Broadsword vs. Short Sword "problem"

[Baron Wulfraed]

On 4/24/2022 at 2:59 PM, Monty Lovering said:

I firmly believe most weapons should be capable of doing only 1HP damage. The idea a dagger can on average take someone average to zero in the chest is silly, let

Tell that to the creators of the Fairbairn-Sykes dagger and the special ops forces that used them. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairbairn–Sykes_fighting_knife#Design

[g33k]

On 4/22/2022 at 10:43 AM, SDLeary said:

Agreed. Perhaps the "skill" is Close Combat (specialization), where the specialization is one of the weapon categories. Similar categories are at a malus (though never less than 1/2 skill), dissimilar categories at 1/2 skill? This, at least, would encapsulate basic hand-to-hand concepts into a single skill that would carry over to other weapons. And if you wanted to know another weapon category, you could always learn a new specialization starting at half Close Combat skill.

SDLeary

IIRC, one of the versions of BRP did something like this... Ringworld, maybe?
I recall it from a forum-discussion, but it's something I had never actually read; that one, I saw (once, in my "impoverished student" era) but no more...

So, I'm going on what I recall now (years later) of what I understood then, of whatever issue that poster was trying to make...

 

[SDLeary]

1 hour ago, g33k said:

IIRC, one of the versions of BRP did something like this... Ringworld, maybe?
I recall it from a forum-discussion, but it's something I had never actually read; that one, I saw (once, in my "impoverished student" era) but no more...

So, I'm going on what I recall now (years later) of what I understood then, of whatever issue that poster was trying to make...

 

Somewhat. In Ringworld, there was no category bonus. The category values represented the highest a skill could progress (the Root Maximum) before having to declare a Branch skill.

Melee weapons (Archaic Melee Weapons) fell under Agility, and the Root Maximum for that category was STR + DEX. So Joe (STR 12, DEX 13) could train in Archaic Melee Weapons until he reached 25%. At that point, he would have to declare a specialty in order to keep advancing. The specialties were Swords, Axes, Maces, and so on, so with this example it wouldn't necessarily get too far into the weeds. But you can imagine how cumbersome this approach would be in a fantasy game where we are debating the differences of sword length, blade curvature and the direction thereof, and so on. 🙂

SDLeary

[coffeemancer]

4 hours ago, SDLeary said:

Somewhat. In Ringworld, there was no category bonus. The category values represented the highest a skill could progress (the Root Maximum) before having to declare a Branch skill.

Melee weapons (Archaic Melee Weapons) fell under Agility, and the Root Maximum for that category was STR + DEX. So Joe (STR 12, DEX 13) could train in Archaic Melee Weapons until he reached 25%. At that point, he would have to declare a specialty in order to keep advancing. The specialties were Swords, Axes, Maces, and so on, so with this example it wouldn't necessarily get too far into the weeds. But you can imagine how cumbersome this approach would be in a fantasy game where we are debating the differences of sword length, blade curvature and the direction thereof, and so on. 🙂

SDLeary

dang, I kinda really like that idea

[SDLeary]

6 hours ago, coffeemancer said:

dang, I kinda really like that idea

It's cumbersome, but it can work if the game provides a large pool of skill points, and if players are given enough time to craft their character. 

SDLeary

[g33k]

How about this idea...

1.  All melee combat skills -- as has been repeatedly pointed-out -- broadly share a lot of elements... timing, spacing, your own body-position, "reading" your foes' body-language, etc.  Someone who's 100% with any given weapon "A" will still be a dangerous person, even with an unfamiliar weapon "B" -- far outclassing a student of "B" who's new to the fighting arts, only having trained for a month or two.

2.  Weapons fall (broadly) into several categories, and skill with one weapon in a category means you are "somewhat familiar" with other weapons in the same category.  For the sake of this notion, I'm going with @icebrand's categories (adjust to your table, your preference):  1H-Axe, 2H-Axe, 1H-Sword, 2H-Sword, 1H-Spear, 2H-Spear, Hand-to-Hand (includes dagger, cestus, etc), etc.

So (the meat of the idea) let's layer up our skills...

You have a "Melee" skill -- it helps with all melee combat.  You have trained with a specific weapon -- it helps with all similar weapons.  A section of character sheet might look something like:

Melee 25%

• Hand to Hand +15 = 40%
•   Grapple +5 = 45%
•   Dagger +20 = 60%
• 1H Swords +30 = 55%
•   Bastard S. +30 = 85%
•   Short S. +15 = 70%

etc...

You haven't really done much "punching and kicking" sorts of fighting:  you grapple to subdue, but if you aren't "subduing" you draw blade and go for the kill!  So that "punching and kicking" sort of "unarmed strike" is your base 40% hand-to-hand.

When it comes time to do Improvement -- from an experience-tick with a Skill, or from training, or whatever -- you get +3% in the specific skill. BUT (because (as noted originally) experience generalizes) you ALSO get +2% in the weapon's category AND +1% with all melee.

This adds... kind of a lot... to bookkeeping in the "skills improvement" part of downtime; e.g. a successful check on "Shortsword" would make the above look like this:

 

Melee 26%

• Hand to Hand +15 = 41%
•   Grapple +5 = 46%
•   Dagger +20 = 61%
• 1H Swords +32 = 58%
•   Bastard S. +30 = 88%
•   Short S. +18 = 76%

Note that every single line (eep!) changes, because your base "melee" skill changed.  But I think this is kind-of implied by the ideas being bandied-about...


Over on the technical / sci-fi side of things, you might have something like:
Physical Science

• Chemistry
•   O-Chem
•   Biochem
•   P-Chem
• Physics
•   Fluid Dynamics
•   High-Energy Phys

etc...

Edited July 8, 2022 by g33k
fontplay

[Shiningbrow]

Tangential...

What about dividing up shields more, not only by size, but shape as well ?

[SDLeary]

24 minutes ago, Shiningbrow said:

Tangential...

What about dividing up shields more, not only by size, but shape as well ?

What are you thinking of that would make shape relevant?

SDLeary

[coffeemancer]

I would rather argue grip type. centre grip shields are quite different from strap shields.

but size does matter too...

 

[Akhôrahil]

2 hours ago, coffeemancer said:

I would rather argue grip type. centre grip shields are quite different from strap shields.

but size does matter too...

This is where combat styles would come in as well - no-one learns to use a shield except as part of weapons fighting, and even having a separate skill for it isn’t obvious.

[French Desperate WindChild]

1 hour ago, Akhôrahil said:

This is where combat styles would come in as well - no-one learns to use a shield except as part of weapons fighting, and even having a separate skill for it isn’t obvious.

yes, day after day, that is my conclusion too

that is not obvious, but  the issue is the opposite (separate combat styles ) is not obvious too

 

if you know how to use [ {axe + shield} vicking style], you know how to use [ {axe only} no style ] or  [ {shield only} no style] or even [ {spear + shield} zulu style ] at a better level than someone without any experience.

 

 

[coffeemancer]

but at this point we might be getting uneccesarily complex

[French Desperate WindChild]

6 hours ago, coffeemancer said:

but at this point we might be getting uneccesarily complex

yes

that's why, for me, there is no changes to "request" in official rules , but house rule only, and table chooses what is important for its own, because nothing is obvious. Personaly, I follow the rules and sometimes simplify it, fights are a little bit boring for me (too many rolls for few events, even if the >100% rule gives less rolls than previous edition)

[davecake]

On 4/18/2022 at 5:51 AM, JustAnotherVingan said:

Hunters often used quite long spears. I'd argue useful in massed formations or against a single foe, bad against several opponents in a skirmish which is a lot of RPG fights.

I find the idea that only short spears can be used 1H, or thrown, to be quite odd for a game that is supposed to cover a broad range of cultures. Australian indigenous hunters used spears around 2.7 m for hunting, and could be thrown a good distance - and were accurate at a huge distance with a woomera (much the same as an atl-atl). 
Plus the spears we know were used 1H by hoplites would be longer than an RQ short spear - a doru was about 2-3m long, wielded 1handed, and could be thrown. 

[Monty Lovering]

On 4/25/2022 at 10:34 PM, Baron Wulfraed said:

Tell that to the creators of the Fairbairn-Sykes dagger and the special ops forces that used them. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairbairn–Sykes_fighting_knife#Design

Any weapons can just deliver a light wound. No matter how good a dagger the FS was, a blow did not on average  knock most locations on an average human down to zero. 
 

But it you landed a good blow it could certainly take someone down. That’s why we roll for damage rather than having fixed values and why we have special and critical damage. 

[Monty Lovering]

57 minutes ago, davecake said:

I find the idea that only short spears can be used 1H, or thrown, to be quite odd for a game that is supposed to cover a broad range of cultures. Australian indigenous hunters used spears around 2.7 m for hunting, and could be thrown a good distance - and were accurate at a huge distance with a woomera (much the same as an atl-atl). 
Plus the spears we know were used 1H by hoplites would be longer than an RQ short spear - a doru was about 2-3m long, wielded 1handed, and could be thrown. 

I just have my own weapons tables for this and other reasons. This is an especially odd one though. 

[Joerg]

On 4/17/2022 at 11:45 PM, JustAnotherVingan said:

I would agree but we still need a mechanical reason to use shortswords rather than broadswords

Low ceilings and narrow passages are a great incitive not to use a slashing weapon with reach.

 

Longer spears include some quarterstaff actions as combat options, at least with me as GM. Shortening the grip can increase the weapon strike rank but reduce the disadvantage against enemies closing in, which I would handle with situational modifiers off the cuff. Their real strength other than striking first when charging (or being charged) is that you can strike from behind cover or fortification, reducing the area the enemy can hit you in (at least with distance attacks).

How do you treat cover (e.g. by buildings) when making distance attacks? Does the D20 decide whether 30 points of stone wall are added to the armor of the location, or do you use a modified hit location table and a situational modifier for a smaller target?

[French Desperate WindChild]

1 hour ago, Joerg said:

Does the D20 decide whether 30 points of stone wall are added to the armor of the location,

Yes

Of course if you are behind a wall and your attacker is mounted, the roll is d10+10 as usual

No needs, from my perspective, to create some specific table. However the question may be what about the wall damaging the attack weapon ?

not sure your sword would be efficient after hiting  a solid wall !

maybe rolling a damage result versus ap weapon and reduce ap (-1 ? D6 ? Damage ?) 

[davecake]

On 4/20/2022 at 7:23 PM, Darius West said:

Swords are not "special" there are just a few different types in use, and they all perform a little different in untrained hands.

Swords are also special in RQ for religious reasons. The distinction between curved and straight swords is not just about the details of how you attack with them, but the distinction is important for several cults.
Hence the RQG obsession with the kopis - which isn’t a historical kopis, too long, which also brings us back to the short sword vs broadsword issue. 

[davecake]

On 4/22/2022 at 5:15 PM, coffeemancer said:

I have quite some experience fighting with swords and spears and such, in a sporting context. Thus, this is my way of doing things based my experience.

And I’d add one more category - paired swords (or paired anything really). The RQ way of treating fighting with an off hand weapon as two entirely unrelated weapon skills seems entirely unlike the way traditions of two weapon use, whether it is paired weapons like Kung fu ‘butterfly’ swords, or rapier and main gauche, are actually taught. Goes for paired stick fighting as well. 

[davecake]

On 4/22/2022 at 6:40 PM, JRE said:

A good example is comparing all the interesting Chinese martial arts weapons with the few actual weapons used by Chinese soldiers throughout the centuries and in different dinasties. Career soldiers with cut and thrust polearm, a more flexible weapon than a spear in the hands of skilled users, and spear armed militias.

RQG is one of the few games that represents the difference between individual combat and massed warfare at all, and only in a piecemeal way - really, it just has shield wall (and special case phalangite) rules. But at least it does so! 

Kung fu, and many other martial arts, is generally taught as more or less a ‘street fight’ technique with some military weapons taught as advanced techniques. Which actually works pretty well for a lot of adventuring uses, but badly for military ones. To some extent that might not be historical - but quite a bit it seems intrinsic, like many Kung fu styles putting a heavy emphasis on independent movement, and so being quite unsuited to close formation.
You also see in several martial arts styles (eg karate, capoeira) the use of unarmed styles matched with using tools as weapons showing origins as a style used for underground resistance to military forces. Which is cool, but sits oddly with putting it into more general gaming contexts. 

 

[davecake]

On 4/25/2022 at 2:59 AM, Monty Lovering said:

I firmly believe most weapons should be capable of doing only 1HP damage.

I don’t really understand this. Could you explain a little? A dagger thrust with a real fighting weapon is absolutely capable of stabbing through to the heart, and thus both disabling someone and very quickly killing them. Sure, not every blow is going to manage going straight through the rib cage etc - but it’s certainly something that the weapon is capable of. And it is really not that hard for a head blow to be both disabling (up to unconsciousness) and potentially lethal, when inflicted with something hard (and even unarmed brawls are dangerous, especially if they cause someone to fall hard onto a hard surface). 
I do think the RQ rule of instant death through general hit point loss is unrealistic though - people who are unconscious and who have a potentially lethal injury can survive a surprisingly long time, and often survive terrible injuries if got to a modern emergency department, especially with even minimal first aid - and let’s assume Heal Body is pretty much as good. 

[davecake]

An observation - much of this thread (though not all) seems to be heading in the vague direction of rules more like Mythras, particularly the emphasis on closing and maneuvering.
 
I think the discussions of how would you change the rules differently from the start, and house rules that can be added to RQG without requiring significant change eg to statistics and character creation, but that improve the realism of RQG combat for those that want it, are different discussions. Arguably only one of those discussions belongs in this forum, though I think this thread straddles both and is still at a more general level.

 

[SDLeary]

42 minutes ago, davecake said:

I don’t really understand this. Could you explain a little? A dagger thrust with a real fighting weapon is absolutely capable of stabbing through to the heart, and thus both disabling someone and very quickly killing them.

The way I read this is that they think the damage should come from skill and strength as opposed to the weapon itself. So think of it somewhat like Pendragon (or PDP) modified somewhat by skill (though I could easily be wrong about skill, and they were just thinking success level).

SDLeary

Edited May 9, 2022 by SDLeary

[SDLeary]

1 hour ago, davecake said:

kopis

Yes, more like a Falcata.

SDLeary