[Runequest] Spears stuck in shields?

Lawrence Whitaker lawrence.whitaker at gmail.com
Wed Jul 11 00:41:07 EST 2012

RQ6 has a solution to this.

A weapon impaled in a shield reduces the skills of the recipient depending
on the size of the impaled weapon. Arrows, for example, may be
inconsequential, but a pilum, javelin or spear can be devastating.

On 10 July 2012 10:31, Styopa <styopa1 at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 2:02 PM, Roger Benham <rog_benham at hotmail.com>wrote:
>>  I like this mechanism more.  The pilum had a soft iron shaft, IIRC, so
>> it was designed to bend when it hit to make it even more of an encumbrance.
>> What I'd like to know is how it reduces the shield wielder's chance to
>> parry, along with some ENC problems: -20% per pilum embedded?
> I don't think that's enough.  We know the pilum was quite effective at its
> designed task, based on it's widespread deployment.
> There's two ways to approach this, this simpler way, or the simulationist
> way (although having special subrules for the interaction between a
> specific weapon and specific shields with subsequent conditions ... well
> that makes even my simulationist heart quail at even slowing RQ combat
> MORE....):
> Considering your typical impressed footsoldier would have a shield skill
> of ~50%, and our goal (at the least) should be to make a pilum'd shield
> LESS attractive to carry than no shield at all.  (If I was a combatant with
> 50% shield, and got hit by a pilum and the effect was even -45%, I'd STILL
> keep the shield since 5% (plus cover from missiles) is still better than
> nothing.)  The primary value of every shield - even hoplite shields - was
> in their ability to move to be interposed between the blow and the target.
>  Significantly hindering the ability of even the largest shields to move
> would make them almost useless.
> So I'd say the simple version:
> -50% to your parry per pilum stuck in the shield.  If the pilum actually
> penetrated* the shield, -100%.  To remove, per impaled weapon.
> * a penetrating pilum would be the worst possible circumstance, as the
> narrow shaft would project through the hole in the shield, forcing the
> wielder to cope with a sharp, pointy spike waving around INSIDE his guard
> up to 18" or more.  I think one could rightfully rule that a penetrated
> shield is simply useless for its function unless the pilum is withdrawn.
> simulationist version:
> - worse penalties for smaller shields than larger ones (smaller shields
> require more nimble movement)
> - worse penalties for trying to move while it's in the shield, even worse
> in bad going
> - given the hardened head and soft shaft, I'd consider letting a pilum
> HAVE a full thrown-weapon damage bonus for the purposes of penetrating a
> shield or even armor, but no more than 1d damage bonus to apply to HP of
> the target.
> _______________________________________________
> Runequest mailing list
> Runequest at rpgreview.net
> http://rpgreview.net/mailman/listinfo/runequest_rpgreview.net

One day I feel I'm ahead of the wheel
And the next its rolling over me...

Rush - 'Far Cry'
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://rpgreview.net/pipermail/runequest_rpgreview.net/attachments/20120710/1e4964b9/attachment.html>

More information about the Runequest mailing list