Question regarding shields

[polemikus]

Hi All, 

two questions regarding shields: 

1. I figured that shields in my experience are a bit too weak to carry around if you have are better in your "normal" weapon. So I thought to improve shields with a simple method: the bonus die from Call of Cthulhu. What do you think about that? I haven't figured out the statistics yet, but I think it would give an ok improvement without being too overpowered (and they really help you a lot once the skill gets down which is how I see shields).

2. There are three different kinds of shields, Wicker, Wood and Hide. They seem to have the exactly same effects, so why pay loads of money for wood when wicker has the same effect?

 

[PhilHibbs]

6 minutes ago, polemikus said:

1. I figured that shields in my experience are a bit too weak to carry around.. I thought to improve shields with a simple method: the bonus die from Call of Cthulhu. What do you think about that?

I'm not familiar with the mechanic 

6 minutes ago, polemikus said:

2. There are three different kinds of shields, Wicker, Wood and Hide. They seem to have the exactly same effects, so why pay loads of money for wood when wicker has the same effect?

You don't want to be the kid with the cheap knock-off trainers.

[polemikus]

1. You take two double digit dice and take the better one. Sorry, my bad 🙄

2. Thanks, thought so. I just thought I had overread a mechanical advantage/disadvantage. 

[David Scott]

34 minutes ago, polemikus said:

2. There are three different kinds of shields, Wicker, Wood and Hide. They seem to have the exactly same effects, so why pay loads of money for wood when wicker has the same effect?

As Phil said, but mechanically you can only have wicker extra large shields and can't have wicker small shields. Wicker mediums are crescent shaped. As for the others, it will be cultural. Praxians will use hide and bone shields for example as the materials are plentiful. See Weapons & Equipment.

[Beoferret]

In regard to #1: I can see your point. I would worry that it'd end up prolonging combats, but maybe that wouldn't be too bad of an effect in practice. Shields should be pretty effective for parrying and probably more so than weapons. Maybe just give them a blanket +20% to parrying? Then the unaltered shield skill would mainly be for using the shield offensively. Characters with high weapon skills might remain interested in parrying with their sword/spear/whatnot; but the real boost to survivability that a shield provides militia-types, etc., would still be present.

 

in regard to #2: You could easily just modify how many hit points a shield can take according to it's material construction (and quality, for that matter). A few points more or less here and there could add verisimilitude and player choice, without threatening to break the game in any way.   

[JustAnotherVingan]

Parrying with your weapon will whittle away its hit points, better to parry with a cheap shield. Also a medium shield blocks considerably more damage than an axe, mace or spear. Its really only swords or iron weapons that are a good alternative to a shield for parrying.

[SevenSistersOfVinga]

I just hit everyone with arrows, darts, jabalines, rocks and anything they have at hand. That settles the usefulness of the shield.

[Lordabdul]

On 3/27/2022 at 1:58 AM, polemikus said:

1. I figured that shields in my experience are a bit too weak to carry around if you have are better in your "normal" weapon. So I thought to improve shields with a simple method: the bonus die from Call of Cthulhu. What do you think about that?

I generally don't like mechanics that don't "belong" in a system even if they are "good" mechanics generally speaking. So even though I love this simplification of BRP for CoC 7e, since there's no bonus/penalty die in RQG, I personally wouldn't want to bring it over.

The one thing I have in the back of my mind is to simply expand on the rule about -20% to cumulative defenses. As in: you get -20% if you parry with the same weapon you attacked with, or -20% if you attack with a weapon you parried with. Basically simply making the attack part of the chain of cumulative -20% penalties (in order of how it happens in the round), not just parries and dodges. It's not perfect, there are a few things I don't like about it, so it needs more tweaking around with the idea, but that's where I would start.

Edited March 29, 2022 by lordabdul

[g33k]

On 3/27/2022 at 3:53 PM, SevenSistersOfVinga said:

I just hit everyone with arrows, darts, jabalines, rocks and anything they have at hand. That settles the usefulness of the shield.

☝️ This ☝️

Ever so much this!

Ambushes, and volleys of ranged-combat (before closing to melee), are usually the winning tactics in RQ combat.

And facing missile-fire, it's shields FTW;  melee weapons?... eh... hopefully there's some cover you can cower behind.  If not, I guess it just sucks to be you today.
This, to me, is *THE* big reason to use shields.

It is worth noting that shields can often absorb more HP from parrying-damage; and that shields are cheap, so you don't much care if it does get destroyed (unless you're a long way from resupply).

[Squaredeal Sten]

This topic is basically expression of a conviction that there ought to be game-play differences among the three shield materials.

For me personally the current shield rule has enough detail, and in the absence of demand from players I myself don't feel a burning need to add detail and extra mechanics. 

But I do think it is least realistic when applied to the wicker shields.  As I understand it, wicker shields were popular among armies that relied principally on missile fire.  They were just great at stopping arrows or at least slowing them down so much that arrows would no longer inflict serious woulds after passing through the shield.  And wicker shields are light compared to solid wooden shields of the same size, which makes a difference when you have to march with your equipment day after day and then maybe run in battle.  So as i understand it the ancient Persian archers carried wicker shields because they were used to opposing other archer-heavy armies.  But when the Persians faced Greek hoplites, whose tactic was to make contact, the wicker shield could get chopped up in melee while the hoplites' more substantial shields were still effective.  The Persian infantry's response was to run away, according to Anabasis.  I can't give you other references.

Therefore if i felt driven to add the extra layer of detail i would make the wicker shields one  lower ENC, require 2 lower STR, and have four fewer damage points (subject to correction by someone who has actually made and then chopped up both wicker and wooden shields) but take half damage from missile fire.

 

 

 

 

[Kloster]

35 minutes ago, g33k said:

Ambushes, and volleys of ranged-combat (before closing to melee), are usually the winning tactics in RQ combat.

This was always true, but even more now with the multiple parry rule.

36 minutes ago, g33k said:

It is worth noting that shields can often absorb more HP from parrying-damage; and that shields are cheap, so you don't much care if it does get destroyed (unless you're a long way from resupply).

Much true.

[Rodney Dangerduck]

1 hour ago, g33k said:

And facing missile-fire, it's shields FTW

A medium shield will protect one arm and, typically, either head or abdomen.  That's 25% - 30% of the hit locations.  

While useful, I'd hardly call that "for the win".  Most if the time (70% or more) the dangerous crit or impale will hit an area not covered by the shield.

[g33k]

3 hours ago, Rodney Dangerduck said:

A medium shield will protect one arm and, typically, either head or abdomen.  That's 25% - 30% of the hit locations.  

While useful, I'd hardly call that "for the win".  Most if the time (70% or more) the dangerous crit or impale will hit an area not covered by the shield.

But it covers the majority of the "puts you immediately out of action" hit-locations (and more, for a large shield!).  If a zero'ed-out leg or arm becomes useless, you can still cast (including healing magic). 

Except not, if you're incapacitated...

Edited March 30, 2022 by g33k
goin' large!

[Dr. Devici]

1 hour ago, g33k said:

Except not, if you're incapacitated...

Per RQG, incapacitated characters can attempt to heal themselves. Or at least, characters incapacitated from receiving double or triple arm/leg damage may attempt to heal themselves. As far as I can tell, the only effect that leaves the adventurer conscious but unable to heal themselves is running out of chest HP. Slashing damage refers to its effect as incapacitation, but later specifies the effect is unconsciousness.

Edited March 30, 2022 by Dr. Device

[SevenSistersOfVinga]

19 hours ago, Rodney Dangerduck said:

A medium shield will protect one arm and, typically, either head or abdomen

Well, against arrows, yes.

You can kneel down, cover or make a shield wall, to improve your odds, I know, not the best but beats having no cover. 

Against thrown weapons you can parry them, it's a big thing passing from 0 defense with a sword to negating almost all damage with a shield.

You can stop an special javelin attack with any shield and decent armor. 

[JustAnotherVingan]

Incidentally since my players realised they can benefit from a shield and use them javelins have become a lot more popular with them, especially the melee types.

[g33k]

20 hours ago, Dr. Device said:

Per RQG, incapacitated characters can attempt to heal themselves. Or at least, characters incapacitated from receiving double or triple arm/leg damage may attempt to heal themselves. As far as I can tell, the only effect that leaves the adventurer conscious but unable to heal themselves is running out of chest HP. Slashing damage refers to its effect as incapacitation, but later specifies the effect is unconsciousness.

Centerline -- head, chest, abdomen -- tends to be fully incapacitated (you cannot heal yourself).  Arms or legs, as you point out, can often be self-healed.

Which is why people love their shields in RQ -- you can protect yourself (vs un-parryable missiles) from MOST of that incapacitation.

[Bill the barbarian]

1 hour ago, g33k said:

Centerline -- head, chest, abdomen -- tends to be fully incapacitated (you cannot heal yourself).  Arms or legs, as you point out, can often be self-healed.

The abdomen can indeed take a trip to zero HP and below (up to one less than the Hit Location's HP expressed as a negative number) in one hit and still not have the abdomen’s owner go unconscious. Though he or she will not be able stand they can fight or heal from the ground. Mind you within ten minutes they will bleed out sans healing or first aid being delivered.

Double the damage and unconsciousness and bleeding occur to all three of the points you mention. We won’t go to triple damage...

Despite me being a little picky all of G33k's post still remains valid.

7 hours ago, SevenSistersOfVinga said:

You can kneel down, cover or make a shield wall, to improve your odds, I know, not the best but beats having no cover. 

 

You know, common sense says you are correct, do not know if the rules agree. Mind you and interesting and easy HR might be kneeling down adds one protected area. 

5 hours ago, JustAnotherVingan said:

Incidentally since my players realised they can benefit from a shield and use them javelins have become a lot more popular with them, especially the melee types.

Add magic to javelins for real fun!

Edited March 31, 2022 by Bill the barbarian

[Rodney Dangerduck]

46 minutes ago, g33k said:

Which is why people love their shields in RQ -- you can protect yourself (vs un-parryable missiles) from MOST of that incapacitation.

If by "most" you mean "half", agreed.  True, a large shield could cover 2/3, but most backgrounds favor medium shield.

[g33k]

1 hour ago, Bill the barbarian said:

The abdomen can indeed take a trip to zero HP and below (up to one less than the Hit Location's HP expressed as a negative number) in one hit and still not have the abdomen’s owner go unconscious. Though he or she will not be able stand they can fight or heal from the ground...

Huh.  TYVM, I need to go review those rules (I suspect that I feel a HR coming on...) .

I'm imagining gut-wounds so severe that they're "incapacitating" (unable to stand, etc) and yet leave the victim able to "fight or heal from the ground."
hmmmmmm
OK, yeah, I can imagine that... sometimes.

But it seems like those would be the minority (mainly piercing; not slashes or blunt-force); that MOST "incapacitating" gut-wounds will leave the victim unable to act at all (unless "laying there moaning or screaming in pain" counts).  Frankly, however, that seems like too fine a level of detail to be worth modelling in the rules; if the majority of wounds are fully-disabling, I prefer to just roll-up the edge cases into the same effect.

Unless someone with medical or combat experience wishes to chime in and tell me I'm wrong, of course!

(n.b. I already have another HR, for "zero HP in a location" -- You can make a roll against the relevant stat, to maintain marginal functionality; make a DEX roll on a zero-HO leg to stay upright, at half-move; or vs. a zero-HP arm to maintain a loose grip (and half skill) with a weapon or other object; CON rolls for abdomen or chest; POW roll to stay conscious (but muzzy; half-skill for any perception-skills or other "concentration") with a zero-HP noggin. )

 

[g33k]

1 hour ago, Rodney Dangerduck said:

If by "most" you mean "half", agreed.  True, a large shield could cover 2/3, but most backgrounds favor medium shield.

Large can cover the whole centerline (3 locations)
Medium can cover 50% or 66% (your choice), when you consider it as a function of the d20 hit-location roll.  There are 6 centerline rolls, 3 location results:  9-11, 12, 19-20; defender chooses 2 of those locations to cover with a Medium shield.  Chest & head seem obvious (especially if Bill is correct about the abdomen being not fully-disabling).

In fact, under that RAW, you have covered 100% of the fully-disabling hit-locations with "just" a Medium Shield over head & chest!

Other hit-locations... walk it off, dude!  A few MP's into Healing magic and you're good to go!

(I'm likely to be a bit more cruel, also fully-disabling you on a negative-HP gut, i.e. the entire centerline)

Like I said... shields FTW.

 

[Rodney Dangerduck]

2 hours ago, g33k said:

Large can cover the whole centerline (3 locations)
Medium can cover 50% or 66% (your choice), when you consider it as a function of the d20 hit-location roll.  There are 6 centerline rolls, 3 location results:  9-11, 12, 19-20; defender chooses 2 of those locations to cover with a Medium shield.

RQG Page 219:

Medium Shield protects  "Shield arm and one other hit location".  

Large Shield protects "Shield arm and two other hit locations contiguous with each other"

So a large shield can protect only 50% or 66% of the centerline, medium at most 50%.

[svensson]

This is another one of those roleplaying situations where actual practice fighting in the SCA provides some realistic expectations. This isn't to say that SCA heavy combat is the be-all and end-all in any discussion about medieval [sic] combat, it isn't. It's the experience I've got so it the experience I use. And let's be absolutely honest here: the only 'experts' in medieval combat are the survivors. You face a man over a bare blade and the only technique is survival.

As to shields...

This is what my real-world experience has shown me:

- Shields are disposable. Anyone with a fighting profession knows that you're lucky if a shield lasts more than one or two fights. That doesn't always play out in RPGs, which if fine, but don't get attached to you surf board because some Uz with ugly intentions is going to reduce it to kindling with just a couple a solid whacks. Think '13th Warrior'...

- There are two ways to use a shield, gripped and hung [I'll wait while your filthy scatological senses of humor get done with that one... 😉]. OK, we back? Good.

--A 'gripped' shield is held from behind a center boss by means of a handle. This allows great individual freedom to dictate the range of a fight, a full arm's length, at elbow's length, or very close to the body.

--A hung shield is strapped to the forearm and requires a great deal of footwork to keep your body behind your shield's protection... more so than a center-gripped shield. Hung shields are used in tight formations like phalanxes and medieval conrois, the knee-to-knee heavy cavalry charge of the medieval knight. There is little room between you and the man beside you, and your shield is covering your neighbor's weak side just as another man's is covering yours. Unit cohesion is vital in these formations.

This is how all that translates into an RQ game:

- I think that wicker shields ought to have fewer AP than wooden ones, especially against piercing attacks [spears, arrows, etc.]. That just logic. In my games a wicker shield has 2 AP less than a wooden one.

- When a player is fighting with a medium shield, it is assumed that they're protecting their chest unless they say otherwise.

- When a player is fighting with a large shield, I ask them if they're blocking high [arm, chest, head] or low [arm, chest, abdomen].

Edited March 31, 2022 by svensson

[g33k]

14 hours ago, svensson said:

...

- ... [I'll wait while your filthy scatological senses of humor get done with that one... 😉]. OK, we back? Good.

...

No man!
That was WAY too short a pause, nowhere near being "back."

 

14 hours ago, svensson said:

...

- When a player is fighting with a large shield, I ask them if they're blocking high [arm, chest, head] or low [arm, chest, abdomen].

I don't know that this is RAW, but that's how I play, too.

I also permit a "very low" (abdomen & leg) position if they're trying to protect -- for example -- an already-injured leg.  It's  a somewhat hunched, crouching position; but sometimes you gotta play the hand you're dealt...

[svensson]

31 minutes ago, g33k said:

I don't know that this is RAW, but that's how I play, too.

I also permit a "very low" (abdomen & leg) position if they're trying to protect -- for example -- an already-injured leg.  It's  a somewhat hunched, crouching position; but sometimes you gotta play the hand you're dealt...

I can see that. That would reasonably count as a low block as I envision things.

My rules are based on two things...

a] when one is in melee using a large shield to parry it is physically impossible to not protect the chest, and

b] preventing people from trying to finagle the rules to always put the shield's AP in the way of any strike where their armor is thin and never where their armor is strong.