Tomboys and Troublemakers Part V: Zut Zut Zut and a Bottle of Bordeleaux

[BananaPhone]

tldr Disarm might need some work but I don't think giving the grappler a way to overpower the grapplee's only guaranteed defense chance against the grapple will be fair. If you're disarmed, you can atleast run away, pick up the weapon, or draw a new one! If you're grappled, and you're not strong, you're just sort of boned.

Or you just end up as lunch, I guess .

Just another couple of questions:

A) How are you handling natural weapons in a grapple? Like fangs or claws etc.

B) If someone takes a hand away from grappling to draw a dagger and stab, do they now get a penalty to grappling (because they're doing it one handed) in exchange for a huge bonus to hit against an immobile enemy?

C) I'm going to be using sword'n'board or a spear, two-handed, as the main weapon combos. The rules, as far as I can tell, don't say the spear has to be held in two hands, but for a lone fighter outside of formation it makes sense that that's how they'd wield it. Were you doing anything with spears to make them more attractive, or would the rules for them change depending on whether you use them one handed with a shield/buckler or two-handed etc?

Like if you use them one handed you get to keep Fast and can use a shield/buckler to get a free parry, but if you use them two handed you keep Fast but can threaten anything a square out from you etc ?

D) If you want to make Bucklers attractive (aside from a Best quality only being 20gc!), what if you can strap them to your forearm and use them to parry while wielding a two-handed weapon, like a two-handed axe, sword, even a spear etc ? That way you wouldn't even really need to change great-weapons that much, because it's an attractive combo.

[MrAbdiel]

A) Natural weapons are basically another species of unarmed attack, so I'm okay with them being used in a grapple as 'compact' weapons. Some sensible exceptions may apply for like... if you are fighting a mutant with a two meter bonespike for an arm or something.

B) I considered getting into the number of hands used in the grapple, but I decided it's about as complex as I want it already. You need a hand free to grapple, and that's it. Once you're in the grapple,you're locked in, and so is that hand. You can't reach out and grapple another person with the other hand; you're imagined to be using all of your efforts and hands in the one conflict, whether that second hand is grabbing a knife, or fending the enemy's reprisals, or whatever. The bonus you get to hit against an opponent you're grappling is that they can't dodge or parry - it's just your WS test against the enemy, and that's it. But enemies outside the grapple get +20% to hit anyone involved! :O

C)Speak is a weird one. It's the same cost as a hand weapon, but it differs from a hand weapon by:
- being Fast
- being Throwable
but
- not being eligible for a free parry from two weapon fighting.
I think the design idea is that a spear is a simple weapon, and most soldiers using them are standing in a line attacking with a half action, and parry stancing with the other half. But as you know, having a free parry allows you your premium defence in the same turn you swift attack, so characters with more than one attack quickly find they have less use for spears, however iconic they may be.

In my proposed changes, the spear is changed so:
- It can indeed be two-weapon-wielded with another weapon or shield for a free parry
- It is 'bold' which means you can't put it away because it's too big but peasants don't assume a person carrying a spear is a lunatic in the way they assume a man with a drawn sword is a lunatic. It's considered 'safe' when it's at rest and not pointed at anyone, so you don't need to draw it, but you can't 'sheathe' it.

At that point, they are a fast hand weapon that you can throw, but can't conceal, and have to carry in your hand at all times. I think that's pretty attractive!

For a two handed spear, I recommend buying a halberd and just describing it as a longspear. It's a catchall for polearms and all sorts. That way, you can wield it as a great weapon with all its zone denial power and impact chopness, or two-hand-spear to attack with Fast or even throw it.

D) I... Am extremely reluctant. Basically, I'm trying to keep "Impact" on one side for two-handers, and Two Weapon Fighting's free parry on the other side, and nary the twain shall meet. Exception is for the Morning Star, Lance, and Demilance, which only get the Impact on the charge, so there's no Swift-Attack-Plus-Free-Parry nonsense happening.

Any armor that doesn't require your free hand to use is just going to be armor, I think. We're not nailed to historical accuracy, but a buckler was very much a little... punchy shield guy. Like a little shield you could lean to spoil the enemy's leverage, and you grip it with a handle. But!

I think the Buckler is going to be more attractive with these changes because it's one of very few weapons with Balanced, which means there's no offhand penalty. So you can dual wield buckler and hand weapon, swift attack with your hand weapon, and use your dynamic action to attack with the bucker at a mere -15%. It does SB-4 instead of SB-3 like a Main Gauche or Sword Breaker, but it's pummeling; so a fighter like Gimgroth has a non-trivial chance of popping off a Strike-To-Stun with a buckler. And, like you said, they're cheap!

I don't want to give two-handers any way to get a free parry - they have to sacrifice their swift attack for a parry stance if they want to defend in that way. But with a Zone Control dynamic action each turn, they aren't unacceptably vulnerable, and they're especially defensible against mobs trying to crowd in; which feels like something you want a champion swinging a great axe around to be cinematically good at warding off.

[BananaPhone]

The spear is definitely under-utilized in fantasy games, considering it's probably the oldest and most widely used human-made weapon in history for a variety of reasons, because it's cheap to make and maintain, and even someone with minimal training is still effective with it. I guess it doesn't look as heroic as a sword. And the best means of using it require space to move around in, which isn't as prevalent in D&D style games.

Perhaps it's best then to test the rules out and see how they stack up.

[MrAbdiel]

To be clear, whether you’re using your reskinned halberd as a spear or great weapon, it needs two hands. If you want to pull out a shield, you’re basically dropping the spear (free) drawing a hand weapon (free with QuickDraw) and drawing a shield (half action, or dynamic action.) There’s no way to quickly and comfortably shift armament from a two hand weapon to a pair of weapons so completely in combat, it’s always going to need actions!

[LarsWester]

It's going to take me some time to work with the new weapon qualities and abilities but I like the spirit behind all of it. Gimgroth will likely still be using his runed hammer in one hand but might offhand a weapon or even consider going 2-handed Great pick at some point. Also grappling has suddenly become an interesting option. All in all I like what I'm reading but may get things wrong the first few combats so bear with me.


Crazy week at work so been out of pocket.


*EDIT*
Wondering if you'd consider giving Knuckle-dusters the compact quality?

[farothel]

For the dynamic action, I have the feeling it is a lot better for certain weapons and for instance a lot less for sword/shield combos. Unless I'm missing something somewhere.

on another note: I'll be on holiday from tomorrow until next saturday. I'll normally have internet access (the hotel should have Wifi), but I might be slower to respond

[LarsWester]

I think the Buckler is going to be more attractive with these changes because it's one of very few weapons with Balanced, which means there's no offhand penalty. So you can dual wield buckler and hand weapon, swift attack with your hand weapon, and use your dynamic action to attack with the bucker at a mere -15%. It does SB-4 instead of SB-3 like a Main Gauche or Sword Breaker, but it's pummeling; so a fighter like Gimgroth has a non-trivial chance of popping off a Strike-To-Stun with a buckler. And, like you said, they're cheap!

These rules introduce choices to the game which I think is a good thing. Does Gimgroth keep his hammer/shield approach. With the DCA and hammer Gimgroth is going to get a gnarly 5 attacks per round now.
With a BQ shield that is a -30% to the attack with SB-2 damage and the shield special against missiles.
With a BQ Buckler that is a -5% to the attack and losing the shield special against missiles to go for the Strike to Stun.
Not sure which direction he will go in the future he may try a BQ buckler for a bit. Or he might get a BQ Great Weapon in the future. He just needs a pile of gold and he's headed into the Champion career next so he needs a collection of BQ weapons.

[wilphe]

Compact

Spears, shortswords and similar thrusting weapons should be fine


A main gauche seems to require a lot of space to move around and parry


A sling is not under any circumstances a compact weapon, the amount of space you need is why its historically a weapon of irregulars who fight in loose formations if at all


Bold

I'm not sure I understand what you are trying to model here

"A flail can't be scabbarded or holstered therefore people won't see it as a threat"

Those are two distinct properties and the second is situational

The first is, as someone who regularly took an assault rifle to a nightclub,

Spoiler

Show

This was in LARP, and how I learned that walking around as heavily armed and armoured as cyberpunk players typically claim they are doing is rather hard

not a thing you can really do except if you on the march and even then...

Carrying a weapon in hand everywhere you go sounds fine until you actually try to exist, eat, drink or go to the toilet.

In any case "in hand" and "ready" are not the same, the best way to carry something is not necessarily the best way to wield it

Also in this universe the Flail is the weapon of choice of Zealots and similar flavours of nutter, that's a mark against treating it as harmless

Shooting at Groups:

This should only really apply against a tight formation

Otherwise you know what they say about people who aim at nothing

[MrAbdiel]

Thanks for these replies, guys; I appreciate the feedback and the chance to get perspectives on this stuff.

It's going to take me some time to work with the new weapon qualities and abilities but I like the spirit behind all of it. Gimgroth will likely still be using his runed hammer in one hand but might offhand a weapon or even consider going 2-handed Great pick at some point. Also grappling has suddenly become an interesting option. All in all I like what I'm reading but may get things wrong the first few combats so bear with me.


Crazy week at work so been out of pocket.


*EDIT*
Wondering if you'd consider giving Knuckle-dusters the compact quality?

It is so! They have the pummelling quality, but inside a grapple, daggers have that Armor Piercing (2) so that's a tradeoff, and we like tradeoffs!

For the dynamic action, I have the feeling it is a lot better for certain weapons and for instance a lot less for sword/shield combos. Unless I'm missing something somewhere.

on another note: I'll be on holiday from tomorrow until next saturday. I'll normally have internet access (the hotel should have Wifi), but I might be slower to respond

Hope it's a great time of rest, Farothel. And you're right that the sword/board combo is getting less useful, though I'm hoping it lands in the realm of 'tradeoffs against other options'. As Lars says, he has to consider if he wants more accuracy with that free shield bash and pummel (buckler) over the -10 to hit with ranged weapons that comes from the shield. If he was dual wielding hand weapons, he'd get neither, but his free dynamic attach would have more bite to it. We should keep an eye on the shield, though - I don't want it to come off feeling like a second rate option. Maybe some kind of shieldwall thing where that penalty to ranged attacks doubles if you are next to another person with a shield...

These rules introduce choices to the game which I think is a good thing. Does Gimgroth keep his hammer/shield approach. With the DCA and hammer Gimgroth is going to get a gnarly 5 attacks per round now.
With a BQ shield that is a -30% to the attack with SB-2 damage and the shield special against missiles.
With a BQ Buckler that is a -5% to the attack and losing the shield special against missiles to go for the Strike to Stun.
Not sure which direction he will go in the future he may try a BQ buckler for a bit. Or he might get a BQ Great Weapon in the future. He just needs a pile of gold and he's headed into the Champion career next so he needs a collection of BQ weapons.

I did have Gimgroth and champions in mind writing this; the idea that you must collect all these weapons, but the rules sort of drive you into only using one or two anyway. I think a champion who uses his axe for zombies, his hammer for bandits, and his pick for chaos warriors is a cool idea. Having a great weapon I think is definately worthwhile - if you spend your whole turn full defensing and zone controlling, the enemy is at a whopping -35% to hit you in melee and unable to gangup! If they want to hit you at all,they'll be forced to try things like All Out Attack, which will make them unable to defend.... etc etc.

Compact

Spears, shortswords and similar thrusting weapons should be fine


A main gauche seems to require a lot of space to move around and parry


A sling is not under any circumstances a compact weapon, the amount of space you need is why its historically a weapon of irregulars who fight in loose formations if at all

I'll be honest here, I started writing compact about being able to use it in a confined space (especially grapples and extreme confines) and then rolled in the idea of concealing it. But that tis muddling it a bit - I wrote slings as compact because I can imagine them being easilly hidden, not because I thought a pack of Benjaminites are ideally suited to patrolling low caverns! I think I'll reduce Compact to refer specifically to the ability to use it inside of extreme confines, and I'll just let the other situations, which I have called "Partial Infighting", be eyeballed by the GM. Patrolling the sewers and fighting in ranks with spears shouldn't be penalized because they're great tunnel fighting weapons, but not so much in a grapple. Fair cop.

Bold

I'm not sure I understand what you are trying to model here

"A flail can't be scabbarded or holstered therefore people won't see it as a threat"

Those are two distinct properties and the second is situational

The first is, as someone who regularly took an assault rifle to a nightclub,

Spoiler

Show

This was in LARP, and how I learned that walking around as heavily armed and armoured as cyberpunk players typically claim they are doing is rather hard

not a thing you can really do except if you on the march and even then...

Carrying a weapon in hand everywhere you go sounds fine until you actually try to exist, eat, drink or go to the toilet.

In any case "in hand" and "ready" are not the same, the best way to carry something is not necessarily the best way to wield it

Also in this universe the Flail is the weapon of choice of Zealots and similar flavours of nutter, that's a mark against treating it as harmless

This may be another one where the 'social' and 'perception' aspects I should leave to eyeballing as the situations show up than trying to codify. Flails are used by flaggelents, but only because they are the cheap. And because they have a visual semblance of a comet. They're also just peasant weapons because they're tools that can double as weapons. Mostly I was going for the fact that, even though slinging a two handed sword over your back is a well accepted fantasy convention, you can't really stick a spear or a halberd in your bag. You're holding it, or it's leaning against a wall or something. It's a little bit of drawback on those weapons - if you want to change to a different one, you're going to have to drop it, or throw it, or something. But I'll adapt Bold, I think, to just mean 'inconveniently tall'

Shooting at Groups:

This should only really apply against a tight formation

Otherwise you know what they say about people who aim at nothing

Yeah, pretty much. Or the angle... Remember shooting at the guys in the longboat, down the line? I think that'd qualify.

A lot of this is a matter of finding the right balance between "just call it on the spot, GM is king" and qauntifying in rules so the players can predict, plan, and build. We'll get there.


While we're here, are there any Talents or Rules in WFRP2e any of you guys have found underwhelming or that you wish worked better?

[BananaPhone]

While we're here, are there any Talents or Rules in WFRP2e any of you guys have found underwhelming or that you wish worked better?

How about a talent...

Catch Arrows:
(Requires Agility 60, Trained in Dodge Blow)
You may make a single Dodge attempt at an incoming projectile. You may only make one dodge per turn, as normal.
Without this talent, you cannot Dodge projectiles.

[wilphe]

Already exists as a Blood Gift, so, Vampires only

Quickblood
You are so fast you can dodge a shot fired from a pistol or
snatch an arrow out of the air. You may make Dodge Blow
Tests to avoid missile attacks. You may still only dodge once
per round.

[BananaPhone]

A shame Blood Gifts are a lot more precious and rare and more exclusive than 100 exp for talents, heh.

Hmm, maybe MrAbdiel is feeling generous enough to spread the goodwill to everyone else?

[MrAbdiel]

How about a talent...

Catch Arrows:
(Requires Agility 60, Trained in Dodge Blow)
You may make a single Dodge attempt at an incoming projectile. You may only make one dodge per turn, as normal.
Without this talent, you cannot Dodge projectiles.

I am not above making custom talents for things sometimes! However, dodging arrows is sort of outside of human capability, and the supernatural creatures that can manage that have supernatural abilities to accomplish it.

That does inspire me to think about avoiding arrows and lean into the shield a bit, though. As it stands, the best part about the shield is the -10% to ranged attacks against you. But I've sort of nerfed away the shield's biggest selling point by making more weapons available as combinations for the free parry, so maybe Farothel is right that the shield is starting to look less and less worthwhile.

Maybe something like a half-action to actively use a shield to defend against projectiles - let's call it 'Hunker' - that doubles the effectiveness of that shield to +10%; and a Dynamic Combat Action (Lock Shields?) for shield users that permits you to add another 10% if you are adjacent to the an ally who is also hunkering. That would build in the ability for a group to lock up shields for a gnarly -30% to incoming projectiles providing they are willing to shuffle along at one move action per turn.

[BananaPhone]

Could give them an AP bonus instead? Shields give +1 or +2 AP to body/arms ?

[MrAbdiel]

Could give them an AP bonus instead? Shields give +1 or +2 AP to body/arms ?

This is also a possibility! It's what they do in WFRP4e and other D100 products. Goosing up an existing bonus (the +10%) has a greater simplicity and appeals to me than adding a new mechanic (AP to body parts for the shield), but it's an important enough feature I'm interested in modelling it well. The wonderful old Inquisitor tabletop game used to let you add the shield's armor to your arm and one other part of your body you nominated, default chest. Worth a chin-scratch or two.

[BananaPhone]

+1 or 2 AP to body/arms might be the most elegant decision, rather than adding more rules. Gaining an extra 2 AP to most common hit locations could mean the difference between life and death, on top of a free parry and -10% BS to hit you with ranged weapons. All for 10gc.

[LarsWester]

+1 or 2 AP to body/arms might be the most elegant decision, rather than adding more rules. Gaining an extra 2 AP to most common hit locations could mean the difference between life and death, on top of a free parry and -10% BS to hit you with ranged weapons. All for 10gc.

Yep all that means you take the shield every time. I think the goal is to provide choices and trade-offs. I think without buffing shields it is about at a toss up between buckler and shield.

[BananaPhone]

Yep all that means you take the shield every time. I think the goal is to provide choices and trade-offs. I think without buffing shields it is about at a toss up between buckler and shield.

Heh we seem to be unsure whether shields are going from the clear favourite, to toss up to being the less preferably option.

I'm fine with keeping shields as are, because with things like best handaxe + shield removed and two-handed weapons able to accrue some defensive measures like crowd-control, there is less of a clear favourite and more a mixture of mechanics and visual appeal. I like the visual image of a sword + shield, then a spear and then a two-handed axe, so I'll use the rules as best I can to make those three different weapon types work and not feel like I'm nerfing myself for style.

If shields are felt to be lacking a bit, maybe give them a bonus against template weapons or something *shrugs*.

[MrAbdiel]

Yeah, the extra armor does start to put it over the top again. Hmm. It's a conundrum.

I might add a DCA to allow shield users to benefit from grouping up against arrows, but I'll hold off on being too extreme about it until we've played a little and we see how the other options feel. I'm getting second opinions from friends of mine about the weapons, and I might end up rolling picks into axes in the same way we have hammer/mace.


Also! I have posted again. Dojango, feel free to respond to any or all of Small Gaétan's stuff when you get a chance to post too; I just wanted to preserve some momentum so I posted again to keep us hopping.

[BananaPhone]

Though it could be more rules heavy, it might be fun to develop a set of 'fighting style' talent trees, each like 3 talents deep or something.

Like with "Spear Fighting" for example, Tier 1 is being able to free-action parry once a round while wielding a spear in two hands, Tier 2 is gaining an extra square/5 yards of reach and Tier 3 is takes away the WS penalty for dynamic action attacking with the non-bladed butt of the shaft, for example.

Just food for thought, but it would take more work.

[dojango]

Sorry I've been a little (a lot) absent, but I will try to catch up and respond, I guess I'll start with rolling a perception check (1d100)[55] v. 71

[farothel]

let's see how our guide replies to the fact that we might be on to them.

[farothel]

Do we need to pass that bridge? Or is there another way?

[wilphe]

Wighard isn't switching into Reikspeil, if we have reason to be suspicious of our "guide" we have no reason to believe he doesn't speak it

[MrAbdiel]

Wighard isn't switching into Reikspeil, if we have reason to be suspicious of our "guide" we have no reason to believe he doesn't speak it

Noted! I've slightly edited the most recent post to reflect this.

let's see how our guide replies to the fact that we might be on to them.

Make of these comments what you will!

Do we need to pass that bridge? Or is there another way?

Well, so far you've followed the red path on this map into town. This map is your map. Theoretically, it suggests there is another bridge to the north east, but a) it requires a considerable amount of detour through the forsaken and sunken Lost Town, and b) it crosses the Grismerie before it splits into its southern channel and main channel, so you'd have to cross over a second bridge to get back to the Bridge and Chapel Quarters. There are things on that northern dock - mostly skeevy smuggling dock stuff, and the temple of Manaan. And it's also on the same side of the river to Lost Town, where you expect your enemies to be hiding and warring with each other.

Spoiler: Map

Show

[BananaPhone]

Taking away 15 silver to pay for a Best Quality Custard Tarte pie with strawberries on top and in a gift wrapped box with a pretty bow, and 2 silver for a garland of roses.

[farothel]

I'm going to wait to see how Grimgot's attempt works out before I have Bruno try with some diplomacy.

[dojango]

We could also just pay the toll, as a former riverwarden Jasmine understands that tolls are necessary, and in the absence of a strong feudal leader to provide services, private contractors can take up that role as well.

[wilphe]

I'd love to watch that discussion in character

[LarsWester]

To suffer the indignation of paying this toll Gimgroth will need input from the other PCs. Otherwise he is in throwdown mode.