Egregious munchkinnery!

[gochie]

44 minutes ago, BassJon said:

A little thought about applying the culture bonus to the left hand. 

Doesn’t Orlanthi culture consider being left handed weird and draconic? So therefore not something that you’d pick up as part of the culture? 

A bit like school here in the 50s when the teacher would slap your hand with a ruler if you tried to write left handed. 

Also isn’t Orlanthi warfare based around the shield wall. Again precluding the idea of fighting left handed as being a cultural skill. 

I think being inherently left handed is a sign of bad "luck" and draconic, but dual wielding doesn't make you left handed. 

I'm sure any warrior culture would have some dual wielders, and it would be a sign of advanced combat ability. 

[PhilHibbs]

51 minutes ago, BassJon said:

Also isn’t Orlanthi warfare based around the shield wall. Again precluding the idea of fighting left handed as being a cultural skill. 

Heavy infantry, maybe, light infantry less so. Plenty of Orlanthi are highly individualistic and want to go off and do their own thing. Keeping the fyrd disciplined can be like herding shadowcats sometimes.

[BassJon]

22 minutes ago, PhilHibbs said:

Heavy infantry, maybe, light infantry less so. Plenty of Orlanthi are highly individualistic and want to go off and do their own thing. Keeping the fyrd disciplined can be like herding shadowcats sometimes.

Aye which is why I wouldn’t apply the cultural bonus to left handed or dual fighting - it’s an individual choice not a cultural norm. But that’s just me. 

But then there is that sinister (pun intended) clan over the hills who are nearly all left handed. No one likes them except dragonewts. 

Edited April 24, 2019 by BassJon
Last minute thought.

[Tywyll]

22 hours ago, PhilHibbs said:

Base 5, Modifier 10, Occupation (Light Infantry) 25, Cult 10, Cult choice 15, personal choice 25 = 90

You can also get it to 100 if you take the Cult 20 for offhand broadsword instead of the Cult 10.

That's if you put all your eggs in your offhand weapon, what would your main be?

[g33k]

I don't understand.

Why is anyone (everyone) worried about RANGE?

6 hours ago, Crel said:

Range 6 (so, +5MP/INT if everything's mastered) is 130m, which feels to me like the start of "safe range" when dealing with big critters, particularly predators, considering the slow cast times. An upside is that at that sort of range, the animal's probably aware of you, but there's a fair chance it isn't interested until you throw the spell...

This is GLORANTHA, dammit!

If you don't want the triceratops to trample you... you don't cast from FARTHER, you use magic to fly a meter higher than its horns can reach, right over its back.

[PhilHibbs]

6 minutes ago, Tywyll said:

That's if you put all your eggs in your offhand weapon, what would your main be?

Another broadsword. Two attacks at full chance.

[gochie]

1 hour ago, PhilHibbs said:

Another broadsword. Two attacks at full chance.

Even as a real-life munchkin myself, I find giving both skills the same increases to be a pretty big stretch. I also believe there was an oversight in the rules when it comes to dual wielding... It makes no sense to have a rule specify that the left-handed weapon starts at 5% and then later have a rule state that it is always at a minimum of half the right-handed skill.

 

As a GM I'm not even sure I would allow 2 attacks + normal parry (which is not what is written in the rules, it's just what Jason said in the Core Rules Question thread) - the downside is just too small... 

[PhilHibbs]

Just now, gochie said:

As a GM I'm not even sure I would allow 2 attacks + normal parry (which is not what is written in the rules, it's just what Jason said in the Core Rules Question thread) - the downside is just too small... 

Two attacks and dodge, however...

[gochie]

2 minutes ago, PhilHibbs said:

Two attacks and dodge, however...

I'm honestly not sure... What reasoning could I give to allow one and not the other? You normally can parry with the same weapon you attacked with...

[PhilHibbs]

22 minutes ago, gochie said:

I'm honestly not sure... What reasoning could I give to allow one and not the other? You normally can parry with the same weapon you attacked with...

Didn't you just say that you might not allow that?

[gochie]

3 minutes ago, PhilHibbs said:

Didn't you just say that you might not allow that?

Correct, for dual wielding.

But with a single weapon you can Parry with the same weapon you attacked with, but with 2 weapons attacking in one round, if I was to restrict Parry, why would Dodge not be restricted as well? 

In RQ3 we kept it really simple. You had 2 combat actions per round, attack or defend. The only way to attack more often was to have over 100% and split your attacks. 

Going from that to "sure, just equip a 2nd sword and you can attack twice and still parry/Dodge normally with very little disadvantage" is a big jump in power... Overpowered even, when compared to sword and board or 2 handed weapons. 

[PhilHibbs]

13 minutes ago, gochie said:

But with a single weapon you can Parry with the same weapon you attacked with, but with 2 weapons attacking in one round, if I was to restrict Parry, why would Dodge not be restricted as well?

There's no basis for that in the text, but sure if you want to bring back some of the RQ3 mechanic then that's fine.

Another advantage of dual wielding, even if you only get "two actions" à la RQ3, is that it keeps your options open. If you're pretty sure that that huge lizard is intent on eating your friend, you can go ahead and hit it twice at full chance. If it looks like it might have a swipe at you, you can attack it once (or twice if you can split) and parry with the other sword. Parrying animals with a swords is a fantastic strategy.

Edited April 24, 2019 by PhilHibbs

[Joerg]

15 minutes ago, gochie said:

But with a single weapon you can Parry with the same weapon you attacked with, but with 2 weapons attacking in one round, if I was to restrict Parry, why would Dodge not be restricted as well? 

Strange question on restrictions in a thread about examples for egregious munchkinnery, really.

 

A munchkin with a pet sorcerer (or a Brithini Horali, which amounts to pretty much the same) would dual wield under divine Weapon Trance, with a solid small shield with "Attract Missiles" slung to his back (or a large one wielded by his wing man), "Preserve Item", "Neutralize Armor" and "Boon of Kargan Tor" on both melee weapons, "Preserve Item" on all layers and pieces of armor,  and "Ward Against Weapons" on the body (and probably on the Air Elemental cloaking the munchkin, forcing a second resistance roll).

 

 

 

[PhilHibbs]

7 minutes ago, Joerg said:

...with a solid small shield with "Attract Missiles" slung to his back (or a large one wielded by his wing man),

Attract Missiles is what your helmet spike is for.

[Joerg]

3 minutes ago, PhilHibbs said:

Attract Missiles is what your helmet spike is for.

I'd advise against the spike. The feathers or bristles on your helmet deliver a lot less shock than a solidly connected spike or horn.

Ideally, cast it on the Storm Bull or Trickster in the party.

[PhilHibbs]

1 hour ago, Joerg said:

I'd advise against the spike. The feathers or bristles on your helmet deliver a lot less shock than a solidly connected spike or horn.

Well you mount it on a spring obviously.

Edited April 24, 2019 by PhilHibbs

[gochie]

 

 

1

 

 

1

1 hour ago, PhilHibbs said:

There's no basis for that in the text, but sure if you want to bring back some of the RQ3 mechanic then that's fine.

"Any adventurer using a weapon in each hand may use them for two attacks, two parries, or one attack and one parry." (p. 224) Even the Second Printing Corrections state: "Two Weapon Use topic, first bullet changed to '...may use them for two attacks or attacking with one and parrying
with the other, as desired.'" Either one is basically RQ3 rules.

 

Quote

Another advantage of dual wielding, even if you only get "two actions" à la RQ3, is that it keeps your options open. If you're pretty sure that that huge lizard is intent on eating your friend, you can go ahead and hit it twice at full chance. If it looks like it might have a swipe at you, you can attack it once (or twice if you can split) and parry with the other sword. Parrying animals with a swords is a fantastic strategy.

Very true that you get a major advantage when facing an opponent that is attacking someone else.

[gochie]

Interestingly enough I now reread the whole dual wielding section, and it states: 

"Use of a weapon in the “off ” hand must be started at 05%. [...] The player must keep track of the individual weapon expertise of the adventurer with each weapon as used in each hand. Training or experience in using a weapon left-handed does not help the right-handed attack or parry with the same weapon, except that the half effectiveness rule applies. For example, use of a dagger left-handed, allows the adventurer to use it right-handed at half the left-handed ability."

I read that (maybe less explicitly than it should be) as the left-hand skill starts at 5% no matter what, but the right-hand skill gets the advantage of starting at 50% of the left-hand skill. Transferring the skill from your weak hand to your strong one should be easy enough, but the opposite really isn't a thing (which makes sense considering I can't even hold a fork properly in my left-hand IRL).

 

This, along with: "To learn how to use a weapon left-handed means finding an instructor (gamemaster’s discretion on how difficult this is at any time)." (p.225) tells me the left-handed weapon skill truly is in a category of its own, and should not be part of cultural bonuses that use a generic skill like "broadsword". Despite this, you could select the left-handed skill as a weapon option in your occupational and cult bonuses.

[DreadDomain]

3 hours ago, gochie said:

"Any adventurer using a weapon in each hand may use them for two attacks, two parries, or one attack and one parry." (p. 224) Even the Second Printing Corrections state: "Two Weapon Use topic, first bullet changed to '...may use them for two attacks or attacking with one and parrying
with the other, as desired.'" Either one is basically RQ3 rules.

 

Very true that you get a major advantage when facing an opponent that is attacking someone else.

However, ii the Rules thread, Jason clarified:

-------------

Posted April 8 Jason Durall said:

  On 4/7/2019 at 11:43 PM, Paid a bod yn dwp said:

Pardon me -  but I would add (based on Jasons previous clarifications) That with two weapons, one in each hand you can attack with both (subject to strike ranks), and parry with both (though only 1 parry allowed per attack) and subsequent parries (in a combat round) are subject to the -20% cumulative penalty, regardless of which weapon is used to parry.

Worth repeating

------------

[gochie]

25 minutes ago, DreadDomain said:

However, ii the Rules thread, Jason clarified:

-------------

Posted April 8 Jason Durall said:

  On 4/7/2019 at 11:43 PM, Paid a bod yn dwp said:

Pardon me -  but I would add (based on Jasons previous clarifications) That with two weapons, one in each hand you can attack with both (subject to strike ranks), and parry with both (though only 1 parry allowed per attack) and subsequent parries (in a combat round) are subject to the -20% cumulative penalty, regardless of which weapon is used to parry.

Worth repeating

------------

That's not exactly a clarification, it's a complete overhall of the printed rules - including the official reprint. He's either completely mistaken in the questions thread or he went rogue and has different views than the person who wrote the rules. 

 

Edit: let me add that I am the one who posted the original munchkin post about sword Trance and a dual wielding Humakti using the answer Jason provided, even if I think he's mistaken. 

Edited April 25, 2019 by gochie

[Austin]

9 hours ago, g33k said:

Why is anyone (everyone) worried about RANGE?

This is GLORANTHA, dammit!

If you don't want the triceratops to trample you... you don't cast from FARTHER, you use magic to fly a meter higher than its horns can reach, right over its back.

Because I'm an egregious munchkin and don't want to waste time/MP/Runes & Technique choices learning Flight.

...

Also because apparently there is no sorcerous Flight spell yet. Hrm.

[DreadDomain]

1 hour ago, gochie said:

That's not exactly a clarification, it's a complete overhall of the printed rules - including the official reprint.

I don't disagree and I also asked in the same thread if the errata and eventual third printing would be amended accordingly but my question was deleted and no answer was given.

[g33k]

1 hour ago, Crel said:

Because I'm an egregious munchkin and don't want to waste time/MP/Runes & Technique choices learning Flight.

...

Also because apparently there is no sorcerous Flight spell yet. Hrm.

Flight is so generally useful, so tactically advantageous, that if it is AVAILABLE and you don't ALREADY have it, you will need to turn in your Munchkineer's Badge.

 

[Austin]

12 minutes ago, g33k said:

Flight is so generally useful, so tactically advantageous, that if it is AVAILABLE and you don't ALREADY have it, you will need to turn in your Munchkineer's Badge.

Is it reasonable to assume an initiate of Issaries could be a sorcerer? Because they get Flight through Orlanth Adventurous as an associated cult, thus getting a flying sorcerer on the current rules. Otherwise, best bet is to tame a critter or to use an air elemental (which still isn't a bad idea, as that has a variety of applications and you'll want either the Air Rune, or the Water or Darkness Runes in order to learn Steal Breath anyway).

[Shiningbrow]

2 hours ago, Crel said:

Because I'm an egregious munchkin and don't want to waste time/MP/Runes & Technique choices learning Flight.

...

Also because apparently there is no sorcerous Flight spell yet. Hrm.

A) if you're a Lhankor Mhy sorcerer, then you join Orlanth and sacrifice the POW for the Flight; or

b) summon and control an air elemental (noting that you'd need one of the associated Runes - Air, or Fire or Water as lessers... which happen to also be the same runes you want for other spells like Steal Breath, Enhance INT, Create Wall of Flame, etc). If you also have Steal Breath, then MPs become irrelevant!

 

(edit: oh, i missed Crel's response above before posting ...)

Edited April 25, 2019 by Shiningbrow