Less than one hex monster

[phiwum]

Hey,

I was looking at Old School Monsters and thinking about Blood Hawks. I didn't put this in the OSM thread, however, because this is a broader question.

Blood hawks, like dragonets, are less than one hex in size. Like dragonets, they're in that niche between swarm and one hex. But they prefer the wounded or otherwise weak targets.

Blood hawks will
preferentially attack the vulnerable: the wounded, the
unarmored, the young.

So, I reckon that just like dragonets, they must attack from the same hex as their target, but that this isn't HTH. They engage their target (unlike swarm critters).

But I was wondering whether a small critter could gang up on a single target. They already break the usual rule regarding one figure per hex except for HTH, but I've always assumed that only one dragonet could enter a hex with one full-hex figure. I never really even noticed that assumption until I wondered how to effectively gang up on the weak.

So, what do y'all think? Can two dragonets/blood hawks effectively attack a single figure? Or is ganging up limited to having the first attacker disengage if he's wounded, while a healthy hawk takes his place? In my back yard, the hawks tend to go for rather smaller prey than a child, which I suppose is for the best, but that means I can't just observe nature to get my answer.

Thanks.

[Shostak]

Originally Posted by phiwum

But I was wondering whether a small critter could gang up on a single target. They already break the usual rule regarding one figure per hex except for HTH, but I've always assumed that only one dragonet could enter a hex with one full-hex figure. I never really even noticed that assumption until I wondered how to effectively gang up on the weak.

I'd say that yes, multiple small figures like dragonets could be in one's hex at the same time to attack.

Take a look at my solution for several small assailants encumbering a larger one in my grappling rules.

I also think the official rule on 2/hex stacking limit for things like rats [ITL 100] is far too low. It would be better to give small figures a fractional hex size so that the stacking could be quickly determined by whatever number of them is required to equal a size of 1 hex, e.g. if rats were determined to be 1/10-hex, 10 could occupy one hex.

[phiwum]

Originally Posted by Shostak

I'd say that yes, multiple small figures like dragonets could be in one's hex at the same time to attack.

Take a look at my solution for several small assailants encumbering a larger one in my grappling rules.

I also think the official rule on 2/hex stacking limit for things like rats [ITL 100] is far too low. It would be better to give small figures a fractional hex size so that the stacking could be quickly determined by whatever number of them is required to equal a size of 1 hex, e.g. if rats were determined to be 1/10-hex, 10 could occupy one hex.

I had forgotten the two per hex stacking limit for rats. Yes, that's too low. Anyone wearing leather armor would be immune from rat attacks, far as I can tell (the standard way to roll for rat attacks doesn't allow for double or triple damage even).

I play a six rat limit per hex. I was thinking a two dragonet/blood hawk limit.

[amenditman]

Originally Posted by phiwum

Anyone wearing leather armor would be immune from rat attacks

Is that an unreasonable assumption?

If they can get inside the armor, then OK. But if they have to eat through the armor it is going to give more than enough protection until they do.

If you need rats to hurt the figure, use bigger rats.

[hcobb]

Originally Posted by amenditman

If you need rats to hurt the figure, use bigger rats.

It would take rodents of unusual size to have a stacking limit as low as vikings.

[Shostak]

Originally Posted by amenditman

Is that an unreasonable assumption?

Rats can chew through leather in pretty short order if they are motivated.

[phiwum]

I suppose my problem with the two per hex limit is that rats just aren't even a nuisance at that point, unless a PC is wearing cloth or worse. You literally could leave your wounded behind without any concern about rats so long as they are wearing leather armor.

I'm not concerned, therefore, about how likely it is for rats to do damage to someone in leather[1] in real life, but about whether rats really pose at least a modest threat at all.

[1] Realistically, you're not in a leather hazmat suit, so I can't see how leather would prevent all injury. The abstraction of rolling n dice for n rats, with a 50/50 chance of hitting and then subtracting armor represents, I think, the fact that the more rats attacking, the more likely they find a soft and fleshy thing to bite.

Obviously, it's a rough representation, since realistically, even a single rat might find a bit of exposed skin but in game terms, the rat can't by himself defeat cloth armor.

[amenditman]

Originally Posted by phiwum

The abstraction of rolling n dice for n rats, with a 50/50 chance of hitting and then subtracting armor represents, I think, the fact that the more rats attacking, the more likely they find a soft and fleshy thing to bite.

Obviously, it's a rough representation, since realistically, even a single rat might find a bit of exposed skin but in game terms, the rat can't by himself defeat cloth armor.

I use this mechanic and just pile on the rats/spiders/etc.
It seems to be an effective solution to swarms and 'real' enough for me.
As to the original question of how many fit in a hex, I think Treebeard said it best. "They are very small". Put as many as you want and don't think too hard about it.

[phiwum]

Precisely how I figger it, amenditman (aptly named!). I allow six rats per hex.

And thanks to this discussion, I reckon two hawks or dragonets per hex (with a person) sounds about right. That will allow the hawks to focus on the soft targets as they're supposed to.

[amenditman]

Have you ever considered flying spiders (way worse than wasps) or the flying monkeys from The Wizard of Oz (read the books, way more meat for gaming than the film).