Jump to content

Barak Shathur

Regulars
  • Posts

    72
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Converted

  • RPG Biography
    Gamer since 1982. D&D, Drakar & Demoner, MERP/RM and now RQ/BGB
  • Current games
    RQ/BGB
  • Location
    Sweden

Recent Profile Visitors

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

Barak Shathur's Achievements

Newbie

Newbie (1/4)

15

Reputation

  1. Standard RQ dwarves are much weaker than humans due to their low SIZ. When humans got their SIZ bumped from 3d6 to 2d6+6 (I think between 2nd and 3rd ed?) dwarves were left at 2d6 so in terms of calculating damage bonus they fell way behind. This does not reflect WFRP well, so I would bump dwarf SIZ to 1d6+6 (as more recent BRP iterations tend to do).
  2. Not exactly. My proposal was actually that if you attack and parry in the same round with the same weapon, the attack (limited to one unless you have over 100% skill) is counted as one "parry" in terms of the cumulative -30%. For example, first you parry at full skill, then you attack at -30%, then you parry again at -60% etc. Or attack at full skill, parry at -30%, parry again at -60%, etc. I see.
  3. Yeah, but this could be offset by carrying a shield while advancing and then just dropping it before entering melee. I'm thinking more and more that this might be the solution. It's a bit more awkward to manage, but it's there in the rules and it seems it would work as in real life, so maybe BRP wins this one. Like Harnmaster's Tactical Advantages! Yet another proof of how flawed BGB:s weapon system is compared to RQ3:s . In BGB, most weapons and shields have 15-20ish HP. Since you need to do more than that to even begin to damage a parrying implement, it's basically moot. And parrying deflects all damage anyway, so there is no advantage to shields as far as I can tell, apart from the ability to parry missiles. And like I already said, that can be countered by carrying a shield around until you're engaged in melee. It's strange, when BGB is so good, that it's not better.
  4. I think this is exactly what I was proposing.
  5. Yes, this is certainly true. At the same time, the weapon and shield guy has one tool for parrying and another for attacking. Even if you two hands to control your zweihander, the other guy can parry and attack at the same time while you have to recover your weapon's balance so some degree between actions. However, we are trying to create an abstraction that works in a game. In my book, someone with a shield has a defensive advantage while the great weapon fighter has an offensive one. I want this to be reflected in the rules.
  6. That's cool. I prefer a good fighter to have a chance to hold off two or three opponents rather than automatically being cut down. Again, it mirrors my SCA experience.
  7. Yes, if you're talking about closing. You said entering the longer weapon's range, which isn't quite the same thing. Thanks for clearing that up. I'm thinking that as an alternative to limiting two-handed weapons to either attacking or defending, one can count an attack as using up one parry attempt, so that any parries later in that round start at -30%. And conversely, if you've parried and then attack, the cumulative penalty is added to that attack. I'm not sure which one harmonises best with the system.
  8. Actually it's the other way round, the combatant with the lowest SR goes first. So the one with the longer weapon will be able to strike before the one with the shorter weapon.
  9. Yes, a highly skilled polearm or great weapon fighter can get around the disadvantages, especially since he/she has a lot of experience fighting weapon and shield opponents, while the reverse is not true. Kind of like a left handed fighter. I've found that they are often able to figure out some trick that works well against people who haven't fought against them a lot, but eventually, once you've seen it enough times (and it enters the general knowledge of SCA fighters) it becomes less effective. I've seen a Crown tournament where a pole arm guy had a trick no one there had encountered before, and no one had time to figure out how to counter it during the brief time of the tournament, so it carried him all the way to the throne. But it was a one trick pony, and it wouldn't work forever. Against newbies however, it's a killer. This kind of effect is reflected well in the rules, where a highly skilled fighter gets specials more often, and it works especially well since the system is slanted toward the attacker since it forces the defender to score a special parry or dodge to counter fully. That's how RQ3 works too. It seems to me that it makes twohanded weapons a no-brainer choice, if as stated above you'll simply do more damage but have the same defensive ability as a weapon and shield fighter. I think I will limit all weapons to either attacking or defending during a round, but allowing dodging, since that is penalised when wearing armour. In addition to reflecting reality, it creates balance since a twohanded fighter then has worse defensive ability when attacking than a weapon and shield fighter, whose shield parry is unaffected by encumbrance.
  10. I'm a scadian fighter too :). Or was, I have maybe around 10 years' experience spread out in intervals since 1988, but now I'm largely retired (I think the pandemic was the killing blow, but you never know...). My experience with greatswords and halberds was that when fighting against such an opponent, with me using sword and shield, they would often get the first attack in due to greater weapon length, which I however was usually able to quite easily parry with my shield. Once I started pressing the attack, they would largely have to be on the defensive, getting in maybe a third or a quarter of the amount of shots that I did. This was because once they've attacked and I've blocked, it's fairly easy for me to strike them before they have time to recover their weapon fast enough to parry, so in order to survive they had to either just focus on parrying until I missed, overextended, left an opening or something like that, or try to maneuver away from and around me in order to stay out of my weapon's reach and strike from that distance, which is hard to do when you're in heavy armour. Thus it was very rare for me to lose to such a fighter, and you also almost never saw great weapons or polearms in our duel style tournaments. They are just at too great a disadvantage against sword and shield. In real life, however, several things would be different. We use rattan weapons in the SCA. With a steel greatsword or greataxe, you might break the shield and change the dynamic entirely. Also in mass combat, they are very effective since they can use other fighters as cover. But my question was not one of realism, it was regarding rule interpretation. What does the BGB say? By the way, I hate their parrying rule, which says all the damage in an attack is deflected by any successful parry. And with most weapons and shields having 15-20 HP they're almost impossible to break, even with a greatsword with its 2d8 damage. For this reason I use RQ3 for weapon stats, where a shield has 8-16 AP and deflects that many points of damage, so a great weapon has a good chance of getting some damage through and even breaking it. But I've griped about this in another thread. But regarding BGB. Can you both attack and parry with a given weapon in the same round?
  11. I need some help interpreting the rules for 2H weapons. Are you able to attack and parry in the same round with a twohander? In RQ3 you can. It's not clear to me how it works in BGB. Under "Parrying", it says "A character armed with a parrying weapon or shield can block the damage from an attack". Should "parrying weapon" be interpreted as "any weapon that can be used to parry with", or a specialty weapon such as a main gauche? If the former, does this mean that you can in effect parry with any weapon you have also used to attack with in the same round? If this is the case, a twohanded weapon is much superior to a onehanded weapon with shield combination, since you'll do much more damage with the twohander but still be able to deflect attacks completely as per the parrying rules (only benefit to a shield being the ability to parry missiles). The same thing goes with combining Dodge with an attack. Can you attack (with any weapon) and also dodge freely? Again, using a twohanded weapon seems to carry only benefits and no drawbacks here. Or am I missing something?
  12. I'm a (more or less) retired SCAdian (started in 1989 and went off and on for the next 25+ years), and in recent years I've tried out HEMA a bit. I wasn't aware of the HEMA connection to Mythras, that's a fun fact. Thanks. For a player like me, who loves history and has done a fair amount of so called "experimental archeology" through my SCA activities, historical accuracy is part of the fun! Now I'm going to give Harnmaster a try. I like their tactical advantage function, it adds the quality of pressing an advantage, but available to everyone, not just certain characters all the time.
  13. Thanks, I'll take a look! One thought I toyed with is to only allow one attack per round regardless of action points, while any extra action points can be used to parry against several opponents, or possibly do other non offensive things as well. How do you think that might work? Should extra parries be penalised in this case, in your opinion?
  14. Completely agree. Another solution would be to have the shield have AP (how much damage they block) and HP (how much damage they can sustain). In that case, both are lowered by 1 point (to follow RQ3 rule) each time the AP are overcome. You can then have a wooden shield with 12 AP, but only 8 HP, for example. Which system are you talking about in this case? In RQ3, the shield APs seem about right to me. In BGB, both shield and weapon AP are way too high, but then again, like I said in the OP they ruined the parrying system by making a parry deflect all damage. No difference between parrying a dagger or a greataxe. The problem with reducing APs for weapons and shields is that adventurers wind up with deteriorating equipment while their NPC opponents always have just gotten their off the shelf, which seems a bit unfair. I really like the shield breakage system from the Swedish BRP game Drakar och Demoner Expert (I'm Swedish), where every point of damage that exceeds a shield's AP gives 1 on a d20 to break it. So exceed it by 5, it breaks if you roll 5 or under on a d20. Simple and brilliant.
×
×
  • Create New...