View Single Post
Old 05-18-2016, 05:06 AM   #4
Tomsdad
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Brighton
Default Re: Questions about hitboxes, impaling weapons, rigid armor, and hit chances

Quote:
Originally Posted by electrum View Post
Yes, the blunt trauma rule does favor Cr weapons, but the issue is that, according to my book (Basic Set 4E), blunt trauma only happens when the victim is wearing flexible armor and all of the damage is absorbed by the armor. Taking your example of a mail shirt, that means that they only suffer blunt trauma if I deal either a 1 or a 2 before DR. Sure, blunt trauma accumulates twice as fast for Cr weapons, but the effect is so narrowly applied that it feels pretty useless. If I'm relying on a 5-to-1 damage conversion to defeat an enemy by pecking at him with 2s and 1s, I would say that is a poor weapon. Almost worse than a dagger, even.
You'll still do better with a mace against mail though.
OK quick set up: ST10 3lb Broadsword (1d+1 cut) and ST10 3lb small Mace (1d+2 cr)

Both vs. DR5 mail


The sword on average does 4.5 and won't beat the mail

The mace on average does 5.5 but the mail is only DR3 vs. Cr so will actually do damage on average.

Now as I said this get's into a big topic about hand held ST derived damage vs. DR, but I'm trying to stick to basic RAW for the moment!


Just quickly blunt trauma is almost a red herring at this level as it's unlikely to apply. You have to do at least 5 points of Cr damage against flexible DR that will stop all that Cr damage (or 10 for Cut/Imp attacks which is even less likely).


Quote:
Originally Posted by electrum View Post
I will have to look those up. We additionally realized a sort of odd strategy: If one of your arms gets crippled, it's already useless. So why not turn to face the enemy with that arm and let him pummel on it some more? According to most of the rules that arm can't inflict more damage to you as a whole unless he lands another crippling hit, so statistically it's advantageous to use your arm as a literal meatshield if you have nothing else. Is that correct?
In theory yes, but the reality is unless your opponent actively decides to target that crippled arm it won't get hit. Well unless you use random locations in which case yes it's a soak location in terms of nothing else getting hit. Personally I'd still apply a stun penalty for getting hit in an already crippled limb even if there was no HP loss (it will still hurt a lot).

The stance rules in MA:G add a bit of detail in that turning side on and having your weapon in your trailing hand can effect that weapons reach so you might end up negatively effecting your ability to fight.


The reality is for more low level fights having an arm crippled is pretty much going to be the end of a fight. Or certainly the beginning of the end

Quote:
Originally Posted by electrum View Post
We've had issues in the past with combat taking too long due to too many enemies, too strong, dodge too readily, etc. So we've taken up a sort of house mook rule which makes them pretty weak. I'll have to take into account the shield giving 1/2DB though. That would definitely turn the tables on him a little.
Mook rules are pretty common, and to be fair they are designed towards your PCs hitting often and ending fights quickly, which is what this chap seem's to be doing.

The corollary is the GURPS combat system also gives various ways to fight defensively. Should you ever want to draw your combats out give your mooks big DB3 shields, and the shield wall training perk.


Quote:
Originally Posted by electrum View Post
Speaking of active defenses, we realized that one of our PCs took a cloak because he thought it was cool, and it has been giving him +1DB this whole time and we didn't realize. Because that +1DB is quite impactful we're using damage to shields. What are some typical rules for when that's targeted? It doesn't really make a lot of sense to me to say that a successful parry or block by the DB of the cloak means that I parried with the cloak. A dodge would, however. Also, do you prioritize hitting the cloak first, then the shield?
Sorry I'm not quite sure what you are asking. There are rules for damaging shields pg 484 & 287 (and cloaks pg 484 & 184).


But you seem to be talking about using a cloak and shield at the same time (which I guess you could do one in either hand, I'd allow the defender to chose which took the potential damage in the case it came up)?

Last edited by Tomsdad; 05-18-2016 at 09:55 AM.
Tomsdad is offline   Reply With Quote