Y R axes better than swords???

[Talon]

Re: Y R axes better than swords???

 

The issue I have with the FREd weapon table is that, as is the case with axes and swords, some weapons are strictly better than others. I don't like the fact that players who choose swords are going to be at a disadvantage vs. those who chose the axe (perhaps "because it gets the most plusses").

 

This is a game...and one of the things that helps make a game fun for players is promoting choices. Ideally, the axe and the sword should be /different/, but equal in power level. An axe might make more sense for a offensive character who wants to dish out damage; a sword might be better for someone who is parrying and dodging more. As it stands, minimaxing the weapons table is far too easy.

[gewing]

Re: Y R axes better than swords???

 

I'm still annoyed by the Naginata... 4'8" samurai wife or daughter swinging 15 (iirc) str min weapon?

 

The issue I have with the FREd weapon table is that, as is the case with axes and swords, some weapons are strictly better than others. I don't like the fact that players who choose swords are going to be at a disadvantage vs. those who chose the axe (perhaps "because it gets the most plusses").

 

This is a game...and one of the things that helps make a game fun for players is promoting choices. Ideally, the axe and the sword should be /different/, but equal in power level. An axe might make more sense for a offensive character who wants to dish out damage; a sword might be better for someone who is parrying and dodging more. As it stands, minimaxing the weapons table is far too easy.

[keithcurtis]

Re: Y R axes better than swords???

 

I'm still annoyed by the Naginata... 4'8" samurai wife or daughter swinging 15 (iirc) str min weapon?

 

Why couldn't they? STR Min doesn't mean you can't pick it up. You just get an OCV and DC penalty. If the person in question has a 10 STR, then they would do -1/-1. Not hard to make up with skill levels/martial arts.

 

Keith "I have a strength of ten, because my heart is pure" Curtis

[Black Rose]

Re: Y R axes better than swords???

 

I'm still annoyed by the Naginata... 4'8" samurai wife or daughter swinging 15 (iirc) str min weapon?

 

Why couldn't they? STR Min doesn't mean you can't pick it up. You just get an OCV and DC penalty. If the person in question has a 10 STR, then they would do -1/-1. Not hard to make up with skill levels/martial arts.

 

Keith "I have a strength of ten, because my heart is pure" Curtis

 

True, but the naginata has been touted as a kind of "home guard" weapon, that could be picked up by those of less than excellent strength and utilised with some degree of proficiency. It doesn't make a lot of sense to me that the Sengoku-era equivalent of Paw's huntin' rifle would be so difficult to use at a basic level of skill (i.e., without the minuses).

 

Granted, I could always say that women of the samurai caste all pick up +1 OCV w/naginata, but that seems... cheap.

[Blue Jogger]

Re: Y R axes better than swords???

 

Granted' date=' I could always say that women of the samurai caste all pick up +1 OCV w/naginata, but that seems... cheap.[/quote']

 

Actually, the women of the samurai caste learn how to best apply leverage of their bodies, by spinning, giving them a seemingly higher STR for the purposes of using long weapons of naginata and quarterstaff (and possibly some bladed weapons)

 

+8 STR, -1 1/2 Lim:Only to remove STR min penalities of long weapons, no figured characteristics, requires enough room to spin rather than merely thrust

(Real Cost: 3 points)

 

Ok, it's still cheap, but now it has some flavor. Advance techniques would eliminate all limitations and give a raw +8 STR (no figured) due to superior knowledge of the secret arts of torque and leverage rather than brute muscle.

 

"When one uses his entire body with forward pressure, it is an awesome force in comparison." - Chinese boxing quote

[Outsider]

Re: Y R axes better than swords???

 

Or they could just eat the OCV/DCV penalties, and we could chalk it up to a 50kg person just not being as dangerous with muscle powered melee weapons as an equally skilled and armed -and much heavier- person.

[Guest joen00b]

Re: Y R axes better than swords???

 

I saw a show on Discovery studying the medeivel weapons used during the crusades. The Muslims really were on to something when they began using the Mace. It was cracking open and puncturing armor like they were cans of soda! Swords and axes were good weapons, no doubt, but for those armored Europeans, Maces tended to be much more deadlier weapons to use.

[Black Rose]

Re: Y R axes better than swords???

 

Actually, the women of the samurai caste learn how to best apply leverage of their bodies, by spinning, giving them a seemingly higher STR for the purposes of using long weapons of naginata and quarterstaff (and possibly some bladed weapons)

 

+8 STR, -1 1/2 Lim:Only to remove STR min penalities of long weapons, no figured characteristics, requires enough room to spin rather than merely thrust

(Real Cost: 3 points)

 

Ok, it's still cheap, but now it has some flavor. Advance techniques would eliminate all limitations and give a raw +8 STR (no figured) due to superior knowledge of the secret arts of torque and leverage rather than brute muscle.

 

"When one uses his entire body with forward pressure, it is an awesome force in comparison." - Chinese boxing quote

 

This works for me. It's also nice and inexpensive, which is good for a low-point heroic fantasy campaign.

[Markdoc]

Re: Y R axes better than swords???

 

Well, given the choice between facing a small japanese women with a naginata or a large, muscular Yamabushi with a naginata, I'd elect for the former.

 

There are several points to bear in mind.

 

1. In real life, naginatas come in different sizes (as do all weapons). Small people use small ones. If the -1 OCV offendeth thee, give them smaller weapons, which will of course have lower STR mins.

 

2. The naginata was the weapon of choice because swords were generally out (for women) - as were bows - and two-handed weapons such as spears and naginata are generally easier to learn and hit hard with. It's one reason they were also popular with monks, who usually didn't have the luxury of military training starting early in life

 

3. It doesn't take much to make up the deficiency - a +1 OCV level costs 2 points. Thus, a samurai woman (or a small man, for that matter) who had WF: naginata and +1 OCV with naginata, for a total of three points would be able to whop ass compared with Kenji the farmer, who depite his greater size and muscularity has no WF at all and is therefore at -3 from the get-go.

 

None of this applies to player characters, who can buy all the levels and/or extra STR they need, regardless of sex. So I can't say it bugs me.

 

Cheers, Mark

[Blue Jogger]

Re: Y R axes better than swords???

 

Excellent points, Markdoc.

 

I was envisioning the 4'8" 50kg female character (with an 8, possibly 10 STR) who needed to use several 16-18 STR min weapons without additional penality.

 

I was also thinking of those cheezy martial arts movies where the female martial artist does some amazing spins, sometimes doing a 270 degree energy-wasting reverse spin to block or parry a blow.

[Rick]

Re: Y R axes better than swords???

 

Well you could always by Penalty levels to over come the -3 for being beneath the str min. Isn't that still the penalty for using heavy weapons? 4-5 pts, should clear it up completely.

[Outsider]

Re: Y R axes better than swords???

 

The penalty is -1 OCV, and -1 DCV per 5 STR (or fraction thereof) that one is under the Minimum. (pg 327, FRED)

 

Unless she is fighting a very large man indeed, she will probably only be down 5 STR (or less) on him, meaning a relative disadvantage of 1 OCV/DCV. She will also have 5 more points to play with, which could easily be put into a 2 point level (+1OCV) and a 3 point one (OCV or DCV).

 

If her opponent is not also armed with a long weapon, he will be at a -1 or -2 OCV until he hits her (FH, pg 186-7) thus giving her another marginal advantage.

 

 

The main thing the smallish, but equal point woman will be missing is the figured characteristics.

[gewing]

Re: Y R axes better than swords???

 

I should have come back sooner...

 

IIRC, they also lose at least one or 2 damage classes. At that point, why not just use a short sword? Or a light spear, at least.

 

 

 

Why couldn't they? STR Min doesn't mean you can't pick it up. You just get an OCV and DC penalty. If the person in question has a 10 STR, then they would do -1/-1. Not hard to make up with skill levels/martial arts.

 

Keith "I have a strength of ten, because my heart is pure" Curtis

[gewing]

Re: Y R axes better than swords???

 

If she is 10 strength, she will be down one damage class, if she has an 8, she will be down two.

If she has an 8 strength,

I don't think paying 3 end per phase for 1d6 long weapon that is -2 ocv, -2dcv makes much sense.

 

The penalty is -1 OCV, and -1 DCV per 5 STR (or fraction thereof) that one is under the Minimum. (pg 327, FRED)

 

Unless she is fighting a very large man indeed, she will probably only be down 5 STR (or less) on him, meaning a relative disadvantage of 1 OCV/DCV. She will also have 5 more points to play with, which could easily be put into a 2 point level (+1OCV) and a 3 point one (OCV or DCV).

 

If her opponent is not also armed with a long weapon, he will be at a -1 or -2 OCV until he hits her (FH, pg 186-7) thus giving her another marginal advantage.

 

 

The main thing the smallish, but equal point woman will be missing is the figured characteristics.

[Outsider]

Re: Y R axes better than swords???

 

Ah, you're quite right... I misread the rulebook... it is -1 OCV and -1 DC (not DCV) per 5 str (or fraction thereof) under the minimum.

 

None the less, using a pole arm -still- isnt a bad deal for the woman involved. I dont have the rulebook that has the stats for specifically Japanese weapons handy, so I will substitute a few "western" ones, some of which will be much wiser choises for a STR 8 wielder than others, due to game mechanics.

 

 

Glaive_____ : 0 OCV mod : 2d6+1 HKA : 16 STR min (2 Handed)

Pole Axe___ : -1 OCV mod : 2d6 HKA : 13 STR min (2 handed)

Short Spear : 0 OCV mod : 1d6+1 HKA : 8 Str min (2 Handed)

 

In the hands of our 8 Str woman, who has bought 2x2pt level, and 2x3pt levels with the 10 points she will be "down" on her 18 STR opponent :

Glaive______: 0 OCV mod : 1 1/2d6 HKA : AND either +2 OCV, +2 DCV, or +1 DC

Pole Axe____: 0 OCV mod : 1 1/2d6 HKA : AND either +2 OCV, +2 DCV, or +1 DC

Short Spear : +2 OCV mod : 1d6+1 HKA : AND either +2 OCV, +2 DCV, or +1 DC

 

Then, some equivalents for her opponent :

Great Sword : +1 OCV Mod : 2D6 HKA : 17 STR min (2 Handed)

Bas. Sword_ : 0 OCV Mod : 1 1/2D6 HKA : 13 STR min (2 Handed)

Bas. Sword_ : 0 OCV Mod : 1 1/2D6 HKA : 16 STR min (1 Handed)

Long Sword_ : 0 OCV Mod : 1D6+1 HKA : 12 STR min (1 Handed)

Falchion____ : +1 OCV Mod : 1D6+1 HKA : 14 STR min (1 Handed)

Short Sword : 0 OCV Mod : 1D6 HKA : 10 STR min (1 Handed)

 

In the hands of her 18 STR opponent :

Great Sword : +1 OCV Mod : 2D6 HKA

Bas. Sword_ : 0 OCV Mod : 2D6 HKA

Bas. Sword_ : 0 OCV Mod : 1 1/2D6 HKA : Off hand available

Long Sword_ : 0 OCV Mod : 1 1/2D6 HKA : Off hand Available

Falchion____ : +1 OCV Mod : 1D6+1 HKA : Off hand available

Short Sword : 0 OCV Mod : 1D6+1 HKA : Off hand available

 

 

So, basically, using the glaive or pole axe, she can be the equivalent of the very large man indeed using a Bastard Sword. Or she can swap a DC for 2 OCV or 2 DCV, an option the sword wielding man does not have. If I were her, I would put it into DCV, which, along with the OCV the very large man loses for using a medium vs a long weapon, would put his chances of hitting me at -3. (or an 8- if we are otherwise equal, while my chance to hit him stays at 11-, which is more than twice as likely) Especially if the man is only wearing light to medium armor. 1 1/2 D6 works against that just fine.

 

The other option would be to go for the short spear, sacrificing a lot of hitting power, but putting all levels to OCV (+4!) to go for the aimed shot. If the target isnt wearing full coverage armor, an early impairment could decide the fight. Very dicey, this option, because it requires an aimed shot (-5 at least, for anyplace that might be unarmored) and because base damage is on one die only, meaning it could be very good, or very bad)

 

I think she only spends END for the STR she uses, not based on what the weapon requires as a "minimum". so only 2 END/phase for her, even if the weapon is 18 STR min. (1END/5 STR, heroic)

[gewing]

Re: Y R axes better than swords???

 

Good points, but it still bugs the hell out of me. It reminds me of the stupid 20 lb two handed swords and such in Certain other games. The STUPID weapons in Morrowind, of course, being an extreme. IIRC 60 lb Daedric Katana???

 

 

Bollocks!!!

 

A naginata probably weighed 5-6 lbs, usually, up to 10 or so for a heavy/long one.

 

A two handed sword that weighed over 8 lbs was probably not meant for combat, rather being ceremonial.

[Outsider]

Re: Y R axes better than swords???

 

Another option would be to scrap the published weapons tables all together, and come up with your own system.

 

For example, one could decide that weapons do not posess an intrinsic attack value at all, but merely act to increase the wielder's effective strength through mechanical advantage, and to modify the type of damage he does. If the weapon is used in a swinging motion, it acts to increase his effective strength quite a lot. If it is used in a thrusting motion, not so much, though it may still increase his reach quite a bit.

 

Basic concepts :

 

A person's base striking strength = his strength in active points, then :

 

1) Swinging a weapon effectively adds striking strength. The longer the weapon, the more striking strength is added. No L2 weapon may be swung.

Short weapons : +5 active points.

Medium weapons : +10 active points.

Long Weapons : +15 active points.

 

2) Weapons that allow both hands to be used allow for greater striking strength. No Short weapon may be two handed.

Two Handed weapon : +5 active points

 

3) Just what the knobbly bit on the striking surface of the weapon is modifies what kind of damage the weapon does.

Chopping/Crushing (Damage done relies on concentrating impact damage in a small, but non point, area) : Acrive points are Killing damage

Piercing (Damage done relies on focussing impact damage onto a single point) : Active points are Armor Piercing Killing damage

Cutting (Damage done relies on a slicing motion concentrated onto a small area) : Active points have 5 added to them, then are Killing damage, but any armor this attack faces is multiplied by 1.25 (all fractions dropped)Bludgeoning (Damage done relies on mostly on impact, but also on some concentration) : Active points are +1 Stun Mult Killing damage

Blunt (Damage done relies on impact alone) : Active points are Normal damage (5 points = 1d6, NOT 3 points = 1d6!)

 

4) Weapons may be used to inflict more than one form of damage depending on their nature.

Swords (swung) : Cutting

Swords (thrust) : Piercing

Pick Axes (swung) : Chopping or Piercing

Hammer/Axes (swung) : Bludgeoning or Chopping

Spear (thrust) : Piercing

Spread (swung) : Blunt

[NuSoardGraphite]

Re: Y R axes better than swords???

 

Another option would be to scrap the published weapons tables all together, and come up with your own system.

 

For example, one could decide that weapons do not posess an intrinsic attack value at all, but merely act to increase the wielder's effective strength through mechanical advantage, and to modify the type of damage he does. If the weapon is used in a swinging motion, it acts to increase his effective strength quite a lot. If it is used in a thrusting motion, not so much, though it may still increase his reach quite a bit.

 

Basic concepts :

 

A person's base striking strength = his strength in active points, then :

 

1) Swinging a weapon effectively adds striking strength. The longer the weapon, the more striking strength is added. No L2 weapon may be swung.

Short weapons : +5 active points.

Medium weapons : +10 active points.

Long Weapons : +15 active points.

 

2) Weapons that allow both hands to be used allow for greater striking strength. No Short weapon may be two handed.

Two Handed weapon : +5 active points

 

3) Just what the knobbly bit on the striking surface of the weapon is modifies what kind of damage the weapon does.

Chopping/Crushing (Damage done relies on concentrating impact damage in a small, but non point, area) : Acrive points are Killing damage

Piercing (Damage done relies on focussing impact damage onto a single point) : Active points are Armor Piercing Killing damage

Cutting (Damage done relies on a slicing motion concentrated onto a small area) : Active points have 5 added to them, then are Killing damage, but any armor this attack faces is multiplied by 1.25 (all fractions dropped)Bludgeoning (Damage done relies on mostly on impact, but also on some concentration) : Active points are +1 Stun Mult Killing damage

Blunt (Damage done relies on impact alone) : Active points are Normal damage (5 points = 1d6, NOT 3 points = 1d6!)

 

4) Weapons may be used to inflict more than one form of damage depending on their nature.

Swords (swung) : Cutting

Swords (thrust) : Piercing

Pick Axes (swung) : Chopping or Piercing

Hammer/Axes (swung) : Bludgeoning or Chopping

Spear (thrust) : Piercing

Spread (swung) : Blunt

 

In which case, you are now playing GURPS...

[Rick]

Re: Y R axes better than swords???

 

Well,General Kwon's Doa (a pole-arm with a small sword head on one end and a weighted spear head on the other) can wiegh anywhere from 10-15 pounds and was used on horse back as well as by infantry. For the arm strong enough to heft it, it's a very potent weapon.

[gewing]

Re: Y R axes better than swords???

 

and there was the "general" who allegedly used a 130 lb pole arm. It may be possible, but I'll bet it wasn't used the same way as any other pole arm.

 

Never seen that particular weapon. 10-15 lbs for a pole arm IS possible NOt common, imo.

and note from horseback you are probably using your velocity more than your muscles.

 

Actually, Although they are very popular in D&D, and the Lajatang is one of the coolest weapons ever, most double ended weapons seem very easy to Kill YOURSELF with, to me. There are ways to use them, but some of the designs in some "fantasy art" look like they are specifically designed to disembowel the user during a swing. The Lajatang, afaik, would be used in short chops or wide looping strikes keeping ones body INSIDE the 2 blades.

 

Well' date='General Kwon's Doa (a pole-arm with a small sword head on one end and a weighted spear head on the other) can wiegh anywhere from 10-15 pounds and was used on horse back as well as by infantry. For the arm strong enough to heft it, it's a very potent weapon.[/quote']

[gewing]

Re: Y R axes better than swords???

 

No, you are just borrowing some of their better ideas...

 

In which case' date=' you are now playing GURPS...[/quote']

[gewing]

Re: Y R axes better than swords???

 

I thought about this again, do you mean the Kwantow(spelling wrong) , or bandits encampment sword, similar to the Japanese Bisento? broad blade on one end, weight on the other?

 

Well' date='General Kwon's Doa (a pole-arm with a small sword head on one end and a weighted spear head on the other) can wiegh anywhere from 10-15 pounds and was used on horse back as well as by infantry. For the arm strong enough to heft it, it's a very potent weapon.[/quote']

[Outsider]

Re: Y R axes better than swords???

 

Well, there are only so many ways you can do Stat derived damage. That one looks fairly GURPSy, true. So here is another one :

 

1) Toss Strength Minimums. Any melee weapon can be wielded by anyone.

 

2) The base damage on a killing attack weapon represents 1/10ths of the wielder's strength done as body damage. Fractions of 1/2 or more round up. Stun damage done by such attacks is found via the hit location table, OR is three times the body damage.

 

3) The base damage on a normal attack weapon represents 1/10ths of the wielder's strength done as stun damage. Body damage done by such attackes is found by dividing Stun damage by 3.5, and rounding fractions of 1/2 or more up.

 

 

SO

Short Sword : 1d6 HKA : Does 10%-60% of STR in Body damage

Bas Sword : 1 1/2d6 HKA : Does 20% to 90% of STR in Body damage.

Stilletto : 1/2 d6 HKA AP : Does 10%-30% of STR in AP Body damage

War Hammer : 1d6+1 HKA +1SM : Does 20%-70% of STR in Body Damage, Stun mult is +1

Glaive : 2D6+1 HKA : Does 30%-130% of STR in Body damage.

 

 

So your STR 8 woman with a glaive will do 2-10 Body/blow, with your STR 18 Bushi with a Bas. Sword will do 4-16 body/blow. But neither will be getting reduced OCV based on their strength.

 

One thing I like about this system is that every point of STR means something, even if just a little. The main thing I dont like about it is makes extreme STR, which is very easy to get in HERO, do too much damage (IMO) when combined with large weapons. High STR is desirable and effiecient enough as it is, no need to exacerbate the situation. It would work better as a modification for ol' gramps AD&D, where extremely high STR isnt that easy to come by, and, indeed, isnt as high anyway.

 

 

My real solution is that the small STR 8 woman will just have to suck it up and accept that she isnt going to be as effective in melee combat as the STR 18 monster of a swordsman. I already pointed out where, IF she spends her extra 10 points on combat skill levels, she isnt that far behind anyway.

[Mutant for Hire]

Re: Y R axes better than swords???

 

Cutting (Damage done relies on a slicing motion concentrated onto a small area) : Active points have 5 added to them, then are Killing damage, but any armor this attack faces is multiplied by 1.25 (all fractions dropped)

How about Reduced Penetration for a disad on the weapon?

Bludgeoning (Damage done relies on mostly on impact, but also on some concentration) : Active points are +1 Stun Mult Killing damage

Blunt (Damage done relies on impact alone) : Active points are Normal damage (5 points = 1d6, NOT 3 points = 1d6!)

You might want to stick Penetrating on some of these attacks. Remember that a blunt attack can actually transmit some force through the armor.

[Outsider]

Re: Y R axes better than swords???

 

I thought about reduced pen on cutting, but its a bit too debilitating, IMO.

 

And I avoided penetrating because, by the time the force is penentrated through the armor, I figure it is mostly "stun" in nature anyway. That does spark an idea... you could have a house rule that for every 10 or 20 stun a person takes after defences from a single attack, they -will- end up taking at least 1 body, either from the attack itself, or added on after the fact. It should be nearly impossibly to hit someone so hard they are knocked unconsious without doing at least some body...even if they are wearing a helmet/armor.

 

My main point in providing both alternatives, neither of which are "ready to run" as presented, is to say that people shouldnt feel absolutely constricted by the game system rules if they are playing strictly for fun with a regular group. If they want their work to be transferrable throughout HEROdom, things are different, of course.