Weapon Familiarity and Reality

[CTaylor]

So those of you with combat experience, SCA, martial arts, what have you: if you pick up a weapon you've not used before, is there really a -3 OCV penalty for not being familiar with it? In other words, if you don't have the weapon familiarity for that item, do you suffer the standard Hero Games penalty or is that an improper rule?

[ghost-angel]

Re: Weapon Familiarity and Reality

 

I don't know if real life is measured in OCV... but not knowing how to use a weapon usually equates to wielding it like a funny shaped club.

 

Sure, I can pick up a sword, and swing it around a lot, but I doubt I'll be all that effective beyond just trying to smack you with it. God forbid I start using something that requires actual skill like a bo-staff or a whip.

[jtelson]

Re: Weapon Familiarity and Reality

 

If the weapon is truely different than one I've used before then I am considerably less effective with it, I don't know if it's 3 CV or not. However with a few hours of practice I could negate most of that disad.

[psychoticbarber]

Re: Weapon Familiarity and Reality

 

I think in real life STR has more to do with melee than DEX.

 

Edit: (stupid page accidentally told it to post, I wasn't done yet). It's easier to hit when you're strong, because the speed of your swing is proportional to your strength, and the faster you swing, the harder it is to block.

 

Dex is of course also factored in, in terms of blow placement.

[Inu]

Re: Weapon Familiarity and Reality

 

With some, it's even worse. Someone who has no idea how to use a flail will likely be more dangerous to themselves or their friends than the enemy.

 

Can always feel free to introduce a variable penalty based on how familiar the weapon is!

[AmadanNaBriona]

Re: Weapon Familiarity and Reality

 

So those of you with combat experience' date=' SCA, martial arts, what have you: if you pick up a weapon you've not used before, is there really a -3 OCV penalty for not being familiar with it? In other words, if you don't have the weapon familiarity for that item, do you suffer the standard Hero Games penalty or is that an improper rule?[/quote']

 

Totally depends on how weird the weapon is. I don't think -3 OCV is an unfair penalty. For my part...I have shelled out enough points for most of the Common WF's (Melee, Missile, Small arms) and can usually figure out how most simple weapons work with a quick inspection and a few minutes of fiddling around with it, getting used to the balance and the like (or in the case of Small arms, how it loads, where the safety is, how do you cock it, what kind of sights/targeting does it use).

 

On the other hand....

 

There are are still the occasional (Unusual Weapon Familiarities, in HERO terms) weapons I'm no good with. Lances, for instance. While I understand Slings, and have both made and practiced with them, I'd still only give myself around a 50% chance of getting a rock flying in the right general DIRECTION of my target, much less any chance of actually threatening them. Some of the Wu Shu weapons my old fight instructor used to have delivered frankly boggled my mind.... way too many points in way too many wacky places, just begging to tear apart an unskilled user.

 

In total...I think its fair.

WF's are dirt cheap, and the penalties are basically realistic, and as noted above, you can always use it as a club in a pinch.

[CTaylor]

Re: Weapon Familiarity and Reality

 

Definitely some weapons ought to be more difficult to use without training than others, but on the whole the -3 OCV penalty seems overly harsh. I could see -1 for most weapons and -2 for really complex ones, but -3 overall is a huge penalty.

 

Think of it this way, the roll to hit someone with DCV equal to your OCV (very roughly equal in combat skill) is 11-. That's around 50/50 chance to hit. -3 to that reduces it to an 8-, or around 10% chance to hit, a huge penalty. Suddenly instead of hitting every other time, you hit once every ten swings?

 

Yet at the same time the familiarity system also presumes all swords are the same, a falchion=claymore=rapier. That seems a bit odd as well, seems like there could be a temporary unfamiliarity as well, reducing OCV by 1 until you fight at least once with a weapon you've not trained with, even if it's in the same category.

 

At the same time I've not gone and fought with weapons other than sticks as a kid, so I can't really say one way or another with any degree of experience or expertise.

 

The reason this comes up, by the way is how cheap it is to wipe out someone's combat ability if they've bought no skill levels. See that town guard? I can make him totally incompetent with a 1/2D6 drain.

[AmadanNaBriona]

Re: Weapon Familiarity and Reality

 

I think in real life STR has more to do with melee than DEX.

 

Edit: (stupid page accidentally told it to post, I wasn't done yet). It's easier to hit when you're strong, because the speed of your swing is proportional to your strength, and the faster you swing, the harder it is to block.

 

Dex is of course also factored in, in terms of blow placement.

 

Blow placement is a weird artifact of gaming, and game balance.

 

 

In real life, If I want to hit someone in the head, I generally hit someone in the head. I might miss, they might block, or dodge... or I might clock 'em upside the head. No way is it a -8 OCV. However, that said, there are solid gameplay reasons for making called shots harder, and steering a shot past armor isn't as easy as this game makes it out to be, either.

[Inu]

Re: Weapon Familiarity and Reality

 

Blow placement is a weird artifact of gaming, and game balance.

 

 

In real life, If I want to hit someone in the head, I generally hit someone in the head. I might miss, they might block, or dodge... or I might clock 'em upside the head. No way is it a -8 OCV. However, that said, there are solid gameplay reasons for making called shots harder, and steering a shot past armor isn't as easy as this game makes it out to be, either.

The way i've usually interpreted this is to take things a bit more loosely and say that normally, when you roll to hit, you're looking for an opening in their defence. That opportunity might come anyway -- they might be concentrating their defence high, so you can hit their legs. The random roll for location determines where that opening presented itself more than anything else. If you do a called shot, you're trying to power through their defences where there is no opening, hence even going for the chest demands a penalty.

 

Probably not strictly accurate, but it's good enough for me. Just need a somewhat more abstract take on combat than is normally had for Hero.

[AmadanNaBriona]

Re: Weapon Familiarity and Reality

 

Definitely some weapons ought to be more difficult to use without training than others, but on the whole the -3 OCV penalty seems overly harsh. I could see -1 for most weapons and -2 for really complex ones, but -3 overall is a huge penalty.

 

Think of it this way, the roll to hit someone with DCV equal to your OCV (very roughly equal in combat skill) is 11-. That's around 50/50 chance to hit. -3 to that reduces it to an 8-, or around 10% chance to hit, a huge penalty. Suddenly instead of hitting every other time, you hit once every ten swings?

 

Yet at the same time the familiarity system also presumes all swords are the same, a falchion=claymore=rapier. That seems a bit odd as well, seems like there could be a temporary unfamiliarity as well, reducing OCV by 1 until you fight at least once with a weapon you've not trained with, even if it's in the same category.

 

At the same time I've not gone and fought with weapons other than sticks as a kid, so I can't really say one way or another with any degree of experience or expertise.

 

The reason this comes up, by the way is how cheap it is to wipe out someone's combat ability if they've bought no skill levels. See that town guard? I can make him totally incompetent with a 1/2D6 drain.

 

I might impose a brief "Getting used to it" penalty, might not. depends on the character. As for dropping the standard-Even-CV attack from 11- to 8-, that was totally deliberate, as it follows the progression in Skill rolls (Familiarity/Everyman skills usually start at 8-, the full purchaced skill is 11 or better)

You do realize you can't Drain Skills, including WF's, right?

That 1/2d6 Drain will be against DEX if you're trying to hit CV, which will drain 1-3 AP's of dex per hit, IOW, 1/3 to 1 point of Dex per hit. To affect a CV loss will require the target to be crouching on a stat breakpoint or to be hit repeatedly... a guard with a 4 OCV/DCV from a 13 dex, for instance, would need to be pummeled down to a 10, taking 3-9 hits from that 1/2d6 Drain to accomplish a meager -1 to OCV & DCV.

 

 

Edit: Got distracted, almost forgot. When comparing to Real Life fights, consider the Time Scale in Hero. Swinging around that totally unfamiliar sword against someone who's about as agile as you are will result in you hitting him, on the average, around 1 time out of every 10 swings. Real fights can take a while unless both parties are dedicated to the idea of hurting each other, and I expect that Mr Target isn't gonna stand around for a minute and let Mr Stabbity-but-I-don't-know-how keep trying to whack him with his unfamiliar sword.

[Bygoneyrs]

Re: Weapon Familiarity and Reality

 

Ok if your using Dueling foils, the person with the better DEX tends to be able to

parry or block better than the other person. Plus to the increased DEX tends to

allow one to work around or through the other person's defense and score pointed hits!

 

Penn

[AmadanNaBriona]

Re: Weapon Familiarity and Reality

 

The way i've usually interpreted this is to take things a bit more loosely and say that normally, when you roll to hit, you're looking for an opening in their defence. That opportunity might come anyway -- they might be concentrating their defence high, so you can hit their legs. The random roll for location determines where that opening presented itself more than anything else. If you do a called shot, you're trying to power through their defences where there is no opening, hence even going for the chest demands a penalty.

 

Probably not strictly accurate, but it's good enough for me. Just need a somewhat more abstract take on combat than is normally had for Hero.

 

Oh, yeah, sure. I justify it the same way, but it still occasionally irks me, just because it's one of the few places where we HAVE to use such an abstraction.

[AmadanNaBriona]

Re: Weapon Familiarity and Reality

 

I think in real life STR has more to do with melee than DEX.

 

Edit: (stupid page accidentally told it to post, I wasn't done yet). It's easier to hit when you're strong, because the speed of your swing is proportional to your strength, and the faster you swing, the harder it is to block.

 

Dex is of course also factored in, in terms of blow placement.

 

DEX is far more important than Strength, although I agree that muscling your way past a block is something this system could use as an optional rule, because blocking stronger blows sucks.... but the STR min rules do a perfect job of reflecting the problems with using a too heavy for your build weapon, and once you have the required STR to move your big Metal & Wood force multiplier/lever (Basically what all weapons are) it all comes down to Dex. I've HUMBLED guys who could rip me in half barehanded because they thought "Strength=Acceleration=Force" was THE winning combo in a swordfight

[lapsedgamer]

Re: Weapon Familiarity and Reality

 

Blow placement is a weird artifact of gaming, and game balance.

 

 

In real life, If I want to hit someone in the head, I generally hit someone in the head. I might miss, they might block, or dodge... or I might clock 'em upside the head. No way is it a -8 OCV. However, that said, there are solid gameplay reasons for making called shots harder, and steering a shot past armor isn't as easy as this game makes it out to be, either.

 

I agree with you as far as melee combat goes, but I think that the penalties for targeting the head with small arms is probably right. I can comfortably say that I have familairity with small arms, based on my military basic training and time on the range, but I would not say I could reliably shoot someone in the head in combat at any significant range. I was taught to aim at the center of mass of the target, which genarally works out. However, at range or under stress that often turns into hits to the arm, shoulders or the groin. In the end, you are just happy to get rounds on target in a reasonable good grouping. People with levels like trained snipers or competition shooters probably have a different experience.

 

With things like clubs or blades, I think the high shot/ low shot table is the way to go. I try for the head, I can hit the head or the shoulder, but probably not the leg. I believe that's a -4 OCV or something.

 

As far as familiarity goes, I think -3 is right on since familiarity with clubs and unarmed combart are free. As stated above, everything that can be used as a club just turns into a club if you don't know how to use it properly. Seems fair.

[LordSolovar]

Re: Weapon Familiarity and Reality

 

I've done karate for fourteen years and am now an instructor. Her is my personal opinion on weapon familiarty. All you need to do is place them in families. I swing bo staff, if you gave me a spear id probably pick up the art rather fast. maybe only a -1 with a spear. if you give me kamas or kali sticks it would take a little more work so -2. anything like a bull whip or knife, forget it. just take normal -3.

[CTaylor]

Re: Weapon Familiarity and Reality

 

That's what I'm leaning toward right now, -1 for common -2 for uncommon and -3 for really weird weapons.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Weapon Familiarity and Reality

 

Think of it this way, the roll to hit someone with DCV equal to your OCV (very roughly equal in combat skill) is 11-. That's around 50/50 chance to hit. -3 to that reduces it to an 8-, or around 10% chance to hit, a huge penalty. Suddenly instead of hitting every other time, you hit once every ten swings?

Actually, 11- is 62.5% and 8- is 25%.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Weapon Familiarity and Reality

 

Well, if most weapons will only have a -1, I guess a penalty skill level against non-proficiency penalties is a much more logical point investment than buying weapon familiarities.

 

Once you guys have the weapon familiarity rules worked out so they're realistic, maybe you can work on the realism of those fire breathing flying lizards that populate so many fantasy games?

 

Oh, and there's nothing worse than an unrealistic magic system, so maybe someone could work on that. KS, there are probably a dozen or so "realistic magic" systems on your site, right?

[Tonio]

Re: Weapon Familiarity and Reality

 

Well, if most weapons will only have a -1, I guess a penalty skill level against non-proficiency penalties is a much more logical point investment than buying weapon familiarities.

 

Once you guys have the weapon familiarity rules worked out so they're realistic, maybe you can work on the realism of those fire breathing flying lizards that populate so many fantasy games?

 

Oh, and there's nothing worse than an unrealistic magic system, so maybe someone could work on that. KS, there are probably a dozen or so "realistic magic" systems on your site, right?

 

That doesn't follow. Fire breathing dragons, and magic, are imaginary, fantastic concepts, so they get to be modeled however the modeler sees fit. Weapon fighting (and martial arts) are real world concepts, so there's a drive to get them "right" by modeling them as close to real life as possible. Giving a -20 OCV penalty for using an unfamiliar weapon is iffy because you KNOW it's not so, from real world experience (maybe not yours, certainly not mine, but some people's, yes). Having a dragon's breath do 10d6 damage is not iffy because you don't have any real world basis to base it on, so you HAVE to imagine it. Any differences between two people's concepts do not reflect either being wrong, but rather different imaginations. Given that imaginations DO vary, game balance is used instead to work out differences on which people can't agree. On real world concepts, though, the imperative is to build it as realistically as possible without breaking game balance (and of course, playability / fun factor).

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Weapon Familiarity and Reality

 

That doesn't follow. Fire breathing dragons' date=' and magic, are imaginary, fantastic concepts, so they get to be modeled however the modeler sees fit. Weapon fighting (and martial arts) are real world concepts, so there's a drive to get them "right" by modeling them as close to real life as possible. Giving a -20 OCV penalty for using an unfamiliar weapon is iffy because you KNOW it's not so, from real world experience (maybe not yours, certainly not mine, but some people's, yes). Having a dragon's breath do 10d6 damage is not iffy because you don't have any real world basis to base it on, so you HAVE to imagine it. Any differences between two people's concepts do not reflect either being wrong, but rather different imaginations. Given that imaginations DO vary, game balance is used instead to work out differences on which people can't agree. On real world concepts, though, the imperative is to build it as realistically as possible [b']without breaking game balance (and of course, playability / fun factor).[/b]

 

Please direct me to the empirical research summarizing the impact of unfamiliarity with a weapon on the user's OCV.

 

OCV is an imaginary concept. The concept that one is either "unfamiliar" [-3 OCV], "familiar' [base OCV] or "skilled" [various bonuses to OCV] with any given weapon is also an imaginary construct.

 

I find the game works fine with a -3 OCV penalty for unfamiliar weapons, and no middle ground for "maybe a bit unfamiliar weapons", so I see no need to change the rules for any of the critical factors you state, which I have emphasized above.

 

I also find "realism" is a slippery slope. Realistically, combatants' skills vary over time. If you have a cold, are hung over or are distracted, you will not be as effective as you would be in perfect health, focused on the combat. The game does not model this. Damage from most sources, varies much more widely than game mechanics can reasonably convey. Some people trip and fall, hit their head on the linoleum and die in their kitchen. Others survive a fall from several stories virtually uninjured.

 

The system isn't supposed to model reality anyway. It is supposed to model cinematic action adventure. Very few real people crash through a plate glass window and stand up uninjured. Most real car crashes do not result in fire, much less explosions. "Reality" is vastly overrated. "Close Enough" is close enough.

[AmadanNaBriona]

Re: Weapon Familiarity and Reality

 

if for some reason you're totally opposed to the normal -3 OCV non-familiarity penalty and want something more "realistic" I'd go with treating the Non familiarity penalty as effectively -3 levels, allocated by the player.

 

That way you have the choice of trying to keep yourself alive and suck on offense, or go all out but leave openings you can drive a truck through, two extremes I've seen when training complete n00bs in the use of archaic hand weapons.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Weapon Familiarity and Reality

 

if for some reason you're totally opposed to the normal -3 OCV non-familiarity penalty and want something more "realistic" I'd go with treating the Non familiarity penalty as effectively -3 levels, allocated by the player.

 

That way you have the choice of trying to keep yourself alive and suck on offense, or go all out but leave openings you can drive a truck through, two extremes I've seen when training complete n00bs in the use of archaic hand weapons.

 

That's actually a very good idea. I like it!

[AmadanNaBriona]

Re: Weapon Familiarity and Reality

 

That's actually a very good idea. I like it!

 

High praise considering the source

[Old Man]

Re: Weapon Familiarity and Reality

 

In real life, If I want to hit someone in the head, I generally hit someone in the head. I might miss, they might block, or dodge... or I might clock 'em upside the head. No way is it a -8 OCV. However, that said, there are solid gameplay reasons for making called shots harder, and steering a shot past armor isn't as easy as this game makes it out to be, either.

 

This is one of the funny things about melee hit locations, yes. In real life, just about any melee attack is a called shot. Even if you subscribe to the "where the openings are" interpretation, the numbers are still skewed--realistically most blows ought to land on the arms. And then there is the matter of weapon length--when you throw a punch in-game and roll 18 for location, it seems a little odd.

 

But, yeah, game balance must triumph.

[CTaylor]

Re: Weapon Familiarity and Reality

 

Once you guys have the weapon familiarity rules worked out so they're realistic, maybe you can work on the realism of those fire breathing flying lizards that populate so many fantasy games?

 

Yawn

 

Thanks for the input folks, I'll be using the system I suggested above, I'm still pondering how to model weapons that have a high mistake penalty (3 section staff, flails, etc). Having some experience with chucks I can attest to expertise not negating painful error.