Jump to content

fulk

Members
  • Content Count

    125
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

fulk last won the day on October 4 2016

fulk had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

41 Excellent

About fulk

  • Rank
    Junior Member

Converted

  • RPG Biography
    Played RQ since the 1980s
  • Current games
    Pendragon, RQ6/Mythras/BRP, DnD5, Talislanta
  • Location
    Seattle
  • Blurb
    Castle fan

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I would be inclined to disagree. Clothing is just part of your annual budget. If you live at a Superlative level, you have Superlative clothing, which is replaced every year that you can maintain that level of spending. Display is important and clothing is a primary form of display. One could obviously limit this effect to degradable items. So an ermine-lined cloak is part of your Superlative clothing budget, but a gold ring, which would retain value, is not. Alternatively, a gold ring could be part of the Superlative budget but go out of style over time also losing value, even though it's gold. Depends on how much tracking of small stuff you want to do. We could argue about whether or not simple knights are allowed to wear superlative clothing. There were certainly various sumptuary laws and traditions about who could wear what. So perhaps your simple vassal knight isn't allow to wear an ermine-lined cloak. Then I suppose one could limit the value of clothing actually worn. I'm not a huge fan of minor book-keeping, so I prefer to let most that the small stuff just fall in the annual budget and assume that the knight has the same value of clothes each year that his spending is the same.
  2. True. But you can't have everything. Plus, I'm not sure if that is a quirk or a feature...
  3. This would be true of early RuneQuest-based games too. I'm not super fond of the separate shield (and maybe dodge) skills, but they do allow the character to port his/her defensive capabilities from one weapon to the next.
  4. I generally like the GURPS defaults. I don't worry about that aspect being too complicated because the issue probably doesn't come up that often. GURPS overall is a bit more complicated than I like. I can never figure out how many or what skills are appropriate for the setting. Skill trees aren't too bad either, for the same reason. Artesia, which is a Fuzion-based game, also uses skill trees -- Melee sKill and then specializing in something specific (sword) as the costs of increasing the base skill rise.
  5. As a related point, NPC skill levels are, I think, important for defining the world and your PKs place in it based on things like skills. If a farmer has basically no military training, but Mace 8, a knight should start higher. If you inflate NPC skills, PKs will need/want to do the same.
  6. Absolutely. There is a lot of wrestling (and half-swording) in the manuals that involve 'military' as opposed to 'civilian' fencing, especially in Fiore's work, which includes a whole section specifically on fighting in armor. One uses the sword more like a can opener than anything else. (My guess is that you're aware of this).
  7. Do you (anyone) have any game systems that handle this topic well, in your opinion? Just curious.
  8. So I've been fencing for a couple of years (classical fencing, Italian dueling saber). Hitting the maestro, if he doesn't want to get hit, is pretty hard, but he's not perfect. One thing he always asks is, "would you have tried that if we had sharp weapons?" The answer is usually no. You can hit any one if you're willing to be killed in the process, maybe.
  9. No problem. Same for my rebuttal. Already forgot it. Can't even remember it. In my experience, this issue comes up in KAP and RuneQuest related forums every so often. Every one agrees there are some similarities and some differences. Some people think the default should be big, others small. I'm for generally smaller defaults. Apart from historical reality, it is a game of course, I've found that something like -5 works well. Players are more likely to diversify weapon skills if they actually can be reasonably proficient with alternates. Going from sword 16 to mace 11 actually encourages some potential weapon switching, although your table may vary. Once you add in the vagaries of experience rolls, and cap the max skill from a default (for me at 15), you can get an array of weapon skills for more experience knights. It all depends how your group plays though. F
  10. I defer to your utterly superior knowledge and intelligence. You can argue about longsword* and poleaxe with Fiore dei Liberi (1409) who explicitly shows that the guards for a poleaxe are the same as the guards for sword (with two hands) and that one can also use the same guards with a spear. You can argue with Petro Monte (~1500 or so) about 1H vs 2H swords. He notes that the principles of the sword in two hands applies to the sword in one hand, although he does also list a differences too. Of course, these examples aren't specifically relevant to the early period in KAP. Nevertheless, all the details aside, no one is suggesting that things are exactly the same. Weapons have different weights, lengths, strengths and weaknesses. It is a matter of how big a penalty you think applies for shifting from a sword and shield to a mace and shield, or whatever. Clearly you like a bigger drop. I just don't think the penalty should be as large when shifting between weapons that are used similarly. Of course there are some differences between a sword and a mace, but dropping from Sword 20 to Mace 5 seems too much as it ignores all the experience about combat in general that the knight has gained moving from 10 at the start of chargen to 20 after years of experience. I would set the penalty based on similarity of use between the weapons. For example, I don't think being good with a lance would give you much aptitude with a dagger. Regardless, KAP is a simple game mechanically. You can chose a -5 or a -10 or base 5 pretty easily. YPMV. * (in modern English parlance, or hand and a half, or bastard, or spada in due mani, spadone, or sword in two hands, I agree contemporaries didn't use the terms longsword or bastard sword, mostly just 'sword' in translation)
  11. In the end, whatever works in your game. I'm for a higher default for several reasons. If you look at late medieval and early rinascimento fencing manuals (Fiore, Marozzo) one of the things they point out is that the principles defense (footwork etc) are the same. The guards, footwork, etc for a pole axe are the same as for a longsword, etc. Some like Pietro Monte point out that everybody knows that you can use a one-handed sword more or less the same way as a longsword/bastard sword, so he's not going to talk about 1-h swords. These manuals also show that fighters trained and were aware of a range of weapons. I assume, in a KAP environment, that knights are familiar with swords, maces, and axes, but prefer one. So dropping to 5 as a starting point, seems unrealistic. YPMV
  12. I think the takeaway is: weapons skills shouldn't start at zero and you should get some credit for being a good fighter in general...how you model that depends on your version of Pendragon.
  13. It's not a bad idea overall, but it is more fiddly than I would like. I think a default (-5, -10, 1/2 current skill etc) makes more sense for other reasons too. Your shield work depends a bit on your axe work. If you over extend, because you are unfamiliar with weight and balance of the axe, your defense will be lower. Plus...its just more simple. Personally, for me, have a decent default makes it more likely that I will use an axe or mace in some circumstances and thereby actually advance them through experience rolls. As always YPMV.
  14. I find the starting skill of 0 ridiculous, especially for knights. Older versions of KAP had default skills for most weapons, that were also quite low. I've always just used 1/2 dex as a minimum. However, realistically, smacking someone with an axe really isn't a that different from smacking them with a sword. I just can't see a huge difference in axe & shield vs. sword & shield vs mace & shield. I also tend to use Best Weapon - 5, maxing at 15. So a knight with sword 20 would default to mace 15. Of course YPMV.
  15. One doesn't really trump on or the other. Those in KAP5.2 are culture and period agnostic. They are general across all settings. Those in BoK&L are culture and period specific. I'd also check to topic to which Morien linked (above). There is a long discussion comparing the two docs. NT
×
×
  • Create New...