Shields, Dodge, Parrys and Stuff [that doesn't add up and i HATE to houserule!]

[SDLeary]

I don't really like the rule about shields being harder to damage - in real life, shields get tatty pretty quickly.

They did in RQ III too. The current two to four points on a Special or critical just seems a bit off somehow, at least when combined with the high shield HP.

SDLeary

[pansophy]

the rules as written in BRP make sense in one form: you only need ONE skill (the shield skill) to be able to parry everything a foe is attacking you with.

If you use your weapon to parry, you use that skill. You would be screwed if you would need to use an other weapon you do not have a good skill in.

Example:

A fighter has 60% in his "Sword" skill and 60% in "Shield". If the fighter needs to use his backup weapon, a mace, he would need to use his "Mace" skill at let's say 40%. Since the fighter is still using his shield, he is still able to parry at 60%, so only his attack has dropped by 20%.

I think this is pretty good. It's worth investing in the shield skill so you can rely on your parry and do not need to worry much about using an "alternative weapon". It also helps raising these not much used weapon skills without allowing a foe to harm you more than he would using your primary weapon.

Fair deal in my opinion. Nothing to be changed. Maybe it's not that much realistic, but that's not the point in an RPG, is it?

[Nightshade]

The problem with that logic is that the weapon skills are broad enough you're not often going to be using something really new, and what if you don't have a shield? In addition, if you just parry with the weapon, you modestly increase your by the book advancement (because in a battle you'll get a roll in it if you succeed at either end) and can maximize your training.

[vagabond]

I would say make parrying with a shield normal difficulty, and parrying with a weapon a difficult one. A shield is a bigger object which can cover more area, and while slightly harder to move into "perfect" blocking position, allows for a fair degree of "slop". Weapons, in general, are smaller and thus easier to move into "perfect" blocking position, but that position needs to be more precise. So, effectively, a lesser skilled combatant might prefer a shield, while an expert would prefer a weapon.

On the flip side, a riposte should be normal difficulty with a weapon, but hard difficulty with a shield, for the same reasons - the weapon is normally smaller and easier to maneuver. Again, this favors the expert combatant and the preference to use a weapon for parrying.

One could extend this to the equipment charts such that each weapon that can parry (as well as shields) might have different difficulty levels for parrying based upon size and speed.

I would still add something to model the shield's advantage in formation fighting. And, perhaps, allowing shields to "parry" missiles.

Ian

[pansophy]

The problem with that logic is that the weapon skills are broad enough you're not often going to be using something really new, and what if you don't have a shield?

The argument "if you don't have a shield" is the same as "if you don't have your primary weapon" - I guess one will happen as often as the other.

In addition, if you just parry with the weapon, you modestly increase your by the book advancement (because in a battle you'll get a roll in it if you succeed at either end) and can maximize your training.

Sure, but you could get hit a lot more often! And the first hit in combat is usually the pivotal one.

[Nightshade]

Why would you get hit a lot more often? Barring missile weapon fire, its not like there's any particular likelyhood you'll fail a weapon parry over a shield parry, by the book.

[pansophy]

Why would you get hit a lot more often? Barring missile weapon fire, its not like there's any particular likelyhood you'll fail a weapon parry over a shield parry, by the book.

well if you have a two weapon skills, one with 60% and an other with 40% and you do not use a shield for Parry, the 20% difference implies you get a lot more hit, right?

[vagabond]

Another option for shields, especially when used in formation, but easily applied to man to man combat, would be to use the "Cover" rule. Essentially, shields, especially large ones, provide cover. Let me think of a good way to use the "Cover" rules with my earlier use of difficulties modifiers, to come up with a decent rules for shield use.

I don't know why I didn't think of it earlier ...

Ian

[Guest Vile Traveller]

That's my conclusion, too - a big enough shield can be used as cover. Now that I think of it, we used this rule way back when in our SF-BRP games. Power-armoured characters would carry around a big shield (riot-shield size) which they could cower behind when caught out in the open. It was mounted on a boom so it could be "slung" like a Norman kite shield, covering the back or side while leaving the hands free.

[icebrand]

What i have so far for my F&S based BRP:

• Attack and Parry are different skills

• ANY combat skill can be used at 1/2 (hard) best skill [but must be improved from its base]

• Shields give +1 armor and Large Shields give +2 armor (rolling D4-1/D6-1/D8-1 for light/med/heavy with +1 from helm; iron armor increases the die by 1)

• Shields parry missiles at full chance, and have passive 30/60 & 60/90 passive missile defense

This makes shields superior to weapon parry, at no "exta" cost. What i'm worried about is that a fighter-type needs to spend too many checks; im giving checks like F&S to keep up: main weapon,main parry, shield parry, missile weapon, + pow & cult lore, thats 6 out of 7 checks right there, maybe one in a characteristic and i'll be just officially GMing every other game where if you want to fight well you can't raise other skills. =/

[threedeesix]

Another option for shields, especially when used in formation, but easily applied to man to man combat, would be to use the "Cover" rule. Essentially, shields, especially large ones, provide cover. Let me think of a good way to use the "Cover" rules with my earlier use of difficulties modifiers, to come up with a decent rules for shield use.

I don't know why I didn't think of it earlier ...

Ian

This is kind of what I did when I updated Classic Fantasy, something to make shields more useful while taking into account the extra weight and seperate skill. I handled it this way...

Hiding Behind Your Shield: Classic Fantasy adds a new option to shields that makes it worth carrying the extra weight over that of a second weapon, the ability to hide behind your shield. This is only affective against ranged attacks, and area effects that originate in front of the shield user. You may not declare that you are hiding behind your shield until your normal chance to act, or anytime after taking a delayed action. Once in effect, you may declare one hit location shielded for each point of ENC possessed by the shield, in each case, the first location chosen must be the shield arm. Therefore, a buckler (ENC 1) will only affect the shield arm, while a hoplite shield (ENC 7) may be used to shield the entire body, all 7 locations. Any attack that strikes a shielded location has it’s damage reduced by the hit points of the shield, with any remainder affecting the character as normal, continuing on to the location rolled, and possibly being affected by additional armor.

[Redstone]

Our group has elimiinated shield as a skill, and simply adds the base chance of the shield to the characters parry chance.

[icebrand]

Our group has elimiinated shield as a skill, and simply adds the base chance of the shield to the characters parry chance.

simply genius!!! i will definitely use that!!!

[SDLeary]

Our group has elimiinated shield as a skill, and simply adds the base chance of the shield to the characters parry chance.

How are Shield Bashes handled?

SDLeary

[Redstone]

First off, my players have only rarely have attempted a shield bash, so we havent dealt with it more than 2 or 3 times. But when they do I have them make a Difficult attack (1/2) with whatever melee weapon they are using.

[Redstone]

Our group spent sometime yesterday once again discussing the shield issue. Though there was one dissenting vote, this is what we are currently going with, and a little bit about the logic behind it. Just to reiterate, using this method eliminates the shield as a skill, considering it part of your combat ability, rather than a seperate skill.

Brawling (for most characters) is your lowest combat skill. Brawling can also be argued to be your basic combat skill. So this is the lowest your shield USE (not skill) will be. Example: Shield base 15%, Sword skill 60%, axe skill 40%, and brawling skill 25%. You get into a fight at a tavern, but you dont want to kill anyone, so you grab your shield to protect yourself, your parry is now brawling + shield ( total 40%). The fight turns ugly and you draw your axe. Because you are now parrying with a shield as well as your axe, your parry now goes up to axe + shield (total 55%). Your axe breaks and you draw your deadliest weapon, your sword. Your parry goes up again taking into account your proficiency with your sword, to sword + shield (total 75%).

Shield bash would now use your brawling skill.

We are also debating allowing the shield to give one free parry, like MRQ.

Edited August 19, 2010 by Redstone