GDShore

In my new campaign I am introducing a stone bow (with barrel), in the arbalest weight category to fire rounds that look a lot like those of the modern grenade guns. It is a weapon created by an alchemist working with an artisan, I see a wide array of weapons opening up for a fantasy campaign. A captured air elemental in the tank on the pneumatics, never run out of air pressure, a trapped fire/water elemental (or both) makes a portable steam canon. (probably the size of a bazooka or modern anti-tank weapon.) Imagination only constrains the possibilities. Thank you.

The way I have always used this works thus, if the spell has a +1 phase, the spell would go off (complete) in phase 9, if at +1 turn then it would complete on phase eight during the next turn, assuming you are still around.

I haven't gamed for a while, but this quote comes out of the first champions campaign I EVER RAN. This was the early 80's Reagan is president down south, the air traffic controllers strike was on, the setting a group of space aliens was covertly invading the earth, and intending on using Canada as their springboard. the group was an all Canadian hero group working for the Mounties (R.C.M.P.) and after half a dozen sessions had tracked the baddies down to their base at Churchill Manitoba on Hudson's Bay. After a planning session the goes into the base and trashes it, on the verge of success, the chief baddies make a bolt. They take off in a souped up private jet, with US government markings, no flyer in the group, looks like they will getaway, the hero's leader "Nelson Eddy York" calls the air base at Borden Manitoba and orders the base commander to scramble a couple of jets and force the plane to land at Winnipeg, the baddies refuse and continue fleeing south. York orders the base commander to shoot the plane down, he says he can't its a US govt. plane, York replies, "I don't give s D*** who they are their violating Canadian air space." At the time an innocent statement in keeping with York's character. At that time the game group lived in Calgary Alta. I lived 140 km. north in Red Deer, I would travel south every two weeks and run a campaign for the weekend, two weeks later I am back to start a new campaign, and when I enter the game room on an easel is a blowup of an editorial cartoon that had run on Thursday in the local paper(Calgary Herald). Two Mounties are standing on a flat surface reins to their horse's in hand, wearing the traditional Mountie uniform, one has a long barreled revolver in one hand smoke curling up from the barrel, in the near distance a figure has driven head first into a small hillock cape spread out behind him, the bottom half of an S visible on his chest..... caption reads "I don't give a D*** who he is he was violating Canadian air space" York not only got it right, He did it two weeks before!

Really, nothing distinctly relating,,,, the Canada is the reverse image of its flag. By the way Mr. Ruggels really like this!

It has been a long time since I ran a champions game. I never allowed more than 1 DNPC per character or more than 2 hunteds. Two of my players created interesting hunteds One a young lady played a character called Waterbug, with an ability to control water including walking on it. Her hunted was a biologist studying insects, she described him exceptionally well but did not name him. I created him and everyone else's hunters and frequently used them in game situations, don't use them to often, about 1 in 4/5 sessions. The problem of too many DNPC's / Hunters is it can swamp the GM very quickly and very easily, especially with a high involvement level. If the GM is smart they do all the involvement checks before the session begins and then incorporates them into the planned session, done this way you are not just winging it. You can also directly involve a characters hunters or dnpc's and then not do the checks on them for a while. note: try to get to know your players as well as you can, they may have actual phobias or issues that you may trigger without much warning. I think setting max's on how many is up to the GM and the newer they are the fewer the better.

I started out with chainmail moved on to D & D but just before Champions was released a friend and I began to create our own system. (we felt betrayed by promises made by D & D and not kept.) When champions came out we saw that it could easily adapt to other genres and we did so. Then Justice Inc. , Fantasy hero were released and I have never gone back to D & D. At this point I will never go back.

I can speak with some real world experience on recoverable charges for arrows. Back when I actively fought bow and arrow against the tin and flannel set (armored types) I would usually take about 60 prepared arrows and lose (to damage and simply lost) 15 to 20 arrows, works out to 25% to 30%. I cannot remember anyone in the 17 years between 1980 and 2000 ever using or wanting to use deadly blow. They worked on skill levels instead. I am still debating on using martial arts types in my new campaign.

The defense was ,, not that they were marsupials, but because of the innate magic of the elf, that they could put the eggs in a special organ next to the uterus in stasis until needed. After all if you live multiple thousands of years the biological "don't tick so very loud". It is a fantasy.

That was reason #18, #19 was that elven females could store fertilized eggs in some sort of stasis until needed, wanted or the conditions were most favorable. (aka. kangaroos)

Regarding "Halflings" early in my gaming career as a game master I did away with them as using Halfling/Hobbits would be a copyright infringement. I kept elves and dwarves because they were legendary (many cultures have the elf, dwarf or an analogue) . So I built a series of small folk before settling on two. As for what is the point of them, I give you the pygmy (and eliminating them would be a genocide), as for why Elves - Dwarves are rare (ish) I have flirted with the following possible reasons: 1 - an incredibly large infant/child mortality rates some north of 19 out of 20. 2 - an exceptionally low fecundity and based on the inordinate number of half elves most likely male sided. 3 - elves make lousy mothers and thus put off having children till late in life and often do not try until too late and they have entered menopause. 4 - elves have a prolonged pre-puberty and a short period of fecundity. ect. ect. ect. I and my gaming group once spent an entire session once discussing this and came up with 25 - 26 reasons with defence for why elves were not the majority population.

That's certainly one way to go, how about taking a sheet oh 5 cm. thick armor plate and compressing it down to 5 mm. with the weight of 5 mm. The protection of 5 cm. of armor, at the weight of 5 mm. Then of course, someone will come along and develop a sword with the heat of the sub to punch a hole through your armor nah, somebody already did that, Star Wars lightsabers. Just because it looks like medieval plate, doesn't mean you made it from the same stuff. The possibilities are endless!

That is certainly true, the history of our species is littered with stupid and worse those who thought they were smarter than they really were. We also can create blind spots so dense that we refuse to accept the new just cause it's new.

Well reasoned theinf8, if you are wearing chain when attacked its because you were on guard duty, you can not actually sleep in for very long. Sleeping in chain will create bruising, chafing and open sores, not all at once of course, but over the course of a couple of weeks to a month. Sleeping in plate is worse, you risk joint damage and deep bruising down to the bone. We can discuss chain armor if you'd like, the better the quality the more rigid it will be, riveted, welded or barred, the more rigid the harder to sleep in. There are however solutions and these also answer some of what is posed by mallet. In my new campaign magic takes the place of technology as for stagnation / innovation, we have some extreme examples of humanity not taking an innovative leap to the next step. China had gunpowder for at least 800 years and never developed the gun (yes to a degree they had canon very primitive canon) it remained an entertainment. The Aztecs, Mayan's and Incan's all knew about the wheel but never used it for anything but toys. Some of the solutions, that gamers came up with on their own, an Amulet with "instant change" charges on it allowing the user to instantly be armored just as combat started, solving sleeping in it, armoring in the middle of combat or having to carry it around. ( within 3 sessions everyone who wore armor either had one or was clamoring for one after one of my players introduced it one night) I postulate that in a society where magic is abundant technology dies on the vine. I am not the first to so postulate such probably not even the third or fourth. (David Weber's Hellsgate series posits two cultures clashing, one magic driven and one technological with psionics. Back to the Amulet for a moment, I required that while it was active it glowed and hummed. A fortified camping area is always a good idea. My gaming group solved the problem of safe camping. (the group was usually 9 strong, 5 of which were GM's, 1 - E.P.T., 2 - D&D, 1 Gurps, and 1 running a Justice Inc.) They began stopping in game hours before sundown and becoming Roman Legionnaires and building a fortified camp, again magic had a great deal to do with fortifying the camp. In the morning they would just decamp and move on. So magic would have replaced a lot of what we use tech. for today, so they probably would have developed Elvanium, and Unobtainium alloys as time passed. Thus rendering as moot the whole of the debate on how real or close to real we should run armor vs weapons based on the middle ages statistics and qualities. Thank you mallet, that clears some very fuzzy thinking on my part. Again thank you.

What I am about to say my tick some off, but say it I will. The present world spends all too much time judging persons of the past by the mores of the present, and usually getting it wrong. If you try to judge our ancestors by the lights of today one will always be disappointed. If what they did then was right then by our mores it may be wrong today, if it was wrong then it is always wrong. If you judge those of the past by the present, you give permit to those of the future to do thus to us. All we can do is to try to correct the failures of the past and hope we commit no new ones of our own. We play what we play because of the stories told to us by our modern bards and some are good and some are bad. Conan was created of and for the era in which it was written, Howard did not stoop to pander to the lowest denominator his Conan was if not noble at least not ignoble.

As a GM, I have done this once, not in fantasy but in Western hero. I ran two groups on alternate weekends. The group in my home town were youngish (6 at 18 to 20 ish.) who wanted to be bank robbers and the other group were older and more experienced (8 at 25 to 35 years and long time gamers) The 'Bad Guys" began their careers as bad guys to theast and over six months moved steadily westward, hitting eight banks and 4 trains. It did not take the citizens of Cimmaron City long to figure out that they would soon be in the crosshairs of the "Bank Gang" . With two banks they knew they were a big target. The bad guys raided the town robbed both banks, lost two of their number on the way out, townies give chase, know the land better and catch up to the bad guys, ensuing gunfight, bad guys all dead. All done over the phone, pre-cell phone era. You see the reason that "Good triumphs over Evil is such a strong trope, is that that is what happens" it may take some time, decades sometimes centuries but the evil dictators in the end always lose. IT can however be fun to run a short campaign of bad or evil charactors.

I am preparing a new campaign am about halfway there. I intend it to be an old culture, with a LOT of magic, which in the main will do the same types of jobs as technology in our world. So how will I limit things like steel armor, by making armor and other things extremely expensive, and money scarce. The problem with bronze weapons is facing 'Dragons' bronze weapons just would not be effective against them. You are right about working damascus in large plates however high carbon steel is easier to work. Still have to create the large plates of steel.

It depends on where and when things are forged, for instance, Levant Damascus has never been duplicated, weapons created during the period 700 CE to 900-950 CE were sharper more flexible and durable than those built anywhere else. (they used a formula for creating steel that has never been duplicated since, except the Norse smiths that created may have been in contact with the levant towards the end of the Levant smiths time) The Ulfberht swords of the Norse had the same Damascene look as the Levant, not as flexible but as sharp, hard and durable. The Gothic and Maximillian plate armors were all steel not cast or wrought iron, 16th century. Crucible steel was usually a small batch cottage industry, known in the west from roman times and in the orient from 800 and earlier BCE. Steel is generally harder and stronger than cast or wrought iron, this is due in large part to the formulae used to create that steel. The Levant weapons commanded much higher prices (5 to 20 times) than their competitors. I do not remember and can not find citation for when large batch crucible steel manufacture began.

I see I made a mistake on the plate armor weight, it should be 35 to 42 kgs. with G-M being another 10 to 15 kilo more, joust armor is even more massive and can be 85 to 90 kilos. The helmet is heavier because it is thicker, and there is a new piece of armor added, the bevor which is a gorget on steroids. It swoops down to the sternum in front and about half that distance down the back, but it is the neck protection that has major change. It is thicker, and up front rises to cover the lower face, A lance striking the Bevor is more likely to break than is the neck it protects.

DentArthueDent -- With apologies for the late reply. I joined the SCA in 1980, and have for various reasons worn the following, soft leather, (remarkably effective against bird blunt style arrows from a 30# bow) wax boiled Vegetable tanned leather 8 to 12 ounce leather, (absorbs impact blows extremely well, against missiles with just field points 20/30 meter penetration occurred every time at 30# draw with a 60# draw at 50 meter penetration was to the fletching) chain mail - Hauberk and leggings and camail, ( head to ankles, no feet I have small feet, unless the links are very small welded or riveted, and barred, missile strikes from bows 40# draw or heavier at 40 meter punch thru as though it was paper, against thrusts and stabs at best partial defence, reasonable defence against chops and slashes) chain and plate, (this is a chain base to which plates are attached, I have only worn one piece a hauberk, split down the back from neck to about 4" from the bottom. There were shoulder pauldrons, elbows and vambraces linked together with leather straps that were attached to the arms, at the wrists and just below the elbow. The back seam is cased with chap weight leather about three inch's in from the seam, six rings are sewn near the inner edge of the leather this is so that the back can be laced tight. It weighs probably 4 times what my chain hauberk does. Stands well vs, missiles on the plates unless the bows are heavy war bows, 90# and heavier, although crossbows with all steel quarrels will punch through. Takes an assist to put it on, and at least five minutes, my hauberk takes less than a minute ). There are three types of plate if stretched four, basic or simple plate, Gothic, Maximillian tourney/joust. I have worn basic/simple plate, twice, it's hell to put on although to be honest it was to big for me and was for a woman. A two person three if you count me job to put on over chain. It took twenty minutes to put on. The front part of the clam shell is slightly dished the back curved only at the sides straps and buckles connect the sides, and hinged plates lighter than the chest plate connect the front to the back. There are gaps in a lot of places, at the neck a scoop down to below the clavicle, albeit covered by a gorget, a gap just before the arms, under the arms and a gap 2 to 3 inch's wide down the center of the underarm, at the waist there is a gap about 2 inch's wide protected by chain. The legs are connected to leather waist harness, and are the easiest to put on, the front of the leg is well protected, but the back is wide open. the sabots were the hardest to put on. (sabot is a boot cover) Finally the helmet is almost always open faced. Gothic and Maximillian plate are way more refined, and I have never been able to wear either. They both have a lamellar skirt that covers the waist and hips, the arm gaps are gone and the gorget is more comfortable. The final type of plate, is tourney/joust armor. The helmet is a closed faced or visored the eye slits are extremely small. In the last versions of this armor they were either Gothic - Maximillian the primary differences were the lamellar skirt and helmet. The joust form has a lamellar fall down the upper legs, the G-M's helmet is usually visored with breathing holes and hearing holes punched thru the steel. Basic plate weighs about 35 to 42 lbs. while G-M can weigh as much as 29 lbs. more. Today my combat is behind me, I will not see the shy side of 70 ever again.

Interesting "theinfn8" , first you have to pack extra cloth to wrap each piece in, then you need a bag to put the pieces in, then you need to sling that bag onto your back remember it weighs about 40 kilo's. Now we can reduce the bag weight by a little, the helmet you will likely wear, (4 kg) gauntlets, (3 kg) greaves, (4 kg) total = 11 kg. the bag now weighs 29 kg's. Course you just dump it and be rid of that extra weight but wait, it is worth a small fortune. As for putting it on just before combat, it takes the assistance of two who know what they are doing approximately 15 minutes to put plate on, longer if it is Gothic or Maximillian Plate. I suppose one of the mages might have a summon invisible servant to assist you, the average run time of combats in most of my games is 30 to 60 seconds. SOO about the time you get you legs on and settled the battle is over one way or the other.

I have always run campaigns till lately for two separate group types, strict role players and wargamers. That is probably to be expected, as I started out with "Chain Mail" which unless I am mistaken was the first role play game. So I have been gamemaster or moderator of one or the other for more than fifty years but you are right, small unit tactics are different from large form units. In the SCA we found that the most successful shiltron was formed of two sword and board and three archers, or two archers, two sword and board and a pole arm. To explore a ruin you want an even more diverse group than that. One of the problems for armored characters is stealth and someone in plate is, not, stealthy. Not at all. Clang, clang, creek, thump, thump, thump. And that's just a plate wearer going thru a nice clean corridor. That is an aspect that should be examined, the actual wearing of the suit of armor, when and wear you are campaigning.

I would like to make a point slightly off topic. Bows do not work indoors, in a corridor that is 3 meter by 3 meter by x meter long, bows are a problem, the issue is loft. The lighter the bow the larger the loft. Loft is the angle that a ballistic missile takes between point A and point B and the two primary variables are draw weight or energy production of the bow and the range between points A and B. Here is a simple experiment to try, if you are about 6 foot tall or have a friend who lives at that rarified altitude, stand with arm held out parallel to the floor, then put a yard-meter stick in their hand, step back and look at the ceiling, The stick should be close to the ceiling, within 7.5 cm. The heavier the draw the smaller the loft. (personal anecdote when I was shooting regularly a group of much younger archers joined our shooting group, they were strong, vibrant young men, they were all 4 to 5 inch's taller than I am and all outmassed me by 50 lbs. minimum. At 40 I was 5'7" tall and a 110 lbs. I shot a 55lb. draw or 60 lb. weapon. Just starting out they were all shooting 30 lb. bows, at 40 yds. my loft is 6-8 degrees with an average of 29 out of 30 points, at the 20 yard range my loft was 1-2 degrees, theirs closer to 15-20 degrees. ) My point, the heavier the bow the more accurate the shot. Crossbows are a very different beast indeed. Designed to fire with little to no loft, and perfect for inside a corridor.

Good day, I have an admission to make. The tests we performed may have been flawed. The targets we used were plates of steel, not shaped armor (at the time no one in our circle was willing to risk their plate armor getting a hole in it) as such the physics changes completely. I have been watching various videos of archer to armor tests, against well designed well built breast plates the arrows shatter without penetration. As such this would limit to a very great level the ability to take the knight down directly but would likely increase the change in targeting from man to horse. The horse cannot be armored to the same level as can a man. The head is armored with lamellar armor, the eyes will be unprotected as will the nostrils (I have seen some barding cups over the nostrils) a breastplate over the chest is standard and you cannot armor legs at all. The breastplate does not cover the entire chest, to do so interferes with the forelegs. I still contend that the mounted knights are still at grave risk but the foot knights may be a harder nut to crack. The archers would likely wait until the foot has closed to under 100 meter at which point the foot is only 25 seconds from the archers. This would limit them to 4 to 5 shots each and that would make it depend on what the helmets are like. Open faced advantage archers, visored advantage foot.

If vessels were travelling at FTL speeds there could be no fighting. You would not be able to detect enemy vessels except by grav waves if they propagate faster than light. Battles would likely be fought within solar systems around planets at thousands++ of kilometers distances.

Actually I would believe that about silk. We did some experiments shooting at various cloth. From 20 meter vs. cotton broadcloth with a 30# bow complete pass through and 2" penetration into butt, thru corduroy with penetration of 1.5 to 2", thru both sides of a jean pant leg and again a 2" penetration, sail weight denim .5" penetration, belt weight denim stopped the arrows about half to three quarters the length of the arrow. We also tried wool, linen and silk the arrows passed thru like the cotton broad but the silk depending on the type from reaching the butt kimono silk had the best stopping ability. Interesting factoid about silk, if it is pushed into a shallow wound it will not fester or otherwise infect.