[RQ-Rules] Unifying Knockback and Falling Damage

[Steve Perrin]

I've fought in plate armor inside a room with little air circulation. You go
down fast from heat exhaustion, and I wasn't wearing full plate.

Of course, the RQ rules came from my experience fighting, so I'm glad that
they seem to model others' experience who played the rules and then fought
in armor...

Steve Perrin

----- Original Message -----
From: <Nick.Middleton at invensys.com>
To: <rq-rules at crashbox.com>
Sent: Monday, April 28, 2003 6:40 AM
Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Unifying Knockback and Falling Damage


>
> >I thought plate was reasonably well done, in that it had great
> protection
> >value but became a liability in extended combats.
>
> >Acording to a blacksmith that makes full plate armor, you can do anything
> in full plate that you can do without >(perhaps exept pissing, etc.).
>
> Try swimming - a well made leather faced Jack will _initialy_ act as a
> buoyancy aid (but will be a liability once saturated): Plate will simply
> sink you. But by and large I agree, plate is less restrictive of mobility
> than people think; all that business about winching Knights onto their
> horses is Hollywood nonsense. One could do combat rolls in well made
> English field plate of the 1470's...
>
> >The critical factor in all armor is temperature, but even bambersons,
> (Linen padded with "sossages" of >horsetailhair) is hot as hell! (I know,
> because I fight in one.) You allso slow a bit down, due to the extra mass
> >you're moving, try to imagine a fight between two dudes in full plate and
> a hellebard each as a "Robin Hood vs. >Little John" at 70% speed.
>
>
> Well, people stupid enough to use a dog of a weapon like a Halberd deserve
> everything they get... not that I'm biased or anything ;-), but I always
> hated Halberds (never liked the balance and they always seemed outclassed
> by other pole-weapons). I fought in steel weapon re-enactments in half and
> full plate using an english bill-hook and regularly chased swordsman (and
> other bill-hook users for that matter off the field) because I was too
fast
> for them - provided plate is strapped on correctly over well fitted
padding
> (a good arming doublet for example), it is slows you down no more than a
> decent padded jack, but because it has multiple layers, is even worse at
> shedding heat... although the worse armour IME is ill-fitting chain
> (another armour that really requires padding underneath) as all the weight
> hangs from your shoulders and, if it is poorly maintained and thus rusty,
> chain really does impede ones movement as the links bind against each
> other... I still have flash-backs to a small battle re-enactment some ten
> years back where I collapsed due to heat exhaustion thanks to a lousy set
> of chain...
>
> >I have varied over the years between liking
>
> >that sort of break down and finding it a faff to keep track of. At
> present
>
> >(But I reserve the right to change my mind...)
>
> >My system only slows things down when buying armor and during character
> creation. I've introduced 27 hit locations >(!) and 3 armour values for
> each... -But once this is done, the game flows as normal speed (just a bit
> more figures >to keep track on)
>
> Oh, quite possibly. It's just that (at present as I said), I'm really not
> convinced that the added maths etc really adds anything I would personally
> want in my games. But I was at one time very fond of Other Suns, which I
> IIRC did something similar?
>
> >I find that the RQIII rules
>
> >for Impales and blunt weapons vs. non-rigid armour cover the bases
>
> >adequately for me...
>
>
> >I don't. I thought the critical impale -stuff , to be too lethal, and,
> >
> >for instance, only retain the "extra d6 dam. for pulling out an impaled
> weapon" for arrows with fishbonestyle \ >tridents.
>
> Hmm, well RQIII Impales (which stack with Crits) are VERY scary, but
that's
> why one should IMO use the associated rules (weapon damages on parry,
> closing rules) to mitigate their effectiveness. As for weapons getting
> stuck, I think the extra d6 does a reasonable job of representing the
> standard first aid instruction that wounds involving significant
inpalement
> (where the item is still lodged in the wound) should NOT be disturbed, as
> removing the item (even where it appears a clean thrust wound) will cause
> more harm (usually from additional bleeding IIRC). On the other hand I
have
> (fortunately) never had such a wound so I can't speak from personal
> experience there! Perhaps the additional damage should be applied as
> bleeding in the book-keeping phase?
>
> In the end, I like the RQ combat rule because they _felt_ plausible and,
> when I started steel weapon re-enacting, I was pleasantly surprised to
> discover that they _remained_ plausible. These days I tend more to
> Stormbringer/Elric/CoC/BRP, because I'm more interested in a flowing game
> that de-emphasises combat and those systems are easier to explain to the
> current game group. I may yet lure them into RQ though...
>
> Cheers,
>
> Nick Middleton
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> RQ-Rules mailing list
> RQ-Rules at crashbox.com
> http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules
> http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules
>