DnD's Spiked Chain

[Guest bblackmoor]

Re: DnD's Spiked Chain

 

I'm not so sure about your limitation' date=' or the -1/2. ... It depends a lot on the game, too.[/quote']

 

Yes, of course. I made general assumptions about the setting (high fantasy, rigid armor being reasonably common, etc.), but the GM would have to select the appropriate value for the Limitiation, as always.

 

Your "easier means" come with' date=' as KS points out, a long body of text.[/quote']

 

No more so than Killer Shrike's various caveats and explanatory notes (in fact, I would say that it requires a bit less). The difference being that the normal way to achieve the effect he desires is already a standard part of the system, and needs no special explanation.

 

But he apparently likes it that way, so we'll agree to disagree, as gentlemen of good will often do.

 

What bothers me more (and I freely admit this is simply a pet peeve of mine rearing its ugly head) is the matter of chains in his world violating the laws of physics (i.e., doing more, rather than less, damage to rigid armor). But then again, making something realistic is far less important than making it fun to play, particularly in a setting where you have elves and wizards and all sorts of fell beasts running around, so I should (and will) just let that go.

[Guest bblackmoor]

Re: DnD's Spiked Chain

 

But I don't want to be told that I'm wasting my time' date=' so I'm keeping mum. ... I just wanted to get off my chest the idea that chastising him personally is counter-productive. And that I liked the ideas.[/quote']

 

No one has said that anyone is wasting their time. Killer Shrike has gone to an effort to share his ideas with us, and that effort is appreciated. The least we can do is take a serious look at it, and that includes -- nay, requires -- pointing out areas that seem problematic. I do not consider anyone's time "wasted", nor is anyone being "chastised".

 

(And as I said, I also liked the ideas.)

 

Edit:

 

I should point out that I consider uncritical praise to be as vapid and useless as a laugh track on a sitcom. Having respect for the time and effort someone has put into a project, and having respect for the person who put forth the time and effort to share that work, means that you praise what is good, and make suggestions for how it may be improved (if, indeed, you think it can be improved). That is what I do. To do any less would be to display comtempt for the person's project and for the person themselves.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: DnD's Spiked Chain

 

If it is jut "bashing" damage' date=' why not just add an additional increased stun multiple? Dispersed concussive force is more likely to hurt or knock someone unconscious than actually do massive trauma. Focused points of impact are far better for that.[/quote']

It has an increased STUN Multiple also; that works vs every opponent. However I also want concusion weapons to specifically work better vs plate and scale.

 

I wanted to create a situation where choosing weapons and armor did not boil down to taking the weapon that does the most damage and the armor that has the most DEF.

 

I wanted each Armor type to have pros and cons independent of their DEF rating, and Weapons had pros and cons independent of their damage and handedness.

 

Thus I decided that blunt killing would work better vs rigid armors, piercing damage would work better vs Chain, and slashing would work better vs soft armors and skin.

 

So I defined traits that accomplished that purpose.

 

From that basic premise, I started describing various traits defining that behavior. I also wanted these traits to have cons, so I assigned a con to each as well.

 

Then I started describing various weapons via this method and I hit on the idea of describing other traits of particular weapons in a similar fashion as an intellectual exercise, and the list quickly grew.

 

In the end I looked at it and decided that it was playable. Equipment is paid for with money, so I don't need to know how much it costs in points, or its exact power build.

 

Using the variant, the choice of which weapon and which armor to use has no clear cut best option; there are pros and cons to everything. With that washing out, it falls to character concept instead which is vastly preferable in my opinion. In the campaign I used it in, out of 9 PCs no two chose the same disposition of weapon and armor usage, and the choices made by each player came down to character concept. Further, the choices had ramification in game that situationally made each choice better or worse than others.

 

I could have done the same thing by formally statting up each pro and con and making big chubby compound power constructs for each weapon. But I didnt want to, so I didnt.

 

Various posts

bblackmoor, you look at it and think that because I just assing +1 per die without stating it up that it is a flaw, but the variant isnt based on stating things mechanically, its based on mixing and matching flat abilities on the fly and not worrying about the underlying mechanics.

 

You can consider that as a flaw all day long, but I don't. You'll note that I didnt post it with a "Im thinking of using something like this, please critique" note. I designed it a couple years ago, and have used it, and it did work. I posted it to share as an alternative for others, not for critique.

 

Further Im not sure what the nature of your discontent is regarding it. You seem to be hung up on one small aspect of the variant and further seem to disregard (or at least havent mentioned) the context in which it is used. Look at the entire body of work and its implementation to see the bigger picture first. If you are deteremined to be critical, then your critique will be more useful once you consider the context in which something exists and keeping an eye on the intended bigger picture.

 

Finally, if someone offers criticism and it is indicated that it isnt welcome, the polite thing to do is to stop belaboring the point. There are posts where I state that Im looking for input; by all means jump in and critique away. Baring that I would prefer that you refrain from doing so.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: DnD's Spiked Chain

 

Now generally I don't think a grown man needs anyone batting for him, and that's not what I'm doing here. What I would like to do right here is point out that KS himself has been in a very long discussion of another not-book-legal build just this week, and I don't think at any time he ever called the other ideas anything more than 'not book legal.'

 

 

Yeah, I try not to make value judgements. I dont have a problem with people using non standard solutions and houserules by any means. I just think it is important for people to realize that they are doing so.

 

Thus when I see people advocating builds as a valid solution to something and it seems like they are unaware that the build is mechanically not actually legal or viable, I will point out that the build doesnt work the way they think it does.

 

However, if people come at it like "I know this isnt legal, but Im using it anyway and hand waving it" then so be it.

 

 

For my own part I try to be very clear when I post things that are house ruled or variations from the rules. I think that it is important to do this so that less experienced or knowledgeable players don't accept variant material as part of the fabric of the game and thus develop a skewed understanding of the game system.

[Guest bblackmoor]

Re: DnD's Spiked Chain

 

Equipment is paid for with money' date=' so I don't need to know how much it costs in points, or its exact power build.[/quote']

 

What do you do when someone creates a power (whether that's a spell, talent, feat, or what-have-you) using Dispel or Suppress? Knowing the point cost for powers is an intrinsic requirement of the game system, much like knowing the "level" of a spell or character is a requirement for D&D.

 

Further Im not sure what the nature of your discontent is regarding it.

 

I've made that as clear as I am likely to be able. Besides, I don't think it would do either of us any good for me to elaborate, even if elaboration were warranted. As you say, there's no need to belabor the point.

 

There are posts where I state that Im looking for input; by all means jump in and critique away. Baring that I would prefer that you refrain from doing so.

 

With all due respect, that's not how it works. When we post, we invite feedback. We do not get to choose what receives feedback and what does not. Rather, we do, but that choice is made when we decide to post. Deciding to post is to choose the possibility of receiving feedback.

 

And of course, you can pay as much or as little attention to that feedback as you choose. That's definitely your choice, and no one should take offense at whether their suggestions are adopted or ignored. That's simply the nature of discussion in an atmosphere of mutual respect.

[keithcurtis]

Re: DnD's Spiked Chain

 

Of course. I hope you would feel free to do so as well. People of good will can (and inevitably will) disagree on matters of game design. Sometimes others will see flaws in our design which we did not see, and our game will be improved by taking into account the fresh point of view. Other times we simply like different things, or have different design criteria. There's nothing wrong with that. We can still collaborate and profit from each other's work.

 

When your work is great and useful, I say so (and I have said so on more than one ocassion). When I think it can be improved, I say that too. I hope you would do the same. That's how peers interact. Please don't take my observations so personally.

 

I don't know if you can stand back and look at your post (#37) wuth an unbiased eye, but it comes off more condescending than critical. That's why you're seeing the responses you've gotten.

 

Keith "just saying" Curtis

[Guest bblackmoor]

Re: DnD's Spiked Chain

 

I don't know if you can stand back and look at your post (#37) wuth an unbiased eye' date=' but it comes off more condescending than critical.[/quote']

 

I wish people would read what is written rather than trying to divine what they think I am thinking. I said what I meant to say.

 

Edit:

 

It also vexes me that people put words in mouth. No one "chatised" Killer Shrike. No one said that his work was a "waste of time". If I had a nickel for every time someone on this forum attributed obnoxious comments to me which I have never said, I would be a rich man.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: DnD's Spiked Chain

 

What do you do when someone creates a power (whether that's a spell' date=' talent, feat, or what-have-you) using Dispel or Suppress? Knowing the point cost for powers is an intrinsic requirement of the game system, much like knowing the "level" of a spell or character is a requirement for D&D.[/quote']

Equipment is a seperate category in games where they are bought with money; Suppress affects Powers and Characteristics, Dispel affects Powers. In my games Equipment is neither a Characteristic or Power and is thus immune to either.

 

With all due respect, that's not how it works. When we post, we invite feedback. We do not get to choose what receives feedback and what does not. Rather, we do, but that choice is made when we decide to post. Deciding to post is to choose the possibility of receiving feedback.

If I post a reply to someone elses request for information, it is not a request for feedback, it is intended to be of value to the person asking a question.

 

Particularly when in fact what was posted on these boards is not material, but rather a link to my own self-funded site.

 

If in fact what you stated was true, then I would instead simply refrain from posting anything that I didnt want feedback on. Which would be a majority of my posts.

 

And of course, you can pay as much or as little attention to that feedback as you choose. That's definitely your choice, and no one should take offense at whether their suggestions are adopted or ignored. That's simply the nature of discussion in an atmosphere of mutual respect.

So essentially your position is that you can post extraneous "critiques" of anything that I post, and if I don't like it my recourse is to either a) post nothing or ignore you?

[Guest bblackmoor]

Re: DnD's Spiked Chain

 

Equipment is a seperate category in games where they are bought with money; Suppress affects Powers and Characteristics' date=' Dispel affects Powers. In my games Equipment is neither a Characteristic or Power and is thus immune to either.[/quote']

 

Well, if you have established a house rule that says that there are no spells of any kind which affect equipment (weapons, armor, and so on), then you've eliminated most of the reason for knowing the point values. That's an interesting decision.

 

... if I don't like it my recourse is to either a) post nothing or ignore you?

 

You say this like you didn't already know it. You aren't a newcomer: you don't need to be told this. Don't be disingenuous.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: DnD's Spiked Chain

 

Well' date=' if you have established a house rule that says that there are no spells of any kind which affect equipment (weapons, armor, and so on), then you've eliminated most of the reason for knowing the point values. That's an interesting decision.[/quote']

Its not a House Rule per se; it is a literal interpretation of the Suppress and Dispel rules.

 

 

You say this like you didn't already know it. You aren't a newcomer: you don't need to be told this. Don't be disingenuous.

On the contrary, as you state I am not a newcomer, and your position is still somewhat novel to me. It is essentially a false dilemna; it posits that either I don't post or I ignore unwanted criticism. It attempts to limit my options to either of two unacceptable decisions, and thus I reject it.

[Hierax]

PSLs for Weapon Reach with Chain Weapons

 

My big question is: Did I do the penalty skill right? I used a 1 1/2 point penalty skill level' date=' but should I have used a 3 or 5 instead?[/quote'] I think that 2x 1½-point PSLs is right. You're offsetting the specific penalty of Long Reach Weapons (FH-5e.186; H5ER.67). Essentially, you can "morph" the weapon's length/reach from L/M/S pretty much at will.

 

I'll be using it this way for chain weapons IMC too.

[Hierax]

Re: DnD's Spiked Chain

 

Maybe I'm biased (from mainly working with swords, staffs, and knives) but chains seem pretty bloody awkward to use, so I'd probably give a chain weapon a -2 OCV.

 

Mind you, part of the training of any chain-based martial art could well be 3 points for 2x 1½-point PSLs to offset this. Makes the weapon still useable but not by the casually skilled.

 

In D&D/D20 terms, these PSLs would be about the same as an Exotic Weapon Proficiency Feat.

[Hierax]

Re: DnD's Spiked Chain

 

For non-spiked chains, you could have them act as brass-Knuckle like slot for being wrapped around hand like in the Drunken Master movie.

[Hierax]

Re: DnD's Spiked Chain

 

A lot of the same builds as for Whips would apply to chains. It can do the tripping, disarming, choking, etc. but a chain isn't as responsive as a whip (because of the links) yet it is a lot sturdier.

 

So a chain is a pretty {pun}flexible{/pun} weapon, maybe build it as a multi-power.

[Hierax]

Re: DnD's Spiked Chain

 

At first glance, Arcady, a STR Min of 13 seems a bit high to me for a Spiked Chain; I mean it isn't a ball and chain, the end isn't particularly weighted; but then again 10' of metal chain is pretty heavy; mind you, because you can vary the length you can vary the weight that you are swinging so you can kinda change the STR Min too; Hmm, I'm not sure about that now that I think of it.

[Guest bblackmoor]

Re: DnD's Spiked Chain

 

So a chain is a pretty {pun}flexible{/pun} weapon' date=' maybe build it as a multi-power.[/quote']

 

Indeed. You know, I read a really bad fantasy novel, oh, it must have been almost twenty years ago, in which the main character was essentially using a high-tech chain as his weapon of choice. I think the name of the novel was "Sos The Rope". I recall thinking at the time that if I were to try creating that weapon in Fantasy Hero that it would have to be a multipower. I never actually wrote it up, though: the book was so bad, I just wanted to forget it as soon as possible.

[arcady]

Re: DnD's Spiked Chain

 

At first glance' date=' Arcady, a STR Min of 13 seems a bit high to me for a Spiked Chain; I mean it isn't a ball and chain, the end isn't particularly weighted; but then again 10' of metal chain is pretty heavy;[/quote']Actually I think I -was- working on the assumption of something on the end of the chain like a blade (as in the Reaper mini of a spiked chain warrior) or a ball (as in Kill Bill).

 

Some of the design is a game balance issue though. If I recall my Hero right off the fly, you can use a weapon with a Str Min above your strength, just not as well as you could one your are above. Correct? If not, it might need lowering, but then again if not, all weapons would need lowering.

 

In play, the weapon never came up during my Fantasy Hero game. We ended up in a game trapped in a lot of investigation and social interaction and very little action.

 

So I never got to see if my build actually did in play what I hoped to achieve - get across the flavor of the DnD spiked chain without the game imbalance.

[Old Man]

Re: DnD's Spiked Chain

 

Well' date=' if you have established a house rule that says that there are no spells of any kind which affect equipment (weapons, armor, and so on), then you've eliminated most of the reason for knowing the point values. That's an interesting decision.[/quote']

 

I'm going to assume you're being facetious here and that you don't really think KS has 'no spells of any kind' that affect equipment. You really have to take active points construction out of the equation when it comes to heroic-level equipment, using it as a guideline for balance and that's about it. Otherwise you open the door to all kinds of bizarre abuses, like cheaply suppressing all armor within a 3" radius.

 

Besides, points totals don't accurately convey game balance for equipment. If they did, then someone who carried one of each weapon on the chart would be an overpowered combat god, not a weighed-down sitting duck.

[Guest bblackmoor]

Re: DnD's Spiked Chain

 

I'm going to assume you're being facetious here ... Otherwise you open the door to all kinds of bizarre abuses' date=' like cheaply suppressing all armor within a 3" radius.[/quote']

 

Spell Of Rusty Doom

 

Dispel Armor, 15d6 (45 Active Points); OAF (enchanted wand of rusty iron; -1), Gestures (-1/4), Incantations (-1/4), Requires A Magic Roll (-1/2), Only Affects Metal Armors (-1/2). Total Cost: 13 Points

 

(H5R, page 149, "Dispel")

 

A Talent that allows you to attempt to break an opponent's sword (analogous to the "Sunder" feat in D&D) would be written up in a similar fashion.

 

This is off the track of the topic, though. I suggest we table this dicussion.

[keithcurtis]

Re: DnD's Spiked Chain

 

I wish people would read what is written rather than trying to divine what they think I am thinking. I said what I meant to say.

 

Then you said it poorly.

 

Keith

[Guest bblackmoor]

Re: DnD's Spiked Chain

 

Then you said it poorly.

 

Did I ever say that Killer Shrike wasted his time? Did I ever chastise him for putting forth the effort to share his creations?

 

NO.

 

I said what I meant to say. I can't help it that the people who frequent this forum can't be bothered to read posts before they reply to them. Sometimes the gross mischaracterization of what I have written is even deliberate, such as in the case of a certain flake who hasn't been around here recently (and I won't say his name for fear of his appearing -- good riddance to bad rubbish, I say). On more than one occassion, I have been "quoted" as saying the exact opposite of what I have actually written (Nexus was making a habit of this for a while, for reasons which are still a mystery to me).

 

I will not reply to this odious subtopic again (not in this thread, anyway). Either read what I write, or do not. I can't control people who make up their own version of what they think I am thinking when they go to pains to ignore what I actually write.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: DnD's Spiked Chain

 

I can't speak for anyone else, but this comment, taken in the context of your disapproval of the method adopted by KS, is where I read a suggestion that he is wasting his time.

 

Now, your further comment mitigates that a bit, but this is the post which, taken in context with your comments directly to Killer Shrike's modifications, sounds to me like you are suggesting he is wasting his time, and the Board's bandwidth. I'm not saying that was what you intended to communicate, but I am saying that is not, in my opinion, an unreasonable interpretation of what you have written.

 

New tools are fine. New tools which are both redundant and needlessly complex are not. It's simply not a good idea.

 

It is interesting, though.

 

We can read only what you have written, not what your intention was in writing it.

[keithcurtis]

Re: DnD's Spiked Chain

 

Did I ever say that Killer Shrike wasted his time? Did I ever chastise him for putting forth the effort to share his creations?

 

NO.

 

I said what I meant to say. I can't help it that the people who frequent this forum can't be bothered to read posts before they reply to them. Sometimes the gross mischaracterization of what I have written is even deliberate, such as in the case of a certain flake who hasn't been around here recently (and I won't say his name for fear of his appearing -- good riddance to bad rubbish, I say). On more than one occassion, I have been "quoted" as saying the exact opposite of what I have actually written (Nexus was making a habit of this for a while, for reasons which are still a mystery to me).

 

I will not reply to this odious subtopic again (not in this thread, anyway). Either read what I write, or do not. I can't control people who make up their own version of what they think I am thinking when they go to pains to ignore what I actually write.

 

Please read what I wrote. Did I say any of these things?

 

no.

 

I wish people would read what is written rather than trying to divine what they think I am thinking. I said what I meant to say.

It works both ways.

 

Look at my posts. I merely said that your referenced post was written in a condescending manner. How from that you inferred the above, I don't honestly know.

 

And that's my last word.

 

Keith ":hush: " Curtis

[Rage]

Re: DnD's Spiked Chain

 

Maybe I'm biased (from mainly working with swords, staffs, and knives) but chains seem pretty bloody awkward to use, so I'd probably give a chain weapon a -2 OCV.

 

Mind you, part of the training of any chain-based martial art could well be 3 points for 2x 1½-point PSLs to offset this. Makes the weapon still useable but not by the casually skilled.

 

In D&D/D20 terms, these PSLs would be about the same as an Exotic Weapon Proficiency Feat.

I've been using a weighted chain in my firebreathing act for about a year, and from personal experience with using it to hit moving and non moving targets (admittedly, not people,) I honestly don't think it warrents a penalty like that for anyone marginally used to using it. I mean, seriosuly, to use it in a fight takes about the same skill as effectivly using a sword. This is why so many people use chains in street fights.

[arcady]

Re: DnD's Spiked Chain

 

I think a lot of people just don't have a good mental visual for how it 'works' and so they think it is either unrealistic or impossibly hard.

 

Having seen more acrobatic styles of fighting than the 'SCA stand there and thwak them with your cardboard sword' variety, I've no issues with the weapon. Its just all about keeping the 'dance' going - and even stopping your motion is no problem - its an object that moves very rhythmicly.