Jump to content

How do shields work?


Moes1980

Recommended Posts

Given that even hoplite shields only had a thin sheet of bronze, which added little to the shield's protective capability  or even weight, I don't think you are going to see thick metal shields anywhere in Glorantha (except for a few exceptional cases that prove the rule). And I am not exactly sure that Loskalmi metal working is any better than that of the Lunar Empire or Kethaela.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, RosenMcStern said:

The problem is that on the battlefield the opposite tends to happen. Many historical sources hint at the fact that combatants expected to come back without their shield from a battlefield, or that some duels were intended to last "two or three shields". In other words, shields were considered more disposable than weapons.

This is another topic than the OP. From a pure RAW point of vue, Moes1980 now perfectly got the RQ2 rules.

Now it is possible to make your own home rule. I think RQ3 made the shields breakable, or am I wrong?

  • Like 1

Wind on the Steppes, role playing among the steppe Nomads. The  running campaign and the blog

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Jeff said:

Given that even hoplite shields only had a thin sheet of bronze, which added little to the shield's protective capability  or even weight, I don't think you are going to see thick metal shields anywhere in Glorantha (except for a few exceptional cases that prove the rule). And I am not exactly sure that Loskalmi metal working is any better than that of the Lunar Empire or Kethaela.

So what about the rule for iron weapons, which included shields and stated that the HP are multiplied by 1,5?

Wind on the Steppes, role playing among the steppe Nomads. The  running campaign and the blog

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, MJ Sadique said:

In french pre-medieval and earliest medieval Era, shield were stronger than most weapons so battles usually ended with men bashing their enemies with shield only because all swords were broken. So Shields can be almost indestructible (I'll die of fatigue long before).

I find that very difficult to believe. Do you have any evidence of battles "usually ended with men bashing their enemies with shield only because all swords were broken". At the very least I'd think that most combatants wouldn't be armed with swords, and those who were also had a secondary weapon.  I also find it hard to accept that a thin facing of metal made shield almost indestructible, while the metal weapons couldn't last through a battle. 

Putting even a 1mm thick facing of iron on a kite shield would add about 3 or 4 kg of mass, which would be very heavy. What I've read is that most of the metal went into frame of the shield. 

Most information I've seen on medieval warfare was that most shields were good for about one battle, at best. The durability of swords depended heavily on the the methods and materials used in construction, length (longer blades tend to break more often than shorter ones, since they are a longer lever), and just what they are being used against in terms of opponent armor and blocking weapons. 

 

As far as the LOTR props go, they were not weapons forged for actual combat, but movie props designed to look good. It's like comparing a $50 "Samurai Sword" found in some small ethic shops to an actual tachi or katana  made for combat during the Sengoku or Tokugawa eras. 

 

 

  • Like 1

Chaos stalks my world, but she's a big girl and can take of herself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Atgxtg said:

I find that very difficult to believe.

So do I. To add to your points, a typical weapon of the Merowingians (=pre-medieval Franks) was the Angon, a throwing spear very much like a Roman Pilum, designed to lock in the enemy's shield and thereby make it useless. An Angon can only work like this against rather simple wooden shields, it would make no sense at all against metal shields or shields covered with metal.

"Mind like parachute, function only when open."

(Charlie Chan)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Jeff said:

Does it say that in the RQ4 manuscript? I'm looking at the iron section, which does not even mention shields. I'd leave that up to individual GMs - although I doubt any of the hundreds of NPCs we are statting up will have an iron shield.

I don't know about the RQ4 manuscript, I was of course speaking about RQ2. Actually, there is indeed no clear mention of shields in the RQ2 rules (only "bronze weapons and armor"), but the stats in diverse Chaosium publications (e.g. Runemasters) give 24 AP to iron large shields, were the standard ones only have 16.

So if I understand well, in RQ4 shields are not considered as metallic weapon and therefore cannot be in iron. I'm fine with it, I was just curious if there was a change.

In principle, I think it should be avoided whenever possible to leave points of rule to the GMs. It is true that many GMs make anyway their own rules, but a lot like simply to use the RAW and want answers. But it is true that this particular point of rule can be hardly considered as essential, to say the least.

Wind on the Steppes, role playing among the steppe Nomads. The  running campaign and the blog

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

An Angon could probably penetrate a thin layer of metal, but I suspect that a layer thick enough to make a shield virtually impregnable would probably also make it too heavy for most characters to wield. 

Even something like a metal buckler couldn't be all that thick. The data I can dig up suggest a diameter between 8 and 18 inches (20-46 cm). Since bronze and wrought ion both have a specific gravity of around 8. That means that a 1 cubic meter  (1 million cubic centimeters) of sg 8 bronze or wrought iron would mass 8 metric tons (8000kg or about 17680 pounds). So a 1 kilogram buckler would have a total volume of about 125 cubic centimeters. 

That means that a 1 kilogram, solid metal buckler with a diameter of 30cm (12 inches) would have a surface area of 900cm2, would only be about 1.4mm thick.  

 

Now actual values can vary a bit depending on the quality and type of the iron or bronze, the diameter of the buckler, size of the boss, and how many layers it is made into, but the numbers above are in the right neighborhood. 

  • Like 1

Chaos stalks my world, but she's a big girl and can take of herself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Zit said:

This is another topic than the OP. From a pure RAW point of vue, Moes1980 now perfectly got the RQ2 rules.

Now it is possible to make your own home rule. I think RQ3 made the shields breakable, or am I wrong?

And as a matter of fact I just mentioned it as "a problem", not anything that himji got wrong. The rules are quite clear.

The RQ3 rule was rather clumsy (although it helped to differentiate between metal-rimmed shields and non-rimmed by altering APs), but at least it did not suggest the exact opposite of what happened on battlefields :)

"My home rules" you have available, so you should know my idea of how it should actually work, and it has nothing to do with either RQ2 or RQ3.

PS - I am still waiting for your vision about the issue of multiple arrow loading, although Simon has already provided an informed opinion.

23 minutes ago, Zit said:

off-topic - see how  the metric system is easy and elegant ?

Nooooooooo please do not start this! :(

Proud member of the Evil CompetitionTM

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, RosenMcStern said:

This sounds rather new to me. Pre-medieval France means basically Viking age, and in fact Normandy was a Viking land at the time. Some shields had metal rigging (Norman kite?), but many were just round wooden circles with leather protection (sometimes). I have never seen any all-metal shields except bucklers in any museum collections. The metal part was the boss (and archeloogical troves are full of metal bosses that are the only remain of a wooden shield), and that's all.

Battles ending in shield bashes because all swords were broken are completely new to me, too. Where did you get that quote from?

This is so. In fact, the few all metal shields we have, short a few late late Medieval pieces, or bucklers from the Renaissance, are ceremonial as far as we can tell. That is to say, no apparent battle damage, and generally found in situations that suggest they were offerings rather than functional weapons.

SDLeary

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Zit said:

This is another topic than the OP. From a pure RAW point of vue, Moes1980 now perfectly got the RQ2 rules.

Now it is possible to make your own home rule. I think RQ3 made the shields breakable, or am I wrong?

Shields degraded, as other weapons. Exceed AP in a single blow, then the AP of the shield is reduced by one for all subsequent blows. 

SDLeary

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, RosenMcStern said:

 

"My home rules" you have available, so you should know my idea of how it should actually work, and it has nothing to do with either RQ2 or RQ3.

I didn't mean "you " Paolo, but "you" in general.

1 hour ago, RosenMcStern said:

 

PS - I am still waiting for your vision about the issue of multiple arrow loading, although Simon has already provided an informed opinion.

I was running out of popcorns

 

1 hour ago, RosenMcStern said:

 

Nooooooooo please do not start this! :(

Now I've got new popcorns

  • Like 1

Wind on the Steppes, role playing among the steppe Nomads. The  running campaign and the blog

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry for my last post, didn't had time to finish it. About reference, no need, will explain why here but I can't remember every reportage I had seen (should rec them-all XD)

For the destructive nature of weapon, five ring's sword from the film aren't real proficient sword, yeah but Modern XXI Century Steel swords are far more sturdier than a poor soldier sword of the XII century. So if actors can break modern steel sword, most of medieval sword (not Cortana class) will break long before !

For my battle of shield, let enlightened you and made you go to hell (Rosen won't like where this go...) : As RosenMcStern said, most post roman shield have an bumpy part called Umbo (sound more medieval) which hide the hand and give shields like that two advantage. As the handle is in the center of the shield and not behind it, the wearer have a better control and balance with is shield; the bad part is the shield needed to be lighter because all the weight is on you hand alone !

This where the battle of shield start (narrator mode on) : Imagine a soldier, afters weeks of battle, harassed by the enemies and injuries. It's near the end of the day, he fought almost all the full day swinging his nearly 4 pounds sword (1,8kg, Oakeshott type XIII) all the day; His body his suffering and he feel his two arms are literally on fire from fatigue and his strength his leaving him. The man in front of him don't want to die either but he can't lift his damn sword !!! What can he do ? Medieval Shield : Viking mode ... FULL FRONTAL CHARGE (SR 3+0+3 = 6) ..... at a tortoise speed since he his awfully tired. When he and his enemies have felt on the ground, the richer one could have a dagger but the easiest move is to take your shield and bloody-bash your enemy with the little strength you have ! And this is where the UMBO light-shield became very handy, it's light, well balanced, in metal and in your hand !

...

...

So yeah, where I wanted to take you : it's in this HELL : Fatigue Points or not-fatigue points ?

Personally, I think shields should stay as an independent skill !

Edited by MJ Sadique
Tired ;_;
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, MJ Sadique said:

For the destructive nature of weapon, five ring's sword from the film aren't real proficient sword, yeah but Modern XXI Century Steel swords are far more sturdier than a poor soldier sword of the XII century. So if actors can break modern steel sword, most of medieval sword (not Cortana class) will break long before !

Not really. The steel used in most modern swords is fairly cheap stainless steel, which looks pretty, resists rust and pitting, is fairly difficult to put a good edge on, and not designed for actual use. Most are made of only one grade of steel and are either too soft or too brittle to rely on in battle. They also tend to have a poor quality tang and hilts. Basically they are designed for looks and price over function.  Since actors are not supposed to actually hurt each other their swords are not up to field use.

Now it is possible to make a sword with modern materials that is a superior weapon than a medieval blade, and some people still do just that, but they are very expensive, and of little practical use on the modern battlefield. Nor would the be of much use to the film industry.

 

Now if anybody here can provide some evidence that shows otherwise, please post it.

Chaos stalks my world, but she's a big girl and can take of herself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Moes1980 said:

The mace has 20 hps so I am not too worried about it breaking. 

 

The RQ2 arbitrary max damage of 4 points to me seems unjustified and archaic.   Hopefully it will be gone in RQ4.  That said, maybe because your fight was only moderately skilled individuals but I can *easily* see characters parrying 5x in a single fight, much less over the typical several combats in a dungeon crawl.  Oh yeah, weapon breakage is a major issue.

 

13 hours ago, RosenMcStern said:

The problem is that on the battlefield the opposite tends to happen. Many historical sources hint at the fact that combatants expected to come back without their shield from a battlefield, or that some duels were intended to last "two or three shields". In other words, shields were considered more disposable than weapons.

If they took a shield, it would be considered the primary parry thing.  I like RQ3's rule here better, is that if the shield is overcome, it takes a 1ap 'damage'.  We've had long adventures where several toons' medium and large shields where whittled down to a handful or fewer hp.  

We also houseruled that more than 2x the shield dam

age had a resistance table (incoming dmg vs shield) to shatter said shield, with excess damage automatically going to the shield arm.

Note, I've ruled that if you wield ONLY a shield (ie using 2h) and are fighting fully defensively, you get 3x base skill instead of 1x.  (Thinking untrained peasant woman picking up shield and just trying to defend herself...).  It's worked for us.

Finally we ruled that if you impaled a shield with a missile weapon, subsequent parry with that shield is -20x(missile weapon enc; ie -30% for thrown javelin, -40% for thrown spear).  Movement rate with that shield until removed is divided by weapon enc (ie /1.5 for javelin, /2 for spear).  Subsequent impaled missiles are cumulative.  Trivial missiles (arrows, bolts) were simply -1% to parry with the shield, no move penalty.

8 hours ago, Zit said:

Now it is possible to make your own home rule. I think RQ3 made the shields breakable, or am I wrong?

Yes, slowly, see above.

7 hours ago, Zit said:

off-topic - see how  the metric system is easy and elegant ?

Off topic, see how much better we communicate if we get rid of all those silly other languages and use English? ;)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, styopa said:

The RQ2 arbitrary max damage of 4 points to me seems unjustified and archaic.   Hopefully it will be gone in RQ4.  That said, maybe because your fight was only moderately skilled individuals but I can *easily* see characters parrying 5x in a single fight, much less over the typical several combats in a dungeon crawl.  Oh yeah, weapon breakage is a major issue.

Hence every dungeon crawler should know to bring along his Repair spell or matrix.  It's one of the first spells my melee-heavy toons look to acquire.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, styopa said:

Off topic, see how much better we communicate if we get rid of all those silly other languages and use English? ;)

Damn straight!  English is silly enough for all the other languages put together!!!

 

C'es ne pas un .sig

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, RosenMcStern said:

Which opens an entirely new subject.

How many popcorns can a shield parry?

Also -- what damage-type does popcorn have, and what special weapon effects?  "Target gains weight, sometimes at an alarming rate."

 

C'es ne pas un .sig

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

Now if anybody here can provide some evidence that shows otherwise, please post it.

I believe that the LOTR weapons were actual quality pieces done by a skilled swordsmith; Peter Lyon, Lyonesse Armoury http://www.swords.co.nz/

I believe that -- in general -- you're correct in suggesting that the entertainment industry doesn't use "quality" weapons...

 

C'es ne pas un .sig

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, g33k said:

Also -- what damage-type does popcorn have, and what special weapon effects?  "Target gains weight, sometimes at an alarming rate."

 

Does a multimissile spell apply to popcorns ?

It makes me think... More generally, on which missile does it work ? If I shoot a Trollkin with a balista, can I duplicate him?

Do the Sun Dome Templars use multimissile with the Harpoon ? It would make sense.

Wind on the Steppes, role playing among the steppe Nomads. The  running campaign and the blog

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, g33k said:

Also -- what damage-type does popcorn have, and what special weapon effects?  "Target gains weight, sometimes at an alarming rate."

 

Depends mostly on how many points of Butter and Salt the attacker uses. Makes me view Aldryami in a whole new light.

  • Like 1

Chaos stalks my world, but she's a big girl and can take of herself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...