Out of Character discussion:

You can move and shoot but I BELIEVE the movement has to happen first... I'm not 100% on that though.

B/X rules aren't super clear on the order of things, basically just saying you can move up to 1/3 your BMR, "and also attack".


For my games, I'm actually fine with you making your non-movement Action any time during the PC's turn. So you can attack first then move; move first then attack; or even move some of your movement distance, make an attack, and then and finish your movement. The latter option works well if you're trying to get a quick strike in on an enemy as you dash past.

In the IRL game I run I have a rule that if you break up your movement to run up on an enemy, strike him, and then retreat the same direction you came from (as opposed to running past), all movement after your attack is considered a fighting retreat and is halved.

For example, say Gilly is standing 10' from the hole in the wall and a brigand steps up. Gilly has a 120' BMR, so she normally gets to move 40' on her turn. So she runs 10' up on the man (meaning she has 30' of movement left), stabs at him with her dagger, and then backs up the way she came. Since she's backing up from the same direction she came (as opposed to dashing by) she's engaging in a fighting retreat and her remaining movement of 30' is halved. She can only retreat 15'.

If she ran 10', struck at him, and continued past in the same direction she was already going, that's not a fighting retreat, so she gets to move her remaining 30'. But the act of doubling back again eats a lot of your remaining movement.

Does that make sense?

Does to me

Makes sense to me! Thanks!

Makes sense to me.

Holiday speed bump?

Fo sho. All the other games I'm in have come to a screeching halt.

Yep. Everything is slowed right down

Hope everything is ok with our GM...

@funfungiguy: You good my man? Didn't catch the holiday bug I hope.

I know I'm pretty strict about playing RAW, but I've been willing to be more flexible lately. Not too flexible, but a bit.

In my IRL game, I've been talked into allowing natural-20 rolls to do extra success and attack rolls do double-damage. The players seem to enjoy it.

To offset this, natural-1 rolls usually mean extra failure.

Does anyone want to apply this to the campaign, or should we continue to stick with RAW.

I'm honestly fine with both. I prefer RAW, but my IRL players like it when I stretch my neck out a bit.

Ultimately I'm fine with either way but the more we fudge the more we end up just playing 1e...

I'm wheeling closer to @dominion451. I love the philosophy.

Now that being said, Gilly has the honor of rolling the first crit, so in the spirit of halfling love I'd say maybe let her decide the fate of the nat 20...

Halflings are my peeps... @KCC69: Do you take the crit and do double-damage and alter the game forever, or stick to the RAW...?

As the last player through the door, I feel bad altering the game. Let’s stick to RAW.

Okay... it was still a 100% hit. Any 20 is.

I love that people respect the RAW. As soon as get home I'll give Gilly choice of targets.

Just got late to the party. As fun as Nat 1 failures and Nat 20 Crit’s can be, RAW is how we been playing. And as DM, I will follow whatever decision you choose happily. (When I build up the courage to DM a game of my own I hope I’ll have the stones to make the same call lol)

Frankly in a game as deadly as Basic d&d I wouldn't want to be hit by an enemy crit, so I won't miss it too much.