Fantasy: Sword & Shield vs Sword & Dodge

[MikeEnglish]

I'm wanting to start a fantasy game, and truth be told I'm torn between three systems. I'm kind of going by the book here, which is my preference to begin (although I've been playing Cthulhu for 20 years or so).

I am not planning on splitting attack and parry, and am not planning on weapon skills over 100% - although I'm open to considering either if it resolves my quandary.

As is, I don't know why a player would divide points between weapon and shield rather than weapon and dodge.

Against melée attacks, presumably the weapon skill would be higher and therefore better to parry with than a shield. No advantage shield.

Against thrown attacks, it's full dodge skill or full shield parry skill - no advantage shield.

Against missile weapons, it's half dodge or 15/30/60% with shield. I can see if you compared having a low dodge skill to carrying a huge shield then shield might have an advantage... But what about the small/regular shield or if you can afford a dodge of 60% or higher?

The benefits of shield seem limited, considering it was a soldier's staple.

Take full action to kneel behind it to avoid missiles

Use it to attack and push - although then it gets compared to carrying two weapons

It has more HP if somebody tries to break it, although if they are trying to intentionally break something you think they'd choose to damage your weapon instead

Wait...am I missing a rule about regular parrys possibly damaging the weapon? That would make sense so you would parry melee attacks with a shield rather than risking damaging your weapon. Mind you, I could just dodge everything and parry nothing.

Maybe I'm just not putting it together properly in my head. Little help, please?

[NickMiddleton]

In the BGB as written, Shield Parry and Dodge are far closer in effect than in other BRP games, hence there is less "rule mechanic" re-inforcement of the differences.

My preferences are to allow Ripostes with their primary weapon by a character using a weapon and shield combination who successfully parries with the shield (the normal riposte rule requires that the character be a master with the parrying weapon and that the riposte is made with the weapon that parries). This gives a specific advantage to having a weapon and shield combination.

Cheers,

Nick

[Merak Gren]

You need to look at things in context and separate out rpg conventions.

Historically sword / spear and shield are used in mass formation combat. Either shield walls or fancy Roman manoeuvre to break them. Dodging was never an option. Holding the line was. To an extent, being killed so you could be replaced by the man on the rank behind you was preferable to breaking the line and running.

When engaged in single combat two weapons, or weapon and shield allow you to 'deflect' the enemy weapon away long enough to strike with your other weapon.

A two weapon user (sword/ dagger) or sword & shield) v a single sword user would have the advantage of having a 'free' weapon available during every parry with the offhand and vice versa.

Dodging, is another matter. Contrary to the popular trope of diving out of trouble, a dodge could be as simple as moving an inch back beyond effective range of your attacker. In Kenjutsu and Kendo, being aware of the distance and effective killing arc of your opponent is vey important. Most dodges are therefore well thought out and drilled manoeuvres to remain outside the killing arc and to tempt your opponent into yours.

[frogspawner]

I allow Parry and Dodge. Thus the problem disappears.

[MikeEnglish]

I allow Parry and Dodge. Thus the problem disappears.

I don't follow? Does that make shields more useful?

I'll have to consider it a bit more. Thanks, everyone.

[MikeEnglish]

As I think about it, in Cthulhu we usually said dodge takes an action - either you declare dodge on your turn, or you sacrifice your next action. Rather than a subtle turn of the waist, it becomes a full bodied throwing yourself out of the way. In this scenario, parry becomes not solely the physical deflection but also a measurement of distance and timing.

This potentially creates a scenario where parrying - with shield, if you're worried about damaging your weapon or incoming missile attacks - becomes the standard. Dodging is reserved for area attacks, non-shielded missile defense, and spending your action in full defense mode.

Still thinking.

[deleriad]

As I think about it, in Cthulhu we usually said dodge takes an action - either you declare dodge on your turn, or you sacrifice your next action. Rather than a subtle turn of the waist, it becomes a full bodied throwing yourself out of the way. In this scenario, parry becomes not solely the physical deflection but also a measurement of distance and timing.

This potentially creates a scenario where parrying - with shield, if you're worried about damaging your weapon or incoming missile attacks - becomes the standard. Dodging is reserved for area attacks, non-shielded missile defense, and spending your action in full defense mode.

Still thinking.

That is basically how it works in MRQII. A dodge (called Evade) prevents you from attacking on your next action as it represents a last ditch attempt to get out of the way rather than a more orderly parry.

[frogspawner]

I don't follow? Does that make shields more useful?

Ah, sorry, I was hung up on the 'why put points in shield when you can put them in dodge' problem. Still using old-style 'Shields block more than weapons, and weapons break' rules, I had forgotten the new-BRP 'useless shield' problem... Good Luck with that.

Aren't there old threads about exactly this...?

[Thalaba]

You're right that shields are not as effective in this edition. If you want to make them more effective, I can think of a few ways.

1. Separate attack and parry skills. The main advantage that parrying with a sword has over shield in the game is that you've already trained with the sword. Forcing the character to train separately for parry takes away this advantage.

2. Reduce the HP of swords, spears, and other weapons so they won't last as long as shields. This will make shields look more attractive.

3. Remember that shields protect against missiles better than other weapons. Also, parrying weapons are not subject to armour penalties the way dodge is.

4. Re-introduce the 'slung shield' rule. This rule granted a certain amount of protection to the location it was slung, acting like armour.

Alternatively, you can create combat styles the way MRQ2 does. Thus 'sword and shield' would be a style, 'spear and shield' would be another, 'sword and axe' might be another. This allows you to put all your attacks and parries into a single skill. Now that you don't need a separate skill for shield use, they'll become attractive to players again for parrying. You could even have a combat style that doesn't have a parrying weapon at all, and give users of that style a bonus (say 10% or 20%) to dodge.

Hope that helps.

[MikeEnglish]

That is basically how it works in MRQII. A dodge (called Evade) prevents you from attacking on your next action as it represents a last ditch attempt to get out of the way rather than a more orderly parry.

Oooh... cool. Thanks. Might have to pick that up after all.

[Narl]

One minor point - Dodge (being a Physical skill) is penalized by armor, while parry (a Combat skill) is not. So a warrior wearing chain is going to have a -20% penalty to Dodge. If you use the Encumbrance rules, he will also be penalized 1% off Dodge for each point of ENC he is carrying, not including the armor. Probably another -5% off Dodge for a total of -25%.

[Benaris]

You could use weapon skill for Parry and give a flat +30%(example) usable only for Parry when equipping a shield.

[frogspawner]

That reminds me - when this was discussed before, wasn't it suggested that Parrying with a Shield should be Easy (i.e. x2) ?

[vagabond]

That reminds me - when this was discussed before, wasn't it suggested that Parrying with a Shield should be Easy (i.e. x2) ?

I believe that was my idea. And shield riposte should be difficult. On the flip side, a weapon parry should be difficult, but a weapon riposte should be easy. This was to differentiate shields and weapons when used defensively.

Ian