Shield vs Sword

[Bill the barbarian]

6 minutes ago, Godweyn said:

Ok, that balance the thing a little bit, plus the "protect the main weapon" stuff, i'm sattisface with this answer.

 

Hahaha, another one illuminated. Our evil plan is working! <looks around, nervously> Did I say that outloud... oops?

Edited January 31, 2020 by Bill the barbarian

[7Tigers]

Well, I've nothing against house rules but in my games:
. PCs start LHW with 05%
. LHW instructors are spare, and expensives
. NPCs are using projectile weapons
. Resurrection does not come in free multiple access, except if requested in service to community, or important people
=> so shields are happily used by players instead of two weapons...

Edited January 31, 2020 by 7Tigers
typo

[Mugen]

1 hour ago, 7Tigers said:

Yes. You are.

Thank you !

[Frp]

Two weapon wielders we're all over the place in RQ3. It got old so I'd welcome any method of discouraging it. I think that's what the RQG rules are trying to do.

But, how do you handle a left armed parry? Sometimes you gotta. Starting at %5 plus modifier seems kinda cold. 

[Mugen]

7 hours ago, Frp said:

Two weapon wielders we're all over the place in RQ3. It got old so I'd welcome any method of discouraging it. I think that's what the RQG rules are trying to do

But, how do you handle a left armed parry? Sometimes you gotta. Starting at %5 plus modifier seems kinda cold. 

Well, since the system doesn't make a difference between parrying with your main or off hand, the only occasion where you'll have to parry with your left hand is when the weapon in your main hand is so damaged it's no use to parry with it, and you don't have enough SRs to switch weapons.So, basically you'll just have to drop your main hand weapon to have a better parry chance.

Edited February 1, 2020 by Mugen

[Mugen]

17 hours ago, Godweyn said:

Ok, that balance the thing a little bit, plus the "protect the main weapon" stuff, I am satisfied with this answer.

Thanks !!

Well, if your sword skill is (significantly)higher than your shield skill, I suggest you use your sword nonetheless. It's better to lose a broadsword than a limb.

What you have in your left hand will either grant you a partial parry or a second attack with very low chances, but with the possibility to use the second weapon as a spare for your main hand.

Of course, if you're very quick and your shield SR is low enough to use it for the second attack, it's a no-brainer.

Edited February 1, 2020 by Mugen

[Shiningbrow]

I'll just point out that the shields given in the book are made of hide, wicker or wood. Large shields have 16 HP, medium 12.

I'd expect to see somewhat higher numbers for bronze shields.. . At least 1.5x.

[Atgxtg]

15 hours ago, Frp said:

Two weapon wielders we're all over the place in RQ3. It got old so I'd welcome any method of discouraging it. I think that's what the RQG rules are trying to do.

That's odd since RQ3 missle weapons were sodeadly. No having a shield tended to leave you wide open to speedart and multimissile.

 

[Frp]

3 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

That's odd since RQ3 missle weapons were sodeadly. No having a shield tended to leave you wide open to speedart and multimissile

Maybe they didn't play test their pregenerated runelords back then... 

[Atgxtg]

2 minutes ago, Frp said:

Maybe they didn't play test their pregenerated runelords back then... 

I kinda think they did, as RQ 3 introduced both the missile hit location tables and the shield coverage rules. So it must of gotten tested somehow. Generally we found missile weapons be be a major threat in RQ. Impales were/still are nasty.

[SDLeary]

8 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

I kinda think they did, as RQ 3 introduced both the missile hit location tables and the shield coverage rules. So it must of gotten tested somehow. Generally we found missile weapons be be a major threat in RQ. Impales were/still are nasty.

Yeah, you didn't really go into combat without a shield unless you had seriously heavy armor, and even then you'd have to think about it.

SDLeary

[Atgxtg]

18 minutes ago, SDLeary said:

Yeah, you didn't really go into combat without a shield unless you had seriously heavy armor, and even then you'd have to think about it.

SDLeary

Yup. Or unless you knew it was going to be an indoor fight. Doubly so if you were playing in a low magic setting. Plus shields usually stopped more damage than weapons, and could take more damage before losing AP. 

[soltakss]

On 1/30/2020 at 4:43 PM, HreshtIronBorne said:

That's  what I said. 

So good, it had to be said twice.

Some people, me included, post first and then read comments afterwards.

[soltakss]

RQG p 198, if you parry with a shield, you control which hit location is struck if damage gets through, to a certain extent. 

RQG p 204, if you parry an impale with a shield, then the weapon sticks into the shield, effectively disarming your opponent.

RQG p 213, darts can be clipped inside a large shield for convenience.

RQG p 219, shields can be used to cover hit locations, providing extra APs

RQG p 327, you can cast Earth Shield on a shield, giving it infinite HPs, so a successful parry stops all damage from getting through, but knockback still applies

If you use the weapon breaker rules from RQ3, a weapon breaker can be incorporated into a shield fairly easily.

[Mugen]

14 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

I kinda tahink they did, as RQ 3 introduced both the missile hit location tables and the shield coverage rules. So it must of gotten tested somehow. Generally we found missile weapons be be a major threat in RQ. Impales were/still are nasty.

If protection from missiles is the major reason to carry a shield, you can always switch to dual wielding when in melee. And it's also a good idea even if your shield skill is only 15% and you have 100%+ in both main and off-hand sword skill.

Edited February 2, 2020 by Mugen

[Atgxtg]

4 hours ago, Mugen said:

If protection from missiles is the major reason to carry a shield, you can always switch to dual wielding when in melee. And it's also a good idea even if your shield skill is only 15% and you have 100%+ in both main and off-hand sword skill.

It's not the major reason but it was a major reason. There was also the fact the shields ususally stopped more damage with a parry,; were harder to destroy; were easier to parry with, initially; and that two handed weapons were usually more appealing that two one-handed weapons- lower SR,  greater damage, faster/easier to improve. 

[JustAnotherVingan]

On ‎2‎/‎1‎/‎2020 at 4:06 PM, Shiningbrow said:

I'll just point out that the shields given in the book are made of hide, wicker or wood. Large shields have 16 HP, medium 12.

I'd expect to see somewhat higher numbers for bronze shields.. . At least 1.5x.

From what I've been reading bronze shields were pretty rare and probably expensive.

https://www.academia.edu/1200494/THE_FUNCTION_OF_BRONZE_AGE_SHIELDS

 

[Kloster]

There is another reason to prefer Shields: They are much cheaper to replace when brought to 0 HP The medium shield has the same number of HP than the broadsword (12), but costs 1 to 14L to replace (depending on materials) vs 50L for the broadsword.

[soltakss]

33 minutes ago, JustAnotherVingan said:

From what I've been reading bronze shields were pretty rare and probably expensive.

https://www.academia.edu/1200494/THE_FUNCTION_OF_BRONZE_AGE_SHIELDS

 

But, they used wicker and wooden shield very effectively. I think that the Hittites used wicker shields, as did the Egyptians, at some points in the Bronze Age.

[JustAnotherVingan]

6 minutes ago, soltakss said:

But, they used wicker and wooden shield very effectively. I think that the Hittites used wicker shields, as did the Egyptians, at some points in the Bronze Age.

Yes, and in Western Europe hide shields are thought to have been common.

From what I've read shields were seen as pretty disposable.

Bronze items were expensive and RQC reflects that with a sword costing almost as much as it does to support a free family for a year.

[Bill the barbarian]

3 hours ago, Kloster said:

There is another reason to prefer Shields: They are much cheaper to replace when brought to 0 HP The medium shield has the same number of HP than the broadsword (12), but costs 1 to 14L to replace (depending on materials) vs 50L for the broadsword.

On 1/31/2020 at 12:25 AM, Bill the barbarian said:

That would be my number one reason right there, now combine that with the price of a shield vs broadsword and it makes it bit of sense. 

Ah, Kloster, ya liked my idea so much ya figured it worth repeating as soltakss would say! Thanks!

[Mugen]

3 hours ago, Kloster said:

There is another reason to prefer Shields: They are much cheaper to replace when brought to 0 HP The medium shield has the same number of HP than the broadsword (12), but costs 1 to 14L to replace (depending on materials) vs 50L for the broadsword.

But, again, less expensive than a lost limb. 

Fighting with a shield requires two skills, and it's their major problem in this edition, as your character could die because you tried to parry with his 70% shield skill instead of his 80% sword skill.

Edited February 2, 2020 by Mugen

[Kloster]

12 minutes ago, Bill the barbarian said:

Ah, Kloster, ya liked my idea so much ya figured it worth repeating as soltakss would say! Thanks!

No problemo, baby.

[Kloster]

20 minutes ago, Mugen said:

But, again, less expensive than a lost limb. 

Fighting with a shield requires two skills, and it's their major problem in this edition, as your character could die because you tried to parry with his 70% shield skill instead of his 80% sword skill.

Agreed. This is only one of the reason I dislike this 1 skill rule for attack and defense (but not as much as I dislike the over 100% opposed rolls rule). I already had a discussion about this subject with Jeff. I acknowledge his arguments, but it is still (for me) in opposition with my personal experiences, both as player and as a former fencer.

Edited February 2, 2020 by Kloster
added former, as my last fencing championship is 35 years ago

[Godweyn]

5 hours ago, Kloster said:

5 hours ago, Mugen said:

But, again, less expensive than a lost limb. 

Fighting with a shield requires two skills, and it's their major problem in this edition, as your character could die because you tried to parry with his 70% shield skill instead of his 80% sword skill.

Agreed. This is only one of the reason I dislike this 1 skill rule for attack and defense (but not as much as I dislike the over 100% opposed rolls rule). I already had a discussion about this subject with Jeff. I acknowledge his arguments, but it is still (for me) in opposition with my personal experiences, both as player and as a former fencer.

Edited 5 hours ago by Kloster
added former, as my last fencing championship is 35 years ago

Then again, the weapons tend to break pretty easy, so, I’ll prefer to lose that wooden shield to my broadsword.