70s-80s Dungeons & Dragons - Who of you played it similar to a wargame?

[Citizen Sade]

I have a blog post about some aspects of my early D&D games here: http://sharpbrush.blogspot.com/2021/04/dungeons-digressions.html

An interesting read. Good for you for preserving gaming history. The idea of revisiting your setting and advancing its timeline is an appealing one. 

With regards to the OP’s question, roleplaying was its own distinct thing for my gang. A couple of us came to it from a Warhammer background but none of us were wargaming at the time. That would have been tricky as we were students with space, money and transportation challenges. We did use miniatures for our PCs, but they were representational and used to show marching order.

[fred]

I have a blog post about some aspects of my early D&D games here: http://sharpbrush.blogspot.com/2021/04/dungeons-digressions.html

I guess it depends on what you mean as “similar to a wargame”.  We were also wargamers, and played fantasy miniatures games, both with Chainmail and with the D&D alternative combat system literally used as a wargame, among other things.  These were unconnected to the ongoing D&D games. Our campaign veered into a couple of small wars, but, due to the numbers involved, we used counters rather than miniatures (as best I recall) to resolve them.

What a great post - did you go back and play this campaign / locale again (noting the blog is from 2021)?

It brought back all sorts of memories for me - hex paper wilderness terrain, I was playing a good few years later, and it was possible to get an A4 pad of hex paper - but quite small hexes I recall. I think my biggest map was a fraction of yours, I recall it on a piece of hardboard, so perhaps 2’x3’

My group loved dungeon maps - and I also really enjoyed making these. I’m now wondering do I have some of these stashed away somewhere, or have I thrown them out in one move or another…

[Hobgoblin]

Interesting stuff!

This video might be of interest. In it, Matt Colville draws on Jon Petersen's The Elusive Shift to discuss the conflicting approaches that players took to early D&D, as evidenced by discussion in zines:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wDCQspQDchI

There used to be a great video on YouTube showing one of MAR Barker's original players staging a Tekumel game that was played out on a two-layer wargame table (above ground and 'dungeon'). In it, each player had a player character plus a load of henchmen, all represented in miniature. I think some of the players were competing rather than on the same side. Alas, it was taken down after Barker's unsavoury late-life activities came to light.

[syrinx0]

I started in with D&D in 79 and joined an older group as they transitioned from board games to miniatures & rpg's.  Essentially the older brothers moved on and the youngest inherited it all. They played Chainmail, Greyhawk and Tractics as well as D&D.  They had thousands of 25mm figures for Chainmail battles which often tied back into D&D campaigns.  The better ones were loosely based on Howard's Hyboria. We built economies, trading and professions into our campaigns in the early 90's. Still play the occasional game of Tractics, Battletech, Pulp Alley or Star Wars Legion.  D&D for me now is all online with a group scattered all over.

[Moriarty]

Well, I had the original books, and “Chainmail” - which very young me made use of to fight small skirmishy battles using poorly painted Grenadier lead minis (who needs silver paint? Just sand the sword shiny! )

You mean you didn’t burnish the armour with a pin? :-)

[RSDean]

What a great post - did you go back and play this campaign / locale again (noting the blog is from 2021)?

It brought back all sorts of memories for me - hex paper wilderness terrain, I was playing a good few years later, and it was possible to get an A4 pad of hex paper - but quite small hexes I recall. I think my biggest map was a fraction of yours, I recall it on a piece of hardboard, so perhaps 2’x3’

I haven’t yet, but I’m about the retire and have more time on my hands and I’d still like to.  It just wouldn’t work well with the inclinations of the current rpg group I’m in, so I would need to recruit some different players.

My _players_ used the A4 hex paper pads for their mapping, but I think I’d already started the main wilderness map before I had access to anything like that, so it stayed on wargame hexes.

The Matt Colville video was pretty good, although not much was surprising.  We got out to conventions from ‘76 on, so we saw some variety in play, not to mention among the local groups.I just reread the Elusive Shift after watching the video, by the way, and would recommend it ito anyone interested in the the play culture at the beginning.

 

[Hobgoblin]

One of the very 'wargamey' elements in the original D&D books is the "number appearing" column in the bestiary, which of course persists into AD&D. It indicates that a random encounter (in a wilderness) could throw up 30-300 orcs or bandits, for example, or 40-400 goblins. There are details of what sort of fortifications and artillery a group of orcs is likely to have, and so on.

I suspect a lot of early gamers found that baffling and just followed the note on adjusting to party size. But in the scope of a more 'wargamey' campaign (larger parties with lots and lots of henchmen, allies, etc.), it makes sense. For experienced GMs, it also works as a very quick way to populate and define a given area on a map: "... by the side of the road, you see grim totems: human and animal skulls set on stakes and daubed with vile runes. To the north, you can make an out a hill crowned with rocky outcrops, a crude palisade and a crooked tower ...".

That "area-filling" aspect of random-encounter tables wouldn't have occurred to me as a kid (I was just puzzled by the massive numbers in the Monster Manual). But it strikes me as really handy today.

[Warren Abox]

This is how we've been running more wargame oriented AD&D campaigns lately.  Everybody picks an entry from the Monster Manual and rolls up a force. Drop them into a 30-mile hex, and you're most of the way done with setup.

Figuring out the best practices for execution has been a fun struggle, with several campaigns crashing and burning along the way.  There just isn't much in the way of supporting or advice for this style of campaign out there in D&D land.  You have to go back to Tony Bath or look at Henry Hyde's tome on Wargame Campaigns.

So far we have found that weekly turn orders delivered to a GM produces the best outcomes, and when things get too complicated for that, we build a multi-faction Braunstein event.  There's always a low-key Braunstein kind of running in the background as the factions build and break alliances.  Each usually has goals that aren't mutually exclusive ("I help you secure that location you want if you help me gain that magic artifact that I want.") which adds some incentive for diplomatic play.

It works really well, and makes for a great break from the usual linear narrative style play.

[Hobgoblin]

This is how we've been running more wargame oriented AD&D campaigns lately.  Everybody picks an entry from the Monster Manual and rolls up a force. Drop them into a 30-mile hex, and you're most of the way done with setup.

Figuring out the best practices for execution has been a fun struggle, with several campaigns crashing and burning along the way.  There just isn't much in the way of supporting or advice for this style of campaign out there in D&D land.  You have to go back to Tony Bath or look at Henry Hyde's tome on Wargame Campaigns.

So far we have found that weekly turn orders delivered to a GM produces the best outcomes, and when things get too complicated for that, we build a multi-faction Braunstein event.  There's always a low-key Braunstein kind of running in the background as the factions build and break alliances.  Each usually has goals that aren't mutually exclusive ("I help you secure that location you want if you help me gain that magic artifact that I want.") which adds some incentive for diplomatic play.

It works really well, and makes for a great break from the usual linear narrative style play.

That sounds brilliant! I've been musing something similar, as my 'old' gaming group is scattered and meets only a few times a year, and the 'young' one has limited time because of sports and exams. I kind of like the idea of having the old-timers plus any of the other group who are keen doing a remote, political/wargamey campaign, with the younger group able to play out battles on the tabletop as they arise (preferably with deployment orders from the remote people ...).

One thing I saw online recently was talking about using straight AD&D for mass battles with a 1:10 ratio - so a PC (or a dragon, etc.) just divides his or her damage by 10 and multiplies by 10 whatever they receive (so really high-level characters can hold their own, but
more lowly heroes would be well advised to stay out of mass combat or embed themselves in a unit.

[mikedemana]

It is interesting this thread arose at this time. A friend of mine from our very early days of RPGs just recently rejoined our gaming group. He still does RPGs while our group has diverged from them since he left it. We talked about it over a recent wargame we were playing and decided our original D&D or Champions superhero sessions were really skirmish games -- not true RPGs.

In D&D, it was always tactical. Do we kick open another door? Is the thief in position above the door? One of my magic users had a large rock her minions carried around with her so she could use it with the telekinesis spell. Every group included a Paladin so he could say, "Evil get thee hence" and not have to fight the undead rooms. So, were we really roleplaying? We did talk out our roles and interactions, but honestly, we were playing skirmish wargames even back then. The term just didn't exist as we knew it.

Great way to walk down memory lane with this thread.

Mike Demana

[Warren Abox]

One thing I saw online recently was talking about using straight AD&D for mass battles with a 1:10 ratio - so a PC (or a dragon, etc.) just divides his or her damage by 10 and multiplies by 10 whatever they receive (so really high-level characters can hold their own, but
more lowly heroes would be well advised to stay out of mass combat or embed themselves in a unit.

The rules themselves provide some guidance on that, explicitly calling for a 1:10 or 1:20 figure ratio on page 39 of the PHB.  We've found that a lot of the rules in AD&D discarded over the decades come to the fore in wargame play.  Hobgoblin mentioned the Number Appearing in the Monster Manual, but take a second look at the things  like initiative by side (rather than by individual), weapons versus AC, and the morale rules, and a large number of spells. Spells like "Hallucinatory Terrain" and "Cloudkill" and "Massmorph" really shine in mass battles.

You might also re-read how charging works, and put that into a mass battle context. You choose between moving into combat at your normal speed and waiting until the next round to attack, or charging.  You can attack on the same turn you charge - which lets you attack on that same turn - and it gets you bonus movement and bonuses to hit, but attack order is based on weapon length rather than initiative. Add in the ability to set spears against charge, and you've got a detailed system for handling complex interactions between units that runs way faster than you expect.  The system is built on the old, familiar core D&D rules you already know, so you're halfway there already.

And don't discount the fun of exploring those interactions and looking for ways to exploit the old AD&D gal in new and surprising ways.  We've been playing AD&D for decades, but since pushing toward more domain-level play a couple of years ago, we've had a number of "AHA!" and "wait, you can do that?" moments. If anyone here tries a battle or two using AD&D, I'd love to hear about your experience.

[Hobgoblin]

The rules themselves provide some guidance on that, explicitly calling for a 1:10 or 1:20 figure ratio on page 39 of the PHB.  We've found that a lot of the rules in AD&D discarded over the decades come to the fore in wargame play.  Hobgoblin mentioned the Number Appearing in the Monster Manual, but take a second look at the things  like initiative by side (rather than by individual), weapons versus AC, and the morale rules, and a large number of spells. Spells like "Hallucinatory Terrain" and "Cloudkill" and "Massmorph" really shine in mass battles.

Ah - very interesting! All that ground-scale stuff in the PHB is really interesting and underscores the well-thought-out wargaming underpinning of the whole exercise.

Another aspect, which arises from both the PHB and the MM, is movement. It's a gift to a wargamer that movement is given in inches all the way through. This serves to differentiate monsters types much more than by hit dice. So, for example, goblins and orcs are really only separated by the goblin's -1 to HD if you ignore movement. But goblins move just 6" (like dwarfs and gnomes) whereas orcs move 9". In a wargame-style encounter, that's really significant. And the combination of AC, HD and Movement give you a really nice set of compact wargame stats with ample scope for differentiation between troop types.

You might also re-read how charging works, and put that into a mass battle context. You choose between moving into combat at your normal speed and waiting until the next round to attack, or charging.  You can attack on the same turn you charge - which lets you attack on that same turn - and it gets you bonus movement and bonuses to hit, but attack order is based on weapon length rather than initiative. Add in the ability to set spears against charge, and you've got a detailed system for handling complex interactions between units that runs way faster than you expect.  The system is built on the old, familiar core D&D rules you already know, so you're halfway there already.

Thanks very much for those pointers! I had a skim through the PHB, and there are lots of interesting wrinkles in there, as you say. For example, if you have a troop of two-handed-swordsmen, you'd probably want to send them in against gnolls rather than squander their potential chopping up orcs or hobgoblins (3d6 damage vs "Large" creatures).

And don't discount the fun of exploring those interactions and looking for ways to exploit the old AD&D gal in new and surprising ways.  We've been playing AD&D for decades, but since pushing toward more domain-level play a couple of years ago, we've had a number of "AHA!" and "wait, you can do that?" moments. If anyone here tries a battle or two using AD&D, I'd love to hear about your experience.

Sound advice! A couple of months ago, after reading some things on Braunstein-style games using (A)D&D, I resolved to base all my RPG-specific miniatures on square bases (I had been keeping the 'true 25' Ral Partha and Minifigs stuff on pennies), precisely to allow mass battles in games. As most figures fit onto 20mm squares, you don't use any significant RPG manoeuvrability over round bases, and you gain the advantage of being able to rank up.