Quote:
Originally Posted by Icelander
To be sure, the target area is somewhat irrelevant, other than it, of course, being unlikely to work to attack armoured targets with a reduced power attack.
My point was that it shouldn't take less APs to make attacks with less precision, but the trade-off should be power, i.e. damage, instead.
True, that also plays a part. But thrusting a weapon just six inches into unprotected areas does expend much less energy than swinging one hard enough to hack through flesh and bone, let alone possibly through armour.
|
But that's a factor of target as much as attack especially if your point of comparison is final wound value*. And even then if you broaden the definition of effort to include concentration, timing, accuracy etc not just expenditure of muscle energy I'd argue that a carefully and precisely aimed blow in combat will also take effort and expend "combat energy" (especially energy that is bolstered by high skill as well as high fitness).
*there are several way of inflicting a 12 point wound on a target with the same sword and same wielder, hacking through the armour and the torso will probably need a AoA(s) more often than a thrust strike to the vitals or a swing to an unprotected neck all to get to 12pts.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Icelander
In the RAW, yes. But with the existence of the Last Gasp system, there is no reason we should not have a wider range of combat options, inc. the option to strike with less damage and less effort.
|
I think the problem I have with that is it's actually quite difficult to pull your blows and have them remain combat effective (i.e to weaken them without reducing accuracy) certainly to the point that will end up in a net reduction in energy expenditure. Especially as damage is factor of not only your ST but the weapon as well. i.e ultimately you're talking about a fine adjustment to actions in a combat situation. These tend not to come with saving of energy attached.
Personally I'd go with the MoS idea, on the basis that an easy attack is an attack that requires less expenditure of "combat energy".
Quote:
Originally Posted by Icelander
Well, I want to allow a trade-off between effort and effectiveness, as well. Hence a Technique for a lower-damage attack that takes only 1/2 AP (which is rounded up, though) and a Technique for a penalised Active Defence that does the same, which cannot be improved up to full Block, Dodge or Parry.
|
I can see you reasoning its just I think it may have implications of the system beyond the AP system. So I guess my question is are you doing this because you don't like the current range of damage/protection trade off, or because you want your chaps to make more attacks before running out of AP (to be faor it could be both of course)?
I.e I'm not anti your idea in abstract (in general I'm all for the highly skilled/able to be able to out option their opponents by leveraging their advantage), just that I think you might be curing a different problem than the one you started out to treat.
What did you think of my higher than min St given bonus AP? My theory being a big strong chap will be less encumbered by his weapon, than one who is just strong enough to wield it without negative effect? It will also allow big strong chaps who may not have much skill to keep going at it for longer than similarly skilled but weaker ones. It would also reward those ST10-11 legionaries using a ST8 short sword than a ST10 broadsword. (although I admit I thought there were more weapons with split min St's for thrusting and swinging).