger or cave bear. It's these little, hidden rules in the books that make this game such a joy to play and explore.

AD&D: At-Will Abilities

A number of higher-level creatures in the MONSTER MANUAL are stated as having at-will abilities. For years it was taken by myself and other members of my various gaming groups, that this meant that such abilities could be used as many times as desired without prior preparation (like spells) or a required period of replenishment (such as "per day" abilities). However, it may also have another meaning in that they could be used in conjunction with regular attacks or movement!

This thought never really occurred to me until I started reading various high-level adventures and read some forum discussions on Dragonsfoot.org. Most of the abilities of said creatures are due to their other-worldly natures or highly magical origins. That being said, such abilities should be as natural to these creatures as breathing or thinking. But should they be usable along with their other attacks?

Let's take an example from the MONSTER MANUAL - one of the creatures that has always intrigued me from the first day I was gifted this book at the tender age of 13 years old - the Horned Devil. This creature is a Greater Devil, meaning that it has abilities and powers of greater strength than a lesser devil, and the ability to reform if slain outside it's home domain of the Nine Hells. Such a creature is able to move freely among the layers of its home plane as well as travel to the planes of Gehenna, Hades and Acheron at will. It is stated that "all devils can direct their attacks against two or more opponents if the means are at hand." I was unaware that creatures could not, for example, strike against multiple opponents within range of their attacks during a round. A dragon, for example, with 2 claws and 1 bite per round, I always envisioned as being able to direct those attacks differently - clawing at a fighter, then chomping down on the thief trying to scuttle behind it, then slashing at the cleric on its other side. However, it does not specifically state that they can do so, and I assume that Gygax envisioned the claw/claw/bite attacking a single target per round. The description of a troll states that it can attack up to three opponents at once (and has three attacks per round - 2 claws and a bite, just like a dragon). I was unaware that other creatures with such attacks (great cats, bears, flesh golems, etc.) might not be able to decide to split their attacks among enemies surrounding them. Then again, a bear's hug makes more sense if it only applies all its attacks on one target per round. The same goes for a mountain lion's rake attack.

In any case, the greater devil, by virtue of its otherworldly qualities and power, can only be struck by magical weapons, or weapons of silver, but ordinary weapons cause no damage. They are also able to perform the following abilities by virtue of simply being a devil (although it is not specifically indicated if these are usable once per day or at will): charm person, suggestion, illusion, infravision, teleportation without error, know alignment, cause fear, and animate dead. Imagine being in a battle with a creature that can teleport around you at will and strike from behind, or grab a weapon and teleport away, or simply teleport out of reach and assault a party with spells at range. How do you stop such an opponent? Add to this the AC -5 and 4 attacks per round of the Horned Devil and you have a potent opponent, even if they only have 5+5 HD.  But wait, it gets better! Now one also has to deal with the special powers of the Horned Devil as well!

The passage from the MONSTER MANUAL reads thusly:

Horned Devils can do any one of the following, at will, once per turn or melee round, as applicable: pyrotechnics, produce flame, ESP, detect magic, illusion, or summon another horned devil (50% chance of success). Once per day they can create a wall of fire of triple normal strength with regard to the damage it causes (3-24 hit points).

Furthermore, it is stated that Horned Devils exude fear in a 5' radius (saving throw versus wand applies). So right there, you can see that the powers listed in the generic description of devils, and the powers of the Horned Devil, seem to overlap a bit. Apparently, the illusion ability of all devils is duplicated under the powers of the Horned Devil. Seems a bit of a waste, since the devil already has access to this power (unless it was supposed to be a different power type, like permanent illusion or somesuch). We're more concerned here with the at will powers anyway. So, the Horned Devil can make blinding smoke and fireworks from existing flame sources, produce a flame equal to a torch in its hand that can be thrown at targets and set them afire, read the minds of those in range, see what is magical in the area, create distractions of a visual nature to fool targets or mislead them, or summon in another of its kind! The only prohibition on these abilities is that they can only be used one at a time, once per melee round, but it does not say that these cannot also be done in conjunction with regular attacks, psionic abilities, or other magical abilities that are not at will (such as the wall of fire mentioned in the paragraph above). Most of the at-will abilities of extraplanar creatures seem to be non-combat, or minor combat spells, with the truly powerful abilities being usable only a number of times per day. Only arch-devils or demon princes have access to combat-type spells on an at-will basis.

But let's take a closer look at this Horned Devil example. Assuming that the generic devil abilities are, in fact, at will abilities, then these creatures can charm person every round, or make suggestions each round, teleport around the battle field every round, or animate dead creatures every round. As a horned Devil, it can continuously throw flame from its hands every round, create illusions every round, or even summon in a fellow devil just like it every round (with a 50% chance of actually working)! This could get out of hand very quickly! Now, let's consider some other aspects of what a Horned Devil could do. The creature has psionics, something that most campaigns don't really deal with very much. It has attack modes of Mind Thrust and Ego Whip (which, if I'm not mistaken, can only be used against psionically endowed characters), and defense modes of Mind Blank, Thought Shield, and Mental Barrier, which are only useful when being attacked psionically (again, if I'm not mistaken). But having psionics means that the creature also has access to Psionic Disciplines which are randomly determined by d% roll. Or, the at will powers of the Horned Devil could be developed from their psionic abilities (in which case, these powers, although at will, would have a psionic strength cost associated with them). In either case, this adds another pool of powers from which the Horned Devil can choose to attack, and some of these powers do not get saving throws!

I can't seem to find anything in the rules that prohibits at-will powers from being used in conjunction with normal attacks. However, this negative evidence is not necessarily in the spirit of the rules. Most, if not all, monster abilities seem to work exactly like similar character spells and abilities - that is, generally only one use of an ability per round is permitted and never in conjunction with another ability type. For example, a thief can Hide in Shadows or Move Silently, but not both at the same time. A magic-user's spells can only be cast one per round regardless of casting time and never in conjunction with an attack (although one could argue that touch spells requiring a "to hit" roll break this rule). Still, a spellcaster either attacks with a weapon or casts a spell, almost never in the same round (again, there are exceptions to every rule). Some magic items allow their use while performing other actions (for example, the Dancing Sword which can attack opponents while the user is free to perform other actions at the same time), but these are not inherent abilities of the user. The closest evidence I can find is in the MONSTER MANUAL page 5 under the description of NUMBER OF ATTACKS. Here it is stated that the number of attacks "does not usually consider unusual or special attack forms." I'm not sure what that means, exactly, but it does not explicitly state anywhere that at-will abilities can be used in conjunction with other attack forms during the round; on the other hand, it doesn't forbid it either.

I suppose that, just like all the rules in the game, the DM has final say on how such abilities function in their campaign. However, to be fair, the DM should make it abundantly clear which way the rules are to work, and if it works one way for the monsters, it should also work the same way for the players. I don't remember seeing many at-will abilities listed for players, but if there are, then they should also be able to use these along with their normal attacks.

One final thing to consider is that the MONSTER MANUAL was written as an interim compilation of monsters for Original D&D with Advanced D&D rules being written at the same time. It could be that the peculiar wording of the entries in the MONSTER MANUAL represents the forward thinking and trial-testing of the game as Gygax was developing those rules into a cohesive format. At-will abilities might be just a peculiar wording for abilities that Gygax deemed usable whenever the creature wanted to but at the restriction of only being usable like other abilities that were more limited to how many times they could be used per day. Again, it seems to me that at-will abilities, although not restricted by number of times they could be used, should be used only once per round and as the only action the creature can perform that round. It seems that most of the abilities of creatures function in that manner unless otherwise stated in the creature description.

For instance, a beholder can seemingly only use 1-4 of its eye stalks at the same time along with its central eye assuming that all attacks are coming from a front 90-degree arc. If attacks come from 180 degrees, then up to double these numbers of attacks can be made in a single round; if 270 or 360-degrees, then triple to quadruple the number of eyestalks (but keep in mind that a beholder only has 10 stalks to begin with). Even so, the number of attacks listed for a beholder do not consider the eye-stalks since these are SPECIAL ATTACKS, not normal attacks. It's only attack listed (the bite) is usable once per round. If the beholder is biting a target within melee range, can it also use its eyestalks? Again, that's up to the DM to decide, but I would assume no, and a beholder resorting to a bite attack must be in desperate trouble or has been crippled by the removal of all its eye-stalks (not likely, but possible). Or, one could say that the eye stalks could be used on targets that it is not biting. Again, the key here is to be consistent with how monster abilities work. Generally speaking, unless the at-will ability has no combat application, I see no reason why it could not be used in conjunction with an attack or movement, but if the at-will ability causes damage or affects others negatively, then it would be best to consider it the only thing the creature can do in the round to make it more in line with what the characters can do by attacking or casting spells.