Jump to content

Shields


BrentS

Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, PhilHibbs said:

Both the front-line fighters in my RQG game broke their swords in the first fight they got into.

Our archer broke her bow in her first fight. I think it was the second shot in her (in-game) career.

Edited by Akhôrahil
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Akhôrahil said:

One has to wonder why anyone would use a wooden shield when a hide shield is cheaper and lighter and just as good in all other aspects...

As far as I know, historical wooden shields were not entirely made of wood. For instance, mycaenian or spartan ones were made of layers of wood, bronze and leather. Roman ones had an iron outer band and center (to protect the hand and help deflecting attacks).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Kloster said:

As far as I know, historical wooden shields were not entirely made of wood. For instance, mycaenian or spartan ones were made of layers of wood, bronze and leather. Roman ones had an iron outer band and center (to protect the hand and help deflecting attacks).

In  that case, "composite shield" might make sense as an option.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My solution would be similar to Fighting Styles, and consider a Combat skill is a combination of an attack weapon and a parry weapon.

For instance, you could have a Sword and Shield skill or a Sword skill. With the first skill, you'd be able to use your full skill when attacking with your sword and parrying with your shield, but would suffer a malus if you use your sword to parry, or your shield to attack. You could use the full second skill to attack and parry with your sword in main hand.

I also think the traditional RQG approach to combat skills is wrong. I don't think a sword fighter should lose all the combat reflexes and experience he learned just because he picked an axe instead of a sword.

Edited by Mugen
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Mugen said:

I also think the traditional RQG approach to combat skills is wrong. I don't think a sword fighter should lose all the combat reflexes and experience he learned just because he picked an axe instead of a sword.

Having fought with sword and with axes, I think this loss is correct, because those weapons have almost nothing in common (weight, length, moves to attack and to parry). You could have a rule that says you keep, say, 1/10th of the gain you have with the other weapon, but not much more. And this would be much more too complicated, even for my tastes.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Mugen said:

I also think the traditional RQG approach to combat skills is wrong. I don't think a sword fighter should lose all the combat reflexes and experience he learned just because he picked an axe instead of a sword.

One of the most interesting modellings of combat I have seen involved a stat called "combat experience", which was super important but could only be raised through experience of being in combat (it started either at zero or just a few points, depending on your background). It included all kinds of things like your stress reactions, reflexes, situational awareness, and so on. If you put someone with sky-high weapon skill but no combat experience up against a theoretically less-skilled but grizzled fighter, it tended to be murder, and a high combat experience meant you could do a lot with most weapons even with little to no formal training.

Basically, being an olympic shooter doesn't help you all that much in a firefight...

Edited by Akhôrahil
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Kloster said:

Having fought with sword and with axes, I think this loss is correct, because those weapons have almost nothing in common (weight, length, moves to attack and to parry). You could have a rule that says you keep, say, 1/10th of the gain you have with the other weapon, but not much more. And this would be much more too complicated, even for my tastes.

I hate to say it but yeah, agreed again. They're utterly different. Also 2 handed versions of the same thing (I'm really good with Two handed Swords, pretty darn good with single handed swords, excellent with 2 handed axes and ...well I probably wont shame myself too much with single handed axe. But pair it with a shield and ...yeah i'm a bit lost) 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Thaz said:

I hate to say it but yeah, agreed again. They're utterly different. Also 2 handed versions of the same thing (I'm really good with Two handed Swords, pretty darn good with single handed swords, excellent with 2 handed axes and ...well I probably wont shame myself too much with single handed axe. But pair it with a shield and ...yeah i'm a bit lost) 

 

But would you say you had to start from 0 each time you used a new weapon combination ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Mugen said:

But would you say you had to start from 0 each time you used a new weapon combination ?

Some of a combat style will also involve fighting in the correct formation (unless it's some pure duelling style) and its maneuvers. You can probably re-use fair amounts of the drill itself.

Edited by Akhôrahil
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Mugen said:

But would you say you had to start from 0 each time you used a new weapon combination ?

Some are related. ShortSword to Arming Sword...yeah very similar or at least not from scratch. 2 handed sword to Arming Sword? Totally utterly different. 

Same deal with axes. Single handed to dane axe? Utterly different. Hatchet to larger..similar. 

I think the families of weapons which RQG mostly has right...except the switch to 2 Handed Weapons from single handed but as an approximation...yeah about right. How much crunch do we want?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Mugen said:

But would you say you had to start from 0 each time you used a new weapon combination ?

No, you start with the base. Or, as I said, you could start with (Base Axe)+(sword skill-sword base)/10, but not much more, and that would be a burden to calculate each time. On this, the weapon categories of RQ3, where you have the same skill with all the weapons of the category is a good catch. The RQG way that says you have the highest of (skill/2) and (base + modifier) is not bad either.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Thaz said:

Some are related. ShortSword to Arming Sword...yeah very similar or at least not from scratch. 2 handed sword to Arming Sword? Totally utterly different. 

Same deal with axes. Single handed to dane axe? Utterly different. Hatchet to larger..similar. 

I think the families of weapons which RQG mostly has right...except the switch to 2 Handed Weapons from single handed but as an approximation...yeah about right. How much crunch do we want?  

If you write up rules like these for combat styles, you will probably want some kind of flowchart or mindmap with different skill inheritances.

You will also have to decide whether, say, "Legionnaire soldier" includes javelins, or whether that's a separate skill.

Edited by Akhôrahil
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Akhôrahil said:

Some of a combat style will also involve fighting in the correct formation (unless it's some pure duelling style). You can probably re-use fair amounts of the drill itself.

I agree the drill is the same. It's very little to do with the weapon use though. Your drill for shield wall is essentially the same for shield + spear or axe or sword but the weapon skills are utterly different. Same Deal with 2 Handed Axe, Sword or Pole-weapons in formation...more or less the same drill skill, utterly different weapons skills. 

I think your abstracting far more than me, to a much greater timescale than a few seconds combat round.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Kloster said:

No, you start with the base. Or, as I said, you could start with (Base Axe)+(sword skill-sword base)/10, but not much more, and that would be a burden to calculate each time. On this, the weapon categories of RQ3, where you have the same skill with all the weapons of the category is a good catch. The RQG way that says you have the highest of (skill/2) and (base + modifier) is not bad either.

Again we agree. And its interesting that the combat heads agree on the mechanics.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Thaz said:

Some are related. ShortSword to Arming Sword...yeah very similar or at least not from scratch. 2 handed sword to Arming Sword? Totally utterly different. 

Same deal with axes. Single handed to dane axe? Utterly different. Hatchet to larger..similar. 

I think the families of weapons which RQG mostly has right...except the switch to 2 Handed Weapons from single handed but as an approximation...yeah about right. How much crunch do we want?  

So, you think it's a good approximation to say that you retained nothing from your experiences with previous weapons ?

1 minute ago, Kloster said:

No, you start with the base.

That's what I had in mind, and and not actual 0% skill... :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Thaz said:

I think your abstracting far more than me, to a much greater timescale than a few seconds combat round.

Maybe, but my idea would be that you had a skill like "Legionnaire", which would be a fighting skill, the skill for drills, and even involving the non-combat basics of the job (like maintaining your stuff). You would have no need for a separate Battle skill in this case, for instance (although probably still the need for a Command skill). 

Edited by Akhôrahil
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting discussion.  The main arguments for one hand and shield fighting in Glorantha are simple:

1) Shields cover missiles -- you really notice this when you hack off a group of elves or a party of Yelnora

2) Shields are a "disposable" weapon, as you can still fall back on parrying and attacking with your one handed weapon if (when) it breaks

3) Shields are mainly wood, so cheap in many areas, versus metal swords, for instance. 

4) Fireblade can be used to greatly increase the damage of a one handed weapon, but not as much a two handed.


The real problem comes with the fact that a two handed weapon does nearly twice the damage as the one handed version, and there are several doubling effects with magic spells and Humkati geas.  This extra damage is able to straight up defeat the normal defense to melee attacks -- parrying and armor.  It also helps to defeat the really monstrous opponents that you will certainly encounter in Glorantha, from time to time.   These facts generally trump the utility of the shield, unless your campaign is both hard on equipment, and features a lot of missile combat.

Thinking on it, it seems like a buckler, especially a metal buckler (sure this is not a common bronze age thing, but neither are two handed weapons -- this IS Glorantha), should be beefed up over the wooden variety in hit points.  10 AP seems reasonable, heck even 12.  That sucker is metal!  It should have the hit points of a metal weapon, like the broadsword.  This would make it a decent dueling item, not optimal at all, just usable, at the cost of weight.   Thinking on it, it seems to me that most shields of the bronze age era were the large type, intended for hiding behind during the missile barrage.

Second thought on it -- campaigns should see more weapon damage and extended missile exchanges.  Sartar has the cultural weapon of javelin, so the old "throw two and then charge" seems natural.  1d10 is not to be scoffed at, and impales are a major problem, even from angry farmers.   Praxian nomads lack metal gear for fighting ,so missiles are deadly.  They should come naturally to any desert encounter, probably annoyingly to both sides.  The players probably want to come to grips like good heavy infantry, while the nomads are probably wondering why these "walkers" just won't fall. 

So basically for every encounter with something that has 8-10 AP everywhere and a 16 point parrying weapon, there can easily be 3-4 encounters where multiple rounds of missiles and spells are the order of the day.  This might change player attitudes a bit, and mollify the somewhat odd values of some of the weapons.  At least a javelin does real damage in this edition -- it used to do the same as an arrow, despite being multiple times the mass.  My current zoom campaign is seeing more bad guys drop to javelins + speedart than every other weapon combined.  Factors involved: party is fresh, so low skill, enemies are generally poorly armored, and many lack shields.  They drop like flies, throw lots of rocks/improvised weapons, and a two handed hit would be overkill on.  More advanced combat encounters are likely not survivable by the starting characters, so we'll see if they decide to start shifting towards the more specialized two handed weapons later.  Most of my PC's have over the years, sadly. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mugen said:

So, you think it's a good approximation to say that you retained nothing from your experiences with previous weapons ?

In fact, previous experience with another weapon can even be counter productive. The first time I fought with an axe, I kept using it with thrust attacks (don't forget I had over 10 years of fencing at that time) and it was difficult for me to forget the acquired reflexes and swing my axe instead of thrusting my sword.

1 hour ago, Mugen said:

That's what I had in mind, and and not actual 0% skill...

Sorry, I misunderstood.

13 minutes ago, Dissolv said:

1) Shields cover missiles -- you really notice this when you hack off a group of elves or a party of Yelnora

How true.

13 minutes ago, Dissolv said:

2) Shields are a "disposable" weapon, as you can still fall back on parrying and attacking with your one handed weapon if (when) it breaks

I even have a backup weapon (short sword) before having to parry with my main weapon.

14 minutes ago, Dissolv said:

3) Shields are mainly wood, so cheap in many areas, versus metal swords, for instance.

Yes, cost is a big criteria in the long term. Of course, you first need to survive the fight.

15 minutes ago, Dissolv said:

4) Fireblade can be used to greatly increase the damage of a one handed weapon, but not as much a two handed.

Yes, the best weapon I've ever had with a fireblade matrix was a dagger. The lower the damage, the higher the effect of fireblade, and with the RQ3 rule of entering the reach of your opponent when your weapon is shorter (i.e. has more SR), that firebladed dagger was terrifying.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Kloster said:

I even have a backup weapon (short sword) before having to parry with my main weapon.

This I find interesting.  My current PC's have a major ENC problem.  They want to wear good armor (scale to plate), and carry shields, 1h weapon, missile weapon, and about 1-2 ENC of misc gear like cash, food, rope, etc.  Most of them only have 1 to 2 ENC left after that, and have had to abandon good loot for fear of going to far over ENC in hostile territory.   A spare weapon is right out the window for them, and several of them have taken off multiple seasons for stat training (STR).

 

4 minutes ago, Kloster said:

Yes, cost is a big criteria in the long term. Of course, you first need to survive the fight.

I haven't hit them with inflated costs of wood in Pavis yet, but that's an issue.  Leather/root type shields are a thing, of course.   Economics may encourage them to go "native" sooner or later, but I suspect that they'll pay twice the usual cost for proper Sartar style shields.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Dissolv said:

Thinking on it, it seems to me that most shields of the bronze age era were the large type, intended for hiding behind during the missile barrage.

Greek ones were 1m to 1.2m diameter.

19 minutes ago, Dissolv said:

Second thought on it -- campaigns should see more weapon damage and extended missile exchanges.  Sartar has the cultural weapon of javelin, so the old "throw two and then charge" seems natural.  1d10 is not to be scoffed at, and impales are a major problem, even from angry farmers.

Completely agree here. Those tactics are perfectly valid. Romans used it for centuries and built an empire with it.

20 minutes ago, Dissolv said:

Praxian nomads lack metal gear for fighting ,so missiles are deadly.  They should come naturally to any desert encounter, probably annoyingly to both sides.  The players probably want to come to grips like good heavy infantry, while the nomads are probably wondering why these "walkers" just won't fall. 

Yes, skirmishing nomads that peppers their opponents with missile is also an old classical: Crassus felt against the Parthians partly because of it.

23 minutes ago, Dissolv said:

At least a javelin does real damage in this edition -- it used to do the same as an arrow, despite being multiple times the mass. 

Javelin was 1D10 in RQ3.

 

25 minutes ago, Dissolv said:

My current zoom campaign is seeing more bad guys drop to javelins + speedart than every other weapon combined.  Factors involved: party is fresh, so low skill, enemies are generally poorly armored, and many lack shields.  They drop like flies, throw lots of rocks/improvised weapons, and a two handed hit would be overkill on. 

Good ideas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Dissolv said:

This I find interesting.  My current PC's have a major ENC problem.  They want to wear good armor (scale to plate), and carry shields, 1h weapon, missile weapon, and about 1-2 ENC of misc gear like cash, food, rope, etc.  Most of them only have 1 to 2 ENC left after that, and have had to abandon good loot for fear of going to far over ENC in hostile territory.   A spare weapon is right out the window for them, and several of them have taken off multiple seasons for stat training (STR).

I also have an ENC problem (which is good). I have 13 STR, but using Linen Linothorax, Cuirboilli vambraces and greaves, plus cloth hauberk, pant and vambraces, give me some room. And most of my equipment is on my mount.

7 minutes ago, Dissolv said:

I haven't hit them with inflated costs of wood in Pavis yet, but that's an issue.  Leather/root type shields are a thing, of course.   Economics may encourage them to go "native" sooner or later, but I suspect that they'll pay twice the usual cost for proper Sartar style shields.

This is respecting the cultural traditions, so is (or can be) good, but sometimes, you must adapt to survive: Mine went to hides shield.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...