Steve Jackson Games - Site Navigation
Home General Info Follow Us Search Illuminator Store Forums What's New Other Games Ogre GURPS Munchkin Our Games: Home

Go Back   Steve Jackson Games Forums > Roleplaying > The Fantasy Trip

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-17-2018, 07:08 AM   #11
tbeard1999
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Tyler, Texas
Default Re: Distinguishing Edged Weapons from Hafted Weapons

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Rice View Post
I'd like a system that incorporated these ideas without too much extra rules overhead. The idea that a weapon would be chosen for a specific purpose or situation appeals to me. So if your warrior is facing a heavily armoured knight, he'd be better to take that warhammer from his belt. If facing a horde of unarmoured goblins he'd be better of with a sword. If charged by a wild boar he'll wish he had a spear, and so on.

I think it will require more than just fiddling with damage values to achieve this which was why I liked the "Bash" idea.

What about something simple like this:

Swords do +1 damage per die against bare flesh or cloth.

Axes do +1 damage per die against shields (or things made of wood)

Maces and Hammers either: ignore armour as far as the results of reactions to injury results are concerned (Bash) or do +1 damage per die against heavy armour.

Spears do double damage against beasts and large creatures.

Just some rough ideas at this point for consideration and comment.
OK...so different weapon classes (sword, axe, hammer) would have damage bonuses or penalties against different armor types (maybe flexible, mesh, rigid)? Flexible would be none, cloth and leather. Mesh would be chain mail and (maybe) half plate. Rigid would be plate and (maybe) half plate. Would you still use a version of the bash rule?

Last edited by tbeard1999; 03-17-2018 at 07:41 AM.
tbeard1999 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-17-2018, 12:17 PM   #12
Kirk
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Default Re: Distinguishing Edged Weapons from Hafted Weapons

Quote:
Originally Posted by tbeard1999 View Post
Then don’t use any of these rules. But as the purpose of this thread is to explore ways to distinguish hafted and edged weapons, I think I’ll continue.

Also, your assertion about the damage curves is mostly incorrect. The hatchet, mace, morningstar, military pick do the exact same damage as their sword counterparts of the same ST. A ST15 battleaxe uses the same 3d6 bell curve that ST14 Two Handed Swords, ST16 Greatswords and ST13 2 handed Bastard Swords use. At ST 8,the club does exactly the same damage as a dagger.

Only the hammer, small axe and great axe have higher minimums and lower maximums than their edged weapon counterparts. That’s only 3 of the 9 hafted weapons.

And there’s no particular rhyme or reason as to why these weapons use different probability curves. The hatchet, small axe, great axe and battleaxe are all axes, but some use bell curves, while others use single die linear probabilities. The club, mace and hammer are bashing weapons, but the mace uses a 2d bell curve and the other two use 1 die linear probabilities.
Right, I didn't say all, but the axes tend to have flatter curves with different mins and maxes, probably an attempt to differentiate the types of damage between swords and axes as reasonably as possible keeping things simple with one type of die and simple additions and subtraction.

Swords, more variable, axes more regular. There is only so much Steve could do working with d6 within the context of the game to keep it simple and well-done. And part of the design fun is deciding between 1+2 vs. 2-1, for instance, regardless of what name is attached to the weapon.

It's great to make up all kinds of variations on damage potential, armor slopes, kung fu movements, weapon balance, materials, etc. along the lines of GURPS or other games, but all of it makes for lengthier PC creation, longer engagements, etc. etc. which isn't TFT. And the best thing about TFT is use of the bell curve with the simple and ancient d6, it was the best decision Steve made to stay away from D&Dish yuck.

I used to joke with D&D guys who wouldn't open their minds to a possibly better system and feign interest in their bag o' dice.

"Yeah, I've got d100, d200, d20, d3, everything! Sometimes it takes 5 minutes just to find the right dice for a roll! And the flat odds, it's so cool when the chances of something rare happening are just the same as the mundane. Mimics the natural world perfectly and feels so right. Oh, and there are those d2 and d1 dice I thought I had lost!."

"d2 and d1 dice, whaaaaat?"

I then would pull out a coin and a marble to show them. :)
Kirk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-17-2018, 12:54 PM   #13
tbeard1999
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Tyler, Texas
Default Re: Distinguishing Edged Weapons from Hafted Weapons

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kirk View Post
Right, I didn't say all, but the axes tend to have flatter curves with different mins and maxes, probably an attempt to differentiate the types of damage between swords and axes as reasonably as possible keeping things simple with one type of die and simple additions and subtraction.
You said "most axes" (and presumably you meant the entire ax/mace clas of weapon since the whole discussion is about them).

As noted, only 3 of the 9 axes/maces have higher minimum and lower maximum damage than equivalent swords. 3 of 9 is not "most" of course.

And hafted weapons don't tend to have flatter curves. 5 of the 9 hafted weapons use multiple d6s with bell curves. 2 of them are ST 9- weapons and all weapons in that ST class use a single die. Only 2 of the hafted weapons use a single die at a ST level where equivalent swords use 2 dice.

Quote:
Swords, more variable, axes more regular.
3 of 9 hafted weapons use a single die. The rest use bell curves. 2 of 10 swords use a single die. The overwhelming majority of both classes of weapon use a bell curve.

I really don’t think there’s any pattern here.

Quote:
It's great to make up all kinds of variations on damage potential, armor slopes, kung fu movements, weapon balance, materials, etc. along the lines of GURPS or other games, but all of it makes for lengthier PC creation, longer engagements, etc. etc. which isn't TFT.
I don’t think anyone has advocated any solutions that aren’t very simple.

If you don't want to make any tweaks to TFT, that is of course your prerogative. I disagree. Currently, there's little meaningful difference between hafted weapons and edged weapons. If a few simple tweaks can add meaningful distinctions without slowing the game down or unbalancing it, I'm interested.

Oh, and while I don’t care to get into a discussion about it, I don’t think there’s anything innately superior about a bell curve, compared with a linear probabilities.

Last edited by tbeard1999; 03-17-2018 at 02:55 PM.
tbeard1999 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-17-2018, 02:51 PM   #14
tbeard1999
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Tyler, Texas
Default Re: Distinguishing Edged Weapons from Hafted Weapons

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kirk View Post
Right, I didn't say all, but the axes tend to have flatter curves with different mins and maxes, probably an attempt to differentiate the types of damage between swords and axes as reasonably as possible keeping things simple with one type of die and simple additions and subtraction.
It occurs to me that you can tweak TFT so that hafted weapons can all use a linear progression (without using polyhedrals). Simply replace 2d6 with 1 die and double the result. Replace 3d6 with one die and triple the result.

I’d use the following notation - x2+1.
tbeard1999 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-17-2018, 05:27 PM   #15
Kirk
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Default Re: Distinguishing Edged Weapons from Hafted Weapons

Re: general trend of axes vs. sword damage

Here is my point:

ST Ax MnMx Srd MnMx
10 1+1 2 7 2-2 0 10
11 1+2 3 8 2-1 1 11
13 2+1 3 13 3-2 1 16
14 2+2 4 14 3-1 2 17

These are the usual weapons characters we run have, and the swords tend to have more dice than the axes, and the min max values tend to put the axes at higher mins and lower maxes than the swords. Choose your poison, more consistent damage with axes, more variable with swords.

As far as normal curves, so much of natural occurrences mimic it, to rely on flat
probabilities never feels right to me and those I game with. I avoid most flat odds setups for that reason. Natural heights, intelligence, abilities, and more, etc. etc. almost all fall into a bell curve upon analysis.

Last edited by Kirk; 03-17-2018 at 10:13 PM.
Kirk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2018, 08:37 AM   #16
David Bofinger
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: Sydney, Australia
Default Re: Distinguishing Edged Weapons from Hafted Weapons

Before working out what weapon characteristics should be it's worth thinking about what weapons we would want to represent. I think we may as well have lots of weapons because a big table doesn't really complicate things the way special rules do and it's cool to be able to pick the weapon that appears in the illustration/miniature/historical period/book/movie you like, or is just the one you imagine.

Here are some suggestions. Many of the names come out of the Roman period or the migration period because they often had the coolest names.
  • Right-handed Melee Weapons
    • A long knife like a seax: full damage in HTH or melee, limited defence because people parried with weapons like these, as they didn't with e.g. axes. Borrowing an idea from Rick Smith, it's a stabby weapon with unpredictable damage so make it x-y rather than x+y.
    • A short point-oriented sword like a gladius or wakizashi: half damage in HTH, full in melee, limited defence. Stabby.
    • A longer edge-oriented sword like a spatha or a Viking age sword: full damage in melee only, limited defence. Many people think a broadsword is like this but as far as I can tell it's quite different.
    • A hand axe, also covering the mace and hammer: the most simple and generic weapon, it hurts people in melee.
    • A throwing axe like a francisca: full damage in HTH or thrown, half in melee.
    • A throwing spear like a javelin: full damage in melee or thrown, half in jab.
    • A dart like a pilum: half damage in HTH, half damage in melee, full damage thrown.
    • Ancient weapons like the bronze age dagger-axe.
  • Left- or Right-handed Melee Weapons
    • A dagger: Full damage in HTH, half damage in melee, half damage thrown, limited defensive value. Stabby.
    • A throwing knife: full damage in HTH or thrown, half in melee.
    • A small parrying shield like a buckler. Defence against melee, decent bash.
    • A medium shield like a targe. Defence against melee, some defence against missiles, limited bash, modest DX penalty.
    • A large shield like a scutum, "heater" or aspis, unless this deserves two kinds of shields. Defence against melee and even more so against missiles, limited bash, larger DX penalty.
  • Right- or Two-Handed Melee Weapons
    • A spear: double damage in charge, full damage in melee, full damage in jab, full damage in throw. One or two hands. Stabby.
    • Maybe a bastard sword, but did anyone really use those one-handed?
  • Two-Handed Melee Weapons
    • A two-handed sword like a great sword or zeweihander: full damage in melee, half(?) damage in jab.
    • Maybe bastard sword goes here: full damage in melee, half in jab, limited defence.
    • A two-handed axe like ... is there a word for this? A great axe, maybe, or a Dane axe? Full damage in melee.
    • A long spear: double damage in charge, half damage in melee, full damage in jab. Two hands. Stabby.
    • A compound polearm like a halberd, pollaxe or bill, perhaps also like a godendag though that might be something else: 1.5 times damage in charge, full damage in melee, full or maybe half damage in jab.
    • A sword-on-a-stick like a glaive or sovnaya: 1.5 times damage in charge, full damage in melee, full or maybe half damage in jab, maybe some defence?
    • A naginata, like a glaive but has no point so no charge bonus.
    • Exotic and bizarre weapons like the kusarigama.
  • One-Handed Missile Weapons
    • A sling
  • Two-Handed Missile Weapons
    • A pole sling
    • A shortbow, moderate to learn, can be fast
    • A longbow, harder to learn
    • A crossbow, spanned by hand, on the slow side
    • An arbalest, spanned by mechanical contrivance, very slow
  • Armour: The standard TFT idea that leather armour is lighter than chain is lighter than plate is kind of silly and anhistorical. I'd prefer using armour kits that were historically worn.
    • Something basic, or heavy clothing: limited protection, small DX penalty.
    • Light armour: some minimal reinforcement of a basic jacket, maybe a skull cap, a greave on the secondary leg at least and probably the primary too, possibly an apology for something to protect the right arm. More protection, more penalty.
    • Something like the Greek panoply or a Roman legionary's kit: protection for lower arms and legs, a breastplate, maybe a skirt, an open helm with a nose piece and perhaps cheek plates. More protection, more penalty.
    • The kit of a mediaeval knight or a Byzantine cataphract: a cuirass or mail shirt that covers both front and back, a helm that closes up, protection on both upper and lower arms and legs, armoured shoes and gauntlets. More protection, more penalty. Being punched by someone wearing this hurts a lot more than if they're unarmoured.
    • The full articulated harness of the renaissance: Lots of pieces and a piece to cover everything. More protection, more penalty. Also good punch.

I realise that's a lot. But I think it adheres to the TFT principle someone or other once stated that players should be able to make decisions about their character and see the effect immediately. Plus it makes it easy to differentiate yourself from the character next door, which is an issue in standard TFT. And looking at a big table (like magic items) isn't particularly harder than looking at a small one (like current weapons).

If you wanted to go further you could include weapons that were particularly good against armour but bad in other ways to compensate (like a pick, I guess, or maybe a war hammer) or particularly bad against armour but good in other ways to compensate (like a sabre, sling, flail, naginata or katana). That opens the door to characters carrying two weapons and switching depending on the enemy which might be OK but I haven't thought about it much.
David Bofinger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2018, 12:33 PM   #17
JLV
 
JLV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Arizona
Default Re: Distinguishing Edged Weapons from Hafted Weapons

That is an excellent summary (though I hope that Steve will once again include the "other" weapons list for each weapon chosen as he did in AM).

I rather like your change in approach to the armor types too, though I'm sure he chose the names of his original armors more for simplicity's sake and to evoke a mental picture for the players, rather than for historical accuracy. (Besides, armor is technically so much more nit-picky than weapons really are; "Is he wearing a helmet? Or not? Do greaves stop 1 point of damage all the time, or 2 points directed towards the legs -- and does that mean we have to have called shots in combat? etc., etc., etc." I always assumed that the armor types were "generecized" by a severe application of both Occam's Razor and the KISS principle in the interest of rapid character creation and simple effect-averaging to keep combat easy to run.)
JLV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2018, 04:52 PM   #18
David Bofinger
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: Sydney, Australia
Default Re: Distinguishing Edged Weapons from Hafted Weapons

Quote:
Originally Posted by JLV View Post
I'm sure he chose the names of his original armors more for simplicity's sake and to evoke a mental picture for the players
We'd all like to think that. But it requires us to think that the fact D&D does it exactly the same way is a coincidence.

It's a philosophical question whether it's desirable to evoke a mental image that is, from an historical context, inaccurate.

Quote:
I always assumed that the armor types were "generecized" by a severe application of both Occam's Razor and the KISS principle in the interest of rapid character creation and simple effect-averaging to keep combat easy to run.
Doing it more historically isn't any more complex: it's still Armour I to Armour V but the names have changed. The only obvious impact is for wizards wearing armour: instead of being limited to the lower levels, they are now at some kind of "not made of steel" penalty all the way up.
David Bofinger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2018, 05:27 PM   #19
JLV
 
JLV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Arizona
Default Re: Distinguishing Edged Weapons from Hafted Weapons

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Bofinger View Post
We'd all like to think that. But it requires us to think that the fact D&D does it exactly the same way is a coincidence.
Good point -- since Melee started out as a replacement for D&D combat, I agree that your point is totally valid. Since it was going to replace D&D combat, it made sense to use the tropes OF D&D combat; e.g., the armor types, the weapon types, the relevant Characteristics (ST, DX)...

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Bofinger View Post
It's a philosophical question whether it's desirable to evoke a mental image that is, from an historical context, inaccurate.
Since it's a GAME and not a history course, I'd wager that most of us just didn't care all that much.

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Bofinger View Post
Doing it more historically isn't any more complex: it's still Armour I to Armour V but the names have changed. The only obvious impact is for wizards wearing armour: instead of being limited to the lower levels, they are now at some kind of "not made of steel" penalty all the way up.
As I stated before, I like your name changes, but then I committed the sin of speculating as to why Steve might have done it the way he did. I'm sorry.
JLV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-20-2018, 02:21 PM   #20
Rick_Smith
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Coquitlam B.C.
Default Re: Distinguishing Edged Weapons from Hafted Weapons

Quote:
Originally Posted by tbeard1999 View Post
TFT more or less treats edged weapons and hafted weapons the same. ...

For no particular reason, I'd like to tweak the rules so that there are some meaningful differences between edged weapons and hafted weapons. So here's a list of possible tweaks.

...

Thoughts? Other suggestions?
Hi Ty, everyone.
I'm reading thru the other TFT threads and making occasional comments.

I like different types of weapons behaving differently from each other. Makes weapon choices more meaningful. That said, a lot of my weapon differentials occur at higher skill. For example, I do let morningstar / flails wrap around shields, but you have to have Ax / Mace 2 talent before you can use this technique. So basic weapons behave much like regular TFT, but as you become more skilled you can start using special tricks for them.

I like this, since the basic game stays simple, but as players gain in competence, the complexity of the game grows slowly.

I've not found a nice rule for heavy swung bashing weapons which I like. (I had one system I liked, but found it was a historical so I'm back to square one.)

Warm regards, Rick.
Rick_Smith is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Fnords are Off
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:50 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.