SDLeary

Yup, that's basically what he said in the video. Along with the downsides of a mace. SDLeary

Virtues of each weapon in various uses. Medieval context, but probably applicable to earlier times as well. SDLeary

"OK! Time for some training!" 😆 SDLeary

I have a vague recollection of this being mentioned by Greg in the early 2010s. Something along the lines of a GPC type campaign book. No clues as to how far along it ever got, but it would certainly be fun to have. SDLeary

Rick, is the plan to re-brand these two items, or to produce new versions with errata integrated? SDLeary

Easy fix though. Pike is a Battlefield/Formation weapon, and thus is outside SR progression. IF a SR value is needed (PC in the front ranks anyone?!) I would say that its more along the lines of 3 (mass, unwieldiness, and all). SDLeary

There was one of those videos on YouTube, where they interview a weapons expert. This one was interviewing Matt Easton (Schola Gladiatoria). They had him watch several flics and comment on the fighting scenes. One of the movies was Troy, specifically the fight between Achilles and Hector. He stated that for the most part, it was a fairly accurate representation of Spear and Shield dueling. There are several instances within the fight where they use the spears (1h) to parry or block the other spear. In fact, he states that Medieval treatises often show how one would use a spear in just such a manner. In other Schola Gladiatoria (proper) vids, Easton has stated that parrying with axes and maces is possible, but the forward heavy nature of the weapons makes it awkward at best. So, yes-ish? Probably in duals, as the movements would not be conducive to a shield wall or phalanx. SDLeary

Hello All, Tod's Workshop is coming back with another round of testing of Longbow vs. Plate armor. Sounds like they are going to side and back shots this time, along with a French Bascinet if they can get the funding. They have set up a Kickstarter to try and get said funding, so head on over! They are at $15K of $50K at this time, with 28 days left. SDLeary

A single edge sword doesn't preclude stabbing. In fact, because of the back, it could be more rigid, and actually better at stabbing. SDLeary

Affinity Publisher. Seriously capable, and iirc what @Loz uses for Mithras layout. In fact, looks like they are running a sale now! Their other apps (Photo, Designer) along with Publisher make a decent replacement for the core Adobe apps. SDLeary

Something that cropped up today: Admittedly, he is talking about iron/steel weapons of the Middle Ages, but the design philosophy and implementation still applies. SDLeary

And, just for some completeness, to show how robust these things were/are! SDLeary

The thing is, if something is published under a gaming company's imprint without any sort of disclaimer or sub-branding (Jonstown Compendium), then it is generally considered canon. It certainly doesn't mean that things can't change, but is considered canon. SDLeary

Correct. However, it confers upon the wielder the ability to attack from either position, using the other weapon as both a device to deliver a feint, and to function as a replacement for a shield. Also correct. It confers the ability to choose to attack from differing vectors, or perhaps more accurate a wider range of differing vectors. That is the thing. When you have two weapons, if you have enough skill with your off hand, you can choose to use that hand instead. If the opponent misses their attack, that shouldn't allow attacking with your off hand, which in your method is for parrying. This is because during your opponents attack, you have (more than likely, unless you are well armored) you have committed the parrying hand to parrying. I would posit that it would be more "realistic?" to allow repost on a significant parry result, such as a Critical Parry. This would denote that your parry has created a significant opening or thrown your opponent off balance enough that you can get an additional blow in. SDLeary

I'm toying with the idea of simply lowering the parry chance of the defender if they are facing a dual wielder. Reasoning is that they have a more difficult time predicting the vector a successful attack will come from. So, the purpose of dual-wielding is NOT to confer any real advantage on the person fighting that way, but to confuse the defender in their attempts to parry/block things. SDLeary

Because the general mode a spear is used in, the thrust, it has the potential to be better against armor. If you get a good, clean, perpendicular hit against the plane of the armor. Arrows, the same. A sword in a thrust could have the same advantages, because they are not only used to cut. The problem is, that most weapons in these categories are not (traditionally) designed to do this. If you look at most spears, arrow heads, and sword points, they are broad blades. Broad blades are not good at penetration against rigid items. They can penetrate, but the design of the head is not actually designed for that. There are some spears, arrows, and swords with specialty points that are designed for armor penetration, but certainly not the majority. So giving all spears (or any other weapon) a cart blanche +1 to all damage because its good against armor, feels a bit... off. And back to my shortsword reference. My question actually was (should have been?), if a shortsword is NOT used in a thrust capacity (or if a Hewing Spear is NOT used in a thrust capacity), are you still giving it a +1 in your system? SDLeary

But in general, they aren't. They just give you the advantage of reach. Even assuming they were, would you then lose the additional +1 if you were fighting someone without armor? Same for the other weapons mentioned. And if you going this route, does something like a Gladius do more when thrusting? That's what it was optimized to do. I'm all for this. Currently, I do envision it a bit differently though: If you are brought to 0 or below Total HP through normal damage, then you have CON – (amount taken below CON) Hours to die If you are brought to 0 or below Total HP due to a Major Wound*, then you have CON – (amount taken below CON) to die If you are brought to 0 or below Total HP due to a Critical Wound**, then you have CON – (amount taken below CON) Melee Rounds to die * A single blow that exceeds the value of the location ** An actual Critical Hit that takes you below CON SDLeary

I wouldn't say unable. If one of the pair is missing, perhaps a 20% penalty? SDLeary

Perhaps, YGWV. But it certainly does add a little bit of flavor to each region and make it less like one overarching myth imposed [Holy Grail French Axent] by nasty God-Learner types [/Holy Grail French Axent]. SDLeary

Yes, more like a Falcata. SDLeary

The way I read this is that they think the damage should come from skill and strength as opposed to the weapon itself. So think of it somewhat like Pendragon (or PDP) modified somewhat by skill (though I could easily be wrong about skill, and they were just thinking success level). SDLeary

Yes. Delta Green/Apocthulhu Sanity rules can pull this off at a relatively low level; they have Fight/Flight/Freeze rules at the core. Can bolt on all the other stuff as needed (perhaps in the case of a Fumble). SDLeary

I would mix it up a bit depending upon the Stress. Perhaps something along the lines of a personal passion with POW for Helplessness for example. Or POW + INT for Violence, or something like that. Of course it depends on what you are using for Stress sutuations. You might want to give your CA player some additional skills or spells that act as temporary psychotherapy. I would also advise you take a look at Delta Green, and Apocthulhu. They both have a D100 take on using this kind of Stress/Sanity system. SDLeary

This. If you have access to UA2, it can port over somewhat seamlessly. And based on your other posts, it sounds like it models more the kind of madness that you're after. SDLeary