[Runequest] Runequest Digest, Vol 59, Issue 7

Vile Traveller viletraveller at gmail.com
Thu Aug 15 13:49:03 EST 2013


Getting to the Point

Back in our RQ2 days, when crunch was king and we still regularly got out
to bash and poke one another with sticks, we used a relatively simple
system similar to the suggestions of other posters. Combatants with shorter
weapons had to make a successful attack roll jsut to get within reach. If
they failed, they remained at distance. If they succeeded, they could try
to attack for real.

On the next round, the weapon SR were reveresed (SR4 daggers became SR0,
SR1 spears became SR3, etc.) and the combatant with the longer weapon had
to make a successful parry roll just to disengage (this was not a parry) if
he wanted to get back out of range. There was a little more thinking, a
little more rolling, but it was not too onerous and it made us feel we were
being more "realistic" at the time.

--
Vile


On 15 August 2013 10:00, <runequest-request at rpgreview.net> wrote:

> Send Runequest mailing list submissions to
>         runequest at rpgreview.net
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>         http://rpgreview.net/mailman/listinfo/runequest_rpgreview.net
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>         runequest-request at rpgreview.net
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>         runequest-owner at rpgreview.net
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Runequest digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>    1. Points Taken (Asher Royce Yaffee)
>    2. Re: Getting to the point. (Marko Per?l?)
>    3. Re: Getting to the point. (Lev Lafayette)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2013 09:04:54 -0700
> From: Asher Royce Yaffee <ashersensei at gmail.com>
> To: RuneQuest Rules <runequest at rpgreview.net>
> Subject: [Runequest] Points Taken
> Message-ID:
>         <
> CAGwJKj1wQjO3VGy4juLZQHa8+ybwdELEXtG0K6VyAg_v31v5yg at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> Hi, All,
>    Thank you all very much for your helpful responses on the spear versus
> sword question.  These are answers I can use when it comes up with my kids,
> which it inevitably will.  (The kids' characters tend to be master
> swordsmen, while most of the flunkies tend to be spear-&-shield-wall types,
> so this sort of thing comes up.)
>    Also, thank you, Lawrence Whitaker, for the bayonet stats.  It is only a
> matter of time before the boys decide they want a gun-based adventure, and
> I'm thinking to provide a 1920's setting -- planes, cars, dynamite, and the
> like, but things were still pretty loosey-goosey compared to today --
> giving the party a good balance of tools and freedom.
>    Well, many chores to do before I can even think about the next campaign.
>  :-)
>    Sincerely,
> Asher
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://rpgreview.net/pipermail/runequest_rpgreview.net/attachments/20130814/2ed5f3aa/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2013 19:55:51 +0000
> From: Marko Per?l? <perala at student.uef.fi>
> To: "runequest at rpgreview.net" <runequest at rpgreview.net>
> Subject: Re: [Runequest] Getting to the point.
> Message-ID:
>         <
> c699a775b1f64a31a50a9f375d9e5caf at DB3PR01MB090.eurprd01.prod.exchangelabs.com
> >
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> I think the concept of reach has been misrepresented in RQ3 (possibly RQ6,
> I haven't read that thoroughly yet). In RQ3 long weapons have only the
> advantage of smaller Strike rank and that's it. They only get to strike a
> bit earlier than shorter weapons, but then the shorter weapons strike
> anyway. On the downside when someone closes in and uses shorter weapon, he
> always strikes first.
>
> The problem: This is unrealistic, because the whole point of spears and
> other polearms is to keep the enemy too far away to attack at all. They are
> defensive weapon, the point of which (pun) is to prevent enemy from getting
> close enough to attack. The point of an attacker using the shorter weapon
> is to deal with the long weapon, slip past it and then be able to attack
> polearm user without him being able to hit back, until he shortens his
> weapon length.
>
> I don't have SCA background and obviously I have never participated in an
> actual spear fight, but there are plenty of videos about re-enactments on
> Youtube - even some spear use lessons. The point (pun) of those videos was
> all about getting to attack the enemy, while preventing the guy with
> shorter weapon from attacking back, and the trick to defeating them was
> slipping past spear head and close in before spear user could respond.
> While the sword has more options for striking, they are (and should be in
> RPGs) completely useless, if the intended target is not located in the
> area, where that sword can reach.
>
> There is also the matter of spears being cheap. Well, part of that
> argument is the historical fact that spearmen (even more so pikemen) didn't
> need much armor to begin with. They use armor, because they didn't receive
> attacks. Swordsmen, men-at-arms and so on used lots of armor, because they
> needed it. They had shorter weapons, they had to expect to receive a few
> stabs, before they could start dishing out their own attacks. Look a few
> pictures of renaissance soldiers. Pikemen wear very little armour (maybe a
> cuirass and helmet) and greatsword-men have plate armour (except oddly no
> shin armor). Basically long polearms were substitutes for armor that kept
> enemy from using their weapons.
>
> The benefit of long weapon on long range and short weapon on short range
> reduced to a measly order of striking does great injustice on my opinion to
> the whole concept of polearms. According to RQ3 deluxe the closing in is
> automatic. It is handled by a simple declaration of intent and moving
> closer. That is wrong.
>
> Possible solution: Maybe getting past spear point should require parry or
> dodge to get a better level of success against spear attack (success vs.
> failure, special vs. success, critical vs. special), before being able to
> move past it and then the polearm user should get a better level of success
> with his parry to either back away again or successfully reduce the length
> of the shaft to also perform attacks with his weapon. Without closing short
> weapon user could only attack the long weapon itself. Lances and pikes
> shouldn't be able to attack in close quarters at all - only parries.
>
> P.S. The thing about spears being only stabbing weapons - not true. There
> were slicing spears too. There are reproduction of some viking model sold
> in the internet, and it gives a very powerful cut like a greatsword. Shaft
> prone to shattering, though.
>
> P.P.S. Weak shafts is another thing that should be addressed. I suggest
> spear APs should be halved, if it was target of an attack - to represent
> attacks against the shaft, instead of the spear head. There are some
> examples - one on Youtube and one I saw with my own two eyeballs - of spear
> shafts breaking after a single hit very easy like.
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://rpgreview.net/pipermail/runequest_rpgreview.net/attachments/20130814/0bb6d103/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2013 09:56:07 +1000
> From: "Lev Lafayette" <lev at rpgreview.net>
> To: "RuneQuest Rules" <runequest at rpgreview.net>
> Subject: Re: [Runequest] Getting to the point.
> Message-ID:
>         <7c8c1b8d903549415bf824951e59152b.squirrel at webmail.rpgreview.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1
>
>
> On Thu, August 15, 2013 5:55 am, Marko Per?l? wrote:
> >
> > The problem: This is unrealistic, because the whole point of spears and
> > other polearms is to keep the enemy too far away to attack at all. They
> > are defensive weapon, the point of which (pun) is to prevent enemy from
> > getting close enough to attack. The point of an attacker using the
> shorter
> > weapon is to deal with the long weapon, slip past it and then be able to
> > attack polearm user without him being able to hit back, until he shortens
> > his weapon length.
>
> Yes, true that. "Threaten parry" is a term that is used to describe the
> situation. Arguably, one quick way it can be simulated is that the
> spear-based (or other) attacker receives a second attack roll is someone
> tries to close, in addition to their normal attack.
>
>
> --
> Lev Lafayette, BA (Hons), GCertPM, MBA
> mobile:  0432 255 208
> RFC 1855 Netiquette Guidelines
> http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1855.txt
> http://www.quicksales.com.au/shop/RPG-Review.aspx
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Subject: Digest Footer
>
> _______________________________________________
> Runequest mailing list
> Runequest at rpgreview.net
> http://rpgreview.net/mailman/listinfo/runequest_rpgreview.net
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> End of Runequest Digest, Vol 59, Issue 7
> ****************************************
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://rpgreview.net/pipermail/runequest_rpgreview.net/attachments/20130815/fbabea29/attachment.html>


More information about the Runequest mailing list