Shields/Weapon HP and Parrying

[Chromatism]

Edit: Thanks for your help! One piece of the puzzle has become clear; I was incorrectly equating the damage absorbed by a weapon/shield as also being the damage it received in certain circumstances (such as with a critical or special hit vs a normal parry). I now understand that the weapon/shield absorbs up to it's current HP in damage, and then any remaining damage applies as per the chart on page 199.

I'm still not entirely clear about the wording on page 200 "Parrying a Critical Hit" vs the Parry table on 199, but I've posted an edited version of question 2 in the Core Rules thread on these forums. Great stuff  

 

I looked! I promise! But unfortunately I can't quite locate an answer to these particular questions.

I'm struggling a just a little when it comes to the concept of HP with Weapons and Shields, particularly in regards to parrying. What I've learned so far can best be summarised below:

• The current total HP of a weapon or shield indicates how much damage it can absorb while parrying, with any remaining damage carrying over to strike the defender.
• At 0 HP the Weapon or Shield becomes "unusable" - it can still be used, but at half skill penalty.
  • At 0 HP and above the weapon/shield can be repaired in the field, but damage taken into the negative requires special attention.
• A weapon or shield can take twice it's max total HP before it's destroyed.
   

So here are the missing pieces of this particular puzzle:

1. It becomes clear that parrying with a weapon or shield that is "unusable" will not block any damage, since it's current total HP is is at or below 0. However am I right in reading that an "unusable" weapon can (for example) still be used to parry if a special or critical result is rolled against a normal attack?
    
2. In the case of a critical attack vs a normal parry, the parry chart shows that the defender's weapon/shield has it's HP reduced by the damage rolled. However in the blurb on page 200 it states that while the weapon/shield blocks the damage it normally would, it receives double the damage from the attack. To my mind, as written, this makes little sense... if I have an undamaged small shield imposed against a critically attacking broad sword, the broad sword will deal max damage (18 + damage bonus). The small shield then absorbs 8 damage as normal, but receives another 8 damage on top and is destroyed. If it had less HP, it wouldn't be destroyed since it could only absorb up to it's current HP total. I'm quite sure this is just a case of extremely confusing wording, but clarification would be grand.
    
3. Returning to the chart for special/critical attacks vs normal parries, it makes it clear that the parrying weapon or shield receives damage over it's normal HP. This ties into my confusion from the above question, so I just want to make absolutely sure I have this correct - A special attack swings in against my normal small shield parry for 14 points of damage. My small shield takes 8 points of damage while also absorbing the same, leaving 6 damage remaining from the attack and my shield at 0 HP. This 6 damage penetrates my defences, ignoring armour, dealing direct damage to the arm carrying the shield. In addition my small shield receives an equal amount of damage, bringing it to -6HP. Is this correct?

Thanks very much guys. Your help is hugely appreciated

Edited January 18, 2020 by Chromatism

[soltakss]

13 minutes ago, Chromatism said:

It becomes clear that parrying with a weapon or shield that is "unusable" will not block any damage, since it's current total HP is is at or below 0. However am I right in reading that an "unusable" weapon can (for example) still be used to parry if a special or critical result is rolled against a normal attack?

I would say that you could do this.

On the face of it, this makes no sense, as the shield has 0 HPs, but you are using your skill to turn away an attack, rather than just putting something in the way to block the attack.

14 minutes ago, Chromatism said:

In the case of a critical attack vs a normal parry, the parry chart shows that the defender's weapon/shield has it's HP reduced by the damage rolled. However in the blurb on page 200 it states that while the weapon/shield blocks the damage it normally would, it receives double the damage from the attack. To my mind, as written, this makes little sense... if I have an undamaged small shield imposed against a critically attacking broad sword, the broad sword will deal max damage (18 + damage bonus). The small shield then absorbs 8 damage as normal, but receives another 8 damage on top and is destroyed. If it had less HP, it wouldn't be destroyed since it could only absorb up to it's current HP total. I'm quite sure this is just a case of extremely confusing wording, but clarification would be grand.

The Table on Page 199 and the Text on Page 200 don't agree. this kind of thing is really annoying, as they are only one page apart and this could easily have been picked up by a good rules-competent proofreader.

The Table says that a critical attack vs a Normal Parry "Attacker rolls special damage. Defender’s parrying weapon HP reduced by the damage rolled. Any excess damage goes to adjacent hit location, with no armor protection". The Text on Page 200 says "Parrying a Critical Hit. Though the target’s armor does not subtract any damage from a critical hit, a successful parry from a weapon or shield blocks the amount of damage it normally would. However, a weapon that parries a critical hit takes twice the damage it would take normally. If the attacking weapon is a long-hafted weapon or an impaling weapon, the parrying weapon takes no damage. A shield that parries a critical hit receives twice as much damage as normal, and any unabsorbed damage strikes the parrying adventurer.".

So, they both agree that the Shield absorbs its HP in damage and the remainder goes through to hit, ignoring armour. Fine, that works OK, although reading it again,l they are not the same.

The table says the parrying weapon's HPs are reduced by the damage rolled. The Text says that the parrying weapon or Shield takes twice as much damage as it would have done. 

So, what does that mean? Looking at Chromatism's example, a Broadsword Criticals and does 18 Points of Damage and is parried by a Small Shield with 8 HPs.

According to the Table, the shield takes the full damage, so takes 18 HPs, it only has 8 HPs, so the shield is reduced to 0 HP and 10 HPs goes throiugh to a random Hit Location, doing 10 points of damage and ignoring armour. Ouch!

The Text says that the shield blocks 8 HPs of damage, leaving 10 HPs, this does 20 HPs of damage to the shield, destroying it, the shield reduces the damage by 8, leaving 12 points of damage to go through to strike a Hit Location, direct  and ignoring armour.

So, both result in the Shield being destroyed, but the first does 10 points of damage and the second does 12 points of damage.

This is annoying, as a Shield parrying a Critical Hit is not an uncommon occurrence or edge case and should clearly be covered in the rules.

What would I do? Pick one and stick with it. I'd use the results from the Table and ignore what it says in the Text. however, maybe one for Jason in the Rules Clarification Thread where Nobody else May Comment.

The moral of the tale might be not to mess about using a small shield, but to use a Medium or Large Shield, but perhaps that isn't the right moral.

 

[soltakss]

34 minutes ago, Chromatism said:

Returning to the chart for special/critical attacks vs normal parries, it makes it clear that the parrying weapon or shield receives damage over it's normal HP. This ties into my confusion from the above question, so I just want to make absolutely sure I have this correct - A special attack swings in against my normal small shield parry for 14 points of damage. My small shield takes 8 points of damage while also absorbing the same, leaving 6 damage remaining from the attack and my shield at 0 HP. This 6 damage penetrates my defences, ignoring armour, dealing direct damage to the arm carrying the shield. In addition my small shield receives an equal amount of damage, bringing it to -6HP. Is this correct?

Oh, there's more, sorry, didn't see this one.

The Table says "Attacker rolls special damage. Defender’s parrying weapon takes damage over its HP, with same amount of damage going to adjacent hit location.".

So, in the example, the attack does 14 points and the shield blocks 8 HPs. The Shield takes 6 points of damage, reducing it to 2HPs and the person takes 6 points of damage, but does not ignore armour, so armour protects. The Hit Location struck is going to be the Shield Arm, despite what I thought was true, as the Text on Page 198 says "A Successful Parry. A successful parry blocks points of damage only equal to the parrying weapon’s current hit points. If more points of damage get through, those points go on to affect a hit location of the defender, determined randomly in the case of a parrying weapon, or referring to the Shield Hit Location table (page 219). In most cases, a hit to a shield damages the arm wielding it. Additionally, the parrying weapon or shield loses 1 hit point, simulating the damage it took blocking such an overwhelming blow.", so, it hits the parrying arm for a small shield.

The moral of the tale is still to use a Medium or Large Shield instead of a Small Shield.

[Chromatism]

6 minutes ago, soltakss said:

What would I do? Pick one and stick with it. I'd use the results from the Table and ignore what it says in the Text. however, maybe one for Jason in the Rules Clarification Thread where Nobody else May Comment.

The moral of the tale might be not to mess about using a small shield, but to use a Medium or Large Shield, but perhaps that isn't the right moral.

 

Thank you! I might just do that.

And you're quite right. Definitely a moral to be taken away, however in this case just used to illustrate my thought process at hand

[Chromatism]

2 minutes ago, soltakss said:

Oh, there's more, sorry, didn't see this one.

The Table says "Attacker rolls special damage. Defender’s parrying weapon takes damage over its HP, with same amount of damage going to adjacent hit location.".

So, in the example, the attack does 14 points and the shield blocks 8 HPs. The Shield takes 6 points of damage, reducing it to 2HPs and the person takes 6 points of damage, but does not ignore armour, so armour protects. The Hit Location struck is going to be the Shield Arm, despite what I thought was true, as the Text on Page 198 says "A Successful Parry. A successful parry blocks points of damage only equal to the parrying weapon’s current hit points. If more points of damage get through, those points go on to affect a hit location of the defender, determined randomly in the case of a parrying weapon, or referring to the Shield Hit Location table (page 219). In most cases, a hit to a shield damages the arm wielding it. Additionally, the parrying weapon or shield loses 1 hit point, simulating the damage it took blocking such an overwhelming blow.", so, it hits the parrying arm for a small shield.

The moral of the tale is still to use a Medium or Large Shield instead of a Small Shield.

Ah! Yes... thank's so much. I was reading the text, but I wasn't putting it together properly. The shield absorbs it's current HP in damage, then the remaining damage is dealt to both the arm and the shield, in this case 6 points. And you're quite right about the arm armour being allowed to absorb in this example. Terrific help.

[French Desperate WindChild]

17 minutes ago, soltakss said:

I would say that you could do this.

The Table says that a critical attack vs a Normal Parry "Attacker rolls special damage. Defender’s parrying weapon HP reduced by the damage rolled. Any excess damage goes to adjacent hit location, with no armor protection". The Text on Page 200 says "Parrying a Critical Hit. Though the target’s armor does not subtract any damage from a critical hit, a successful parry from a weapon or shield blocks the amount of damage it normally would. However, a weapon that parries a critical hit takes twice the damage it would take normally. If the attacking weapon is a long-hafted weapon or an impaling weapon, the parrying weapon takes no damage. A shield that parries a critical hit receives twice as much damage as normal, and any unabsorbed damage strikes the parrying adventurer.".

So, they both agree that the Shield absorbs its HP in damage and the remainder goes through to hit, ignoring armour. Fine, that works OK, although reading it again,l they are not the same.

The table says the parrying weapon's HPs are reduced by the damage rolled. The Text says that the parrying weapon or Shield takes twice as much damage as it would have done. 

So, what does that mean? Looking at Chromatism's example, a Broadsword Criticals and does 18 Points of Damage and is parried by a Small Shield with 8 HPs.

According to the Table, the shield takes the full damage, so takes 18 HPs, it only has 8 HPs, so the shield is reduced to 0 HP and 10 HPs goes throiugh to a random Hit Location, doing 10 points of damage and ignoring armour. Ouch!

The Text says that the shield blocks 8 HPs of damage, leaving 10 HPs, this does 20 HPs of damage to the shield, destroying it, the shield reduces the damage by 8, leaving 12 points of damage to go through to strike a Hit Location, direct  and ignoring armour.

So, both result in the Shield being destroyed, but the first does 10 points of damage and the second does 12 points of damage.

This is annoying, as a Shield parrying a Critical Hit is not an uncommon occurrence or edge case and should clearly be covered in the rules.

What would I do? Pick one and stick with it. I'd use the results from the Table and ignore what it says in the Text. however, maybe one for Jason in the Rules Clarification Thread where Nobody else May Comment.

The moral of the tale might be not to mess about using a small shield, but to use a Medium or Large Shield, but perhaps that isn't the right moral.

 

what I understand from the text :

a Broadsword Criticals and does 18 Points of Damage and is parried by a Small Shield with 8 HPs.

the shield blocks 8 HPs of damage, leaving 10 HPs to hit a character location,

And the shield recieves for it self twice: in a "normal attack" 1 hp, ==> 2 hp

Which is different for a parrying weapon (sword...)

 

but It could be different

[Chromatism]

14 minutes ago, French Desperate WindChild said:

what I understand from the text :

a Broadsword Criticals and does 18 Points of Damage and is parried by a Small Shield with 8 HPs.

the shield blocks 8 HPs of damage, leaving 10 HPs to hit a character location,

And the shield recieves for it self twice: in a "normal attack" 1 hp, ==> 2 hp

Which is different for a parrying weapon (sword...)

 

but It could be different

I'm not sure. On the table on page 199 it specifically states that for a Special Attack vs a Normal Parry - "parrying weapon takes damage over its HP, with the same amount of damage going to adjacent hit location".
The entry for a critical attack on the table states the same, with the added line "with no armour protection".

The wording on page 200 under "Parrying a Critical Hit" flies in the face of this and really obfuscates things.

[Paid a bod yn dwp]

Jason wrote this in reply on the Q&A. Does it help? :

 

Quote

Critical Attack vs Normal Parry Result (page 199)

If a critical sword attack doing 18 damage is met by a normal parry, and the parrying weapon has 12hp, is the parrying weapon broken (as the attack & parry results chart seems to suggest), or is the parrying weapon just reduced to 10hp (as page 200 suggests, under “parrying a critical hit”).  

As per the chart, the defender’s weapon takes the damage rolled and the excess goes to the defender. In this case, “twice the damage it would normally” is a clumsy way of saying it takes critical damage. 

 

 

edit: heres the link to the Q&A:

 https://wellofdaliath.chaosium.com/home/catalogue/publishers/chaosium/runequest-roleplaying-in-glorantha-players-book-print/cha4028-runequest-roleplaying-in-glorantha-qa-by-chapter/cha4028-runequest-roleplaying-in-glorantha-chapter-08-combat/

Edited January 18, 2020 by Paid a bod yn dwp

[French Desperate WindChild]

11 minutes ago, Chromatism said:

I'm not sure. On the table on page 199 it specifically states that for a Special Attack vs a Normal Parry - "parrying weapon takes damage over its HP, with the same amount of damage going to adjacent hit location".
The entry for a critical attack on the table states the same, with the added line "with no armour protection".

The wording on page 200 under "Parrying a Critical Hit" flies in the face of this and really obfuscates things.

As I said, I make a difference between weapon and shield. I m not sure of course but, as the rule is sometimes with "shield" and sometimes with "weapon" I conclude the system is different. And it seems normal (I m not an IRL specialist) : a shield should resist better than a sword

[Akhôrahil]

5 hours ago, Chromatism said:

Edit: Thanks for your help! One piece of the puzzle has become clear; I was incorrectly equating the damage absorbed by a weapon/shield as also being the damage it received in certain circumstances (such as with a critical or special hit vs a normal parry). I now understand that the weapon/shield absorbs up to it's current HP in damage, and then any remaining damage applies as per the chart on page 199.

Always use the table on p. 199 rather than the rules text for attack/parry outcomes - the table is mostly fine, while the rules text both contradicts it and is a bloody mess.

[Paid a bod yn dwp]

Yes the tables seem to be your point to reference here.
I have the 2nd printing, not sure If there were any changes between 1st and 2nd printing to the tables? Gm screen and RQG core 2nd printing seem consistent in their results. And Jason has confirmed the tables are correct. 

Edit: In fairness its just the section on "parrying a critical hit" p200 that is poorly worded. The rest all seems to tally with the Attack & parry results table on p199

Edited January 18, 2020 by Paid a bod yn dwp

[Paid a bod yn dwp]

Ok - this is what I interpret as happening based on the table of results on p200.

A Critical Attack vs Normal Parry

• The parrying weapon takes full critical damage directly to its AP

This is based on the alternative wording. Other examples below in the table use the wording “over it’s AP”. So the usual rule of only damage over its AP is ignored, the weapon takes the critical damage directly, with a good chance of breaking the weapon. This also ties in with Jason’s comment about the weapon taking critical damage, in the sense critical damage ignores armor.

• Any excess damage damage (beyond the original AP of the weapon before the attack) goes to the defender, ignoring any armor on the hit location.

This all seems to be confirmed in the Q&A by Jason that I posted further up the thread.

Edited January 19, 2020 by Paid a bod yn dwp

[Mugen]

2 hours ago, Paid a bod yn dwp said:

Ok - this is what I interpret as happening based on the table of results on p200.

A Critical Attack vs Normal Parry

• The parrying weapon takes full critical damage directly to its AP

This is based on the alternative wording. Other examples below in the table use the wording “over it’s AP”. So the usual rule of only damage over its AP is ignored, the weapon takes the critical damage directly, with a good chance of breaking the weapon. This also ties in with Jason’s comment about the weapon taking critical damage, in the sense critical damage ignores armor.

• Any excess damage damage (beyond the original AP of the weapon before the attack) goes to the defender, ignoring any armor on the hit location.

This all seems to be confirmed in the Q&A by Jason that I posted further up in the thread.

Do you imply that a weapon parrying a non-critical and non-special attack should suffer damage equal to the difference between damage and its current AP total ?

My understanding is that it should only lose 1 AP in this case, like in RQ3.

Edited January 19, 2020 by Mugen

[Paid a bod yn dwp]

1 hour ago, Mugen said:

Do you imply that a weapon parrying a non-critical and non-special attack should suffer damage equal to the difference between damage and its current AP total ?

My understanding is that it should only lose 1 AP in this case, like in RQ3.

No. This is just specific to critical attack vs normal attack. The table is fairly clear on the different results