Question about RQG combat: forfeiting attacks to have more/ better parries?

[Arcadiagt5]

15 hours ago, PhilHibbs said:

I think the problem with any solution is how it scales at high skill. Giving a bonus that is meaningful at "starting" skill levels (50-100%) but not utterly nuts at high skill levels (and lets be honest, 200% is not even that ridiculous at starting level with Sword Trance) is super hard

Fair point. I’m not sure how to address it, although I think that there’s precedent for noting that only raw skill affects attack and parry equally. If you look at the wording of Bladesharp it only affects the chance to hit, and Parry only affects the chance to parry. 

I think a GM would be well within their rights to say that Weapon Trance is an inherently offensive skill - it boosts the Attack chance, but not the parry chance. Although the exact wording does say “skill”, so maybe it is intended to cover both. Which I can kind of see the point of - we are now talking about rune spells, which are intended to be of much greater scope. 

[Mugen]

8 hours ago, smiorgan said:

No, I'm not correct! Rules at page 219 explicitly say that if you attack with the shield you forfeit parry.

So, if you have trained a second weapon you get two chances to attack and you can use either weapon to parry. If you train a shield for roughly the same cost you only get one attack, unless you decide to parry with the main weapon which is not subject to the same parry or attack constraint.

A shortsword has 12 hp just like a medium shield, it has a similar base chance and gives you a second attack if you train it as left had weapon. So, no reason to train that shield skill. To use the shield as cover against missiles you don't need the skill, just the shield.

I actually think RQG rules would make perfect sense in a samurai game, where characters would be encouraged to use the same weapon for attack and parry (except for rather rare Ni-tô kenjutsu users), and the closest equivalent to a shield are the "sode" upper arm armor piece, which are basically static defenses against missiles.

[Kloster]

16 hours ago, French Desperate WindChild said:

don't forget the >100% skill rule

so at the end of the day it is not [200% - (n * 20% or 10%) against a 100% opponent's skill  ] but [100% - (n * 20% or 10%) against a 5% opponent luck]

the >100% skill rule seems to me a good way to accelerate the fight  :  there is a no match between a master with 200% against 5 average guys with. 50%. you don't even have to try to parry

your art is enough to not let opportunities to be touched by low levels (with any stacking debuff, -20 or -10)

against your range opponent (200% against 200%) that becomes a 100% versus 100%  then there is a difference between the -20 and the -10

 

If you have a big gap of skill (like your 200% vs 50%), yes, this will speed up the fight, but we don't care because it is already short, and it removes the threat of numerous trollkins (or ducks, or whatever).

If skills are close (like 200% vs 190%), this rule slows down the fight because it lowers the probability of specials and criticals.

[PhilHibbs]

17 hours ago, French Desperate WindChild said:

the >100% skill rule seems to me a good way to accelerate the fight  :  there is a no match between a master with 200% against 5 average guys with. 50%. you don't even have to try to parry

Sort of - you still have to declare the parry, otherwise they are hitting you at 50% skill. Narratively, you "aren't even trying" though which may be what you meant.

[smiorgan]

13 hours ago, Arcadiagt5 said:

 If you look at the wording of Bladesharp it only affects the chance to hit, and Parry only affects the chance to parry. 

I had missed this subtelty.

[Beoferret]

On 11/2/2022 at 8:55 AM, PhilHibbs said:

Shields are harder to break than swords. Parrying with a sword is a quick way to not have a usable sword any more. Unless you're parrying a natural attack, in which case it's a quick way to cut an attacking limb off.

That's certainly how it should be, IMHO, but not how it is in rules as written (as others have pointed out.) Maybe weapons that have lost half their HP should get a penalty to attacks, while shields are ok until broken? Or give shields better HP (e.g., half again what they have already)? 

Giving up an attack for an extra parry (at regular skill levels) seems like a fair exchange and easy to implement. But my view of how combat rules should work is influenced more by GURPS mechanics than D&D. 

 

[Mordante]

I think that shields have little benefit when compared to weapons when it comes to parrying as it currently stands. I'm considering allowing bonuses to knockbacks when using them but that still doesn't bridge the advantage gap.

[Bill the barbarian]

On 11/2/2022 at 9:42 AM, Bill the barbarian said:

On 11/2/2022 at 7:55 AM, PhilHibbs said:

Shields are harder to break than swords. Parrying with a sword is a quick way to not have a usable sword any more. Unless you're parrying a natural attack, in which case it's a quick way to cut an attacking limb off.

Not sure I understand good sir. A medium shield and a broad sword*, these are almost the default for a bog standard Orlanthi, both have 12 HP. What would the difference in breakage (other than cost) be?

*assuming this is what you were referring to, let me know otherwise

Cheers

You missed this, @PhilHibbs. Apologies for being obtuse, but I love your points and I am afraid I don't get this one.

Edited November 3, 2022 by Bill the barbarian

[Beoferret]

24 minutes ago, Mordante said:

I think that shields have little benefit when compared to weapons when it comes to parrying as it currently stands. I'm considering allowing bonuses to knockbacks when using them but that still doesn't bridge the advantage gap.

What about having a general Shield skill and then apply bonuses/penalties according to shield size and general character position? For example, small shields get no bonus to parry (but are quick to ready), while medium and large shields do get variable bonuses to parrying if the character is on foot (impose a penalty for large shield use on horseback.)

[DreadDomain]

57 minutes ago, Beoferret said:

What about having a general Shield skill and then apply bonuses/penalties according to shield size and general character position? For example, small shields get no bonus to parry (but are quick to ready), while medium and large shields do get variable bonuses to parrying if the character is on foot (impose a penalty for large shield use on horseback.)

A while ago I was suggesting to give bonuses to shield for parrying only, say +10% for small, +20% for medium and +30% for large. I understand the point that shield are useful against missile and that in melee they were often "sacrificial" and getting pummeled by repeated blows but there is a reason they were use and in my view it is because it is easier to block and deflect with a board of wood than it is with a long stick. At least until the long stick carrier becomes very proficient with their long stick.

Another option would be to allow the shield bearer to ward a number of location in melee, as it is done against missile. Bearing a shield would become very atttactive as it would partially protect even without parrying.  

[Rodney Dangerduck]

I guess I'm in a bad mood today, but this is a misguided thread.

In RQ2, with few exceptions, your 2nd parry was at minus everything.  Or, arguably, at half chance if you were a Rune Master., in which case your second parry was halved, and your third parry was at minus everything. 

RQG changed it to -20% per parry.  Far far less of a penalty.

Now, one can argue whether that was a good change or not. 

But one should not complain that you want ways to parry even better.

[PhilHibbs]

On 11/2/2022 at 3:42 PM, Bill the barbarian said:

Not sure I understand good sir. A medium shield and a broad sword*, these are almost the default for a bog standard Orlanthi, both have 12 HP. What would the difference in breakage (other than cost) be?

You're right, I'm wrong. Not sure where I am remembering that difference from, possibly a previous edition.

[Bill the barbarian]

1 minute ago, PhilHibbs said:

You're right, I'm wrong. Not sure where I am remembering that difference from, possibly a previous edition.

Not that I am trying to score points on you... just I thought I might be wrong there... ergo let's ask and find out.

 

Edited November 3, 2022 by Bill the barbarian

[PhilHibbs]

1 minute ago, Bill the barbarian said:

Not that I am trying to score points on you... just I thought I might be wrong there... ergo let's ask and find out.

Absolutely. Petty point-scoring is what munchkins do and you know how much I hate munchkins.

[Bill the barbarian]

12 minutes ago, PhilHibbs said:

Absolutely. Petty point-scoring is what munchkins do and you know how much I hate munchkins.

Indeed! Well do I know that you hate such munchkinerry, egregiously!

 

Edited November 3, 2022 by Bill the barbarian

[French Desperate WindChild]

1 hour ago, PhilHibbs said:

You're right, I'm wrong. Not sure where I am remembering that difference from, possibly a previous edition.

that was the same for me

I thought to "defend" your position but i did not find any evidence in rqg

 

in the french one (oriflam) decades ago, there was something about the weapon losing AP when damage are > AP but not for shield, if i remember well (not the books here so not sure)

 

[DreadDomain]

12 hours ago, smiorgan said:

I need to get the French PDF... maybe, just maybe, they streamlined that blessed attack-parry matrix.

 

Copying your comment from another thread.

How about this? I removed the exceptions and color-coded (same color, same effect)

[Mugen]

10 hours ago, PhilHibbs said:

You're right, I'm wrong. Not sure where I am remembering that difference from, possibly a previous edition.

Broadswords in RQ3 only had 10 AP. When your standard 1 handed weapon deals 1d8+1+1d4 damage, that 2 points difference is huge.

[Arcadiagt5]

One house rule I use is to increase the HP of the more expensive shield types. +1 HP / cost step. So well off Orlanthi will run wooden shields at 14 HP, and that does make a difference.

[smiorgan]

9 hours ago, DreadDomain said:

Copying your comment from another thread.

How about this? I removed the exceptions and color-coded (same color, same effect)

This is excellent. I will use it for sure!

 

[Bill the barbarian]

3 hours ago, Arcadiagt5 said:

One house rule I use is to increase the HP of the more expensive shield types. +1 HP / cost step. So well off Orlanthi will run wooden shields at 14 HP, and that does make a difference.

That is an interesting take!

[Arcadiagt5]

7 hours ago, Bill the barbarian said:

That is an interesting take!

It seems to work well enough. I’m still dithering about whether to introduce bronze shields with a further extra HP but increased (possibly as much as doubled) ENC. 

[Bill the barbarian]

2 minutes ago, Arcadiagt5 said:

It seems to work well enough. I’m still dithering about whether to introduce bronze shields with a further extra HP but increased (possibly as much as doubled) ENC. 

Seems to me there are very few (well, out side of the Marvel Cinematic Universe) pre iron age metal shields. A metal boss in the centre of the shield, maybe some rivets and a metal rim reinforcing the circumference, perhaps. There are experts here about that would have better info but that is a good starting point.

Now do not forget the main rule of many tables around here... MGF! One Cap America shield for you, and for you, and for... hey everybody, look under your seat, a Cap America shield for everyone!

[g33k]

1 hour ago, Arcadiagt5 said:

... I’m still dithering about whether to introduce bronze shields with a further extra HP but increased (possibly as much as doubled) ENC. 

I think only +1 enc:  mostly, shields  just get their edges bound in metal, or metal strips/studs/bindings protecting joints or other weakpoints.

Occasionally, an entire front fascia-layer of metal.

But I don't think  solid metal  shields were much of a "thing" (except bucklers).

Edited November 5, 2022 by g33k

[Rodney Dangerduck]

12 hours ago, Arcadiagt5 said:

One house rule I use is to increase the HP of the more expensive shield types. +1 HP / cost step. So well off Orlanthi will run wooden shields at 14 HP, and that does make a difference.

Until the slightly better off Orlanthi obtains an iron broadsword, worth 18HP.

One point I haven't seen mentioned is that augmenting (or "inspiring") your weapon skill affects both attack and parry, further discouraging shield usage.  So a good initiate can parry with a 12 point medium shield at ~100%, or with an 18 point iron broadsword at 120%.  (assuming 100% skill and a normal +20% success on Inspiration).  Unless you've got Earthshield, the decision seems pretty easy, with a few exceptions.