Fantasy Trip Glitches, Contradictions, Ambiguities

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by ak_aramis

The Crossbow, far more than gunpowder, was capable of defeating knights with relatively untrained use. At the time, it was more accurate, more powerful, easier to train, and way more reliable. The energy on target is comparable to a 7.62N round... much slower, but way more mass. 3000+ grains at 200+ fps, and (unlike the firearms of the day) able to fire a case hardened AP bolt with good accuracy.

Um.... 3000 grains at 200 fps = 0.2 kg at 60m/s = 360J. That's about a tenth the energy of a 7.62N round -- and a normal crossbow bolt is closer to 300 grains than 3000.

[Chris Rice]

Originally Posted by ak_aramis

You're forgetting the single most important element of weapons: The weapon does not need to meet the flesh, merely to put its energy into flesh efficiently.

A saxon-style handaxe to chain & gambeson put the pig's right rib into its left, without even breaking skin. There were pieces of bone through all the organ meats.

The broadsword to the shoulder shattered the clavicle through chain and gambeson.

And, because people often claim that the time betwen death and test is often resulting in brittleness - the pig was still walking at 0700, testing was done at 1000, put into the cooking pit at 1015, and was feast at 1600.

Not one hit made significant damage to the armor - but every blow broke bones and disrupted tissue. Made the ribs hard to eat, too.

So, people from a time when these things were a life and death issue and had the real experience of using them in deadly combat, would waste their time wearing 40lbs of chain and bulky padding underneath to no useful effect? Somehow I don't think so. It's obvious that the armour served 2 purposes; chain prevented penetration, padding spread impact force. If the recreations aren't showing that, then they are not simulating the armour of the period correctly. I would suggest that the underlying gambeson/padding is being incorrectly modelled.

[Chris Goodwin]

Originally Posted by Chris Rice

So, people from a time when these things were a life and death issue and had the real experience of using them in deadly combat, would waste their time wearing 40lbs of chain and bulky padding underneath to no useful effect? Somehow I don't think so. It's obvious that the armour served 2 purposes; chain prevented penetration, padding spread impact force. If the recreations aren't showing that, then they are not simulating the armour of the period correctly. I would suggest that the underlying gambeson/padding is being incorrectly modelled.

Whacking a dead pig is a lot different from whacking a live opponent, who is both trying to avoid being whacked and whack you back. The people in the real world who test everything from crash dummies to ballistic armor have to work pretty carefully to come up with a testbed that matches human results, and even then they're always coming up with better and better models.

Also, I would say that even then, a broken bone is a lot better than an axe to the lung.

[DouglasCole]

Originally Posted by Anthony

Um.... 3000 grains at 200 fps = 0.2 kg at 60m/s = 360J. That's about a tenth the energy of a 7.62N round -- and a normal crossbow bolt is closer to 300 grains than 3000.

The 740-lb draw medieval crossbow I researched and used as a model for The Deadly Spring article was less than 10lbs to haul around but it's short, inefficient stroke delivered only 30-50J on target - that's the real-world measure, not my model.

[bookworm562]

The halfling is clearly broken. I'm thinking a +1 is a big deal, but +3? I've tried to give the Talent Missile Weapons for free and take away the +3 bonus, but basically I'm tired of the, "Halfling Biker Bitch-Boy Gang," and the 70-od Sha-Ken being thrown each turn.

We dropped double damage on the Charge with Pole Weapons. Frankly, the 2-hex jab is such a good thing, why would anyone ask for more? It absolutely doesn't have to be realistic, just playable and entertaining. A feeling of realism is all that is needed.

A change in the experience rules that result in less attribute bloating, or at least emphasis. We never had any problem but it was a hot topic of discussion.

Possible experience point cost for talents and spells.

Eliminating the distinction between Hero and Wizard.

Increase in adjDX required to improve rate of fire OR reduced damage for two dice missile weapons. I like the idea of a lucky shot killing the low ST wizard, not taking out the human tank.

Thank you, and any critiques would be nice.

[JLV]

The more I think about it, the more I like Rick Smith's idea of revising the weapons table to account for penetrating damage, versus crushing damage, without complicating the rules by addressing them under that name, or coming up with extra die rolls or any of that stuff. Simply revising the range of results for the differing damage results accomplishes the exact same thing without having to worry about the details AND makes it more difficult (if done carefully) to choose the perfect weapon.

I also think the idea of Shuriken needs to be looked at much more carefully -- in point of actual fact, they do very little damage to an armored opponent, unless there is an incredibly skilled/lucky hit on such a person. Historically, they were more of a distraction than an actual source of injury (unless poisoned -- and yes, I know they were rusty and could cause lock-jaw, and that probably happened, but it's not terribly heroic to say "wait two weeks, THEN you'll be sorry!"). So, in my opinion, they are bit "overpowered" in the game.

[BrotherBill]

So, if you are not engaged by moving into a front hex of a figure unable to harm you (being under a Freeze spell, for example) why are you engaged by a figure which has moved to far to act during the action phase?

[tbeard1999]

Originally Posted by JLV

The more I think about it, the more I like Rick Smith's idea of revising the weapons table to account for penetrating damage, versus crushing damage, without complicating the rules by addressing them under that name, or coming up with extra die rolls or any of that stuff. Simply revising the range of results for the differing damage results accomplishes the exact same thing without having to worry about the details AND makes it more difficult (if done carefully) to choose the perfect weapon.

I also think the idea of Shuriken needs to be looked at much more carefully -- in point of actual fact, they do very little damage to an armored opponent, unless there is an incredibly skilled/lucky hit on such a person. Historically, they were more of a distraction than an actual source of injury (unless poisoned -- and yes, I know they were rusty and could cause lock-jaw, and that probably happened, but it's not terribly heroic to say "wait two weeks, THEN you'll be sorry!"). So, in my opinion, they are bit "overpowered" in the game.

Maybe the Peculiar Weapons section should be divided into a Peculiar Weapons section and a Ridiculous Weapons (or Dramatic Weapons) section. Peculiar weapons are unusual, but have more or less realistic rules. Ridiculous weapons have explicitly fantastic rules but are highly optional.

[JLV]

Originally Posted by tbeard1999

Maybe the Peculiar Weapons section should be divided into a Peculiar Weapons section and a Ridiculous Weapons (or Dramatic Weapons) section. Peculiar weapons are unusual, but have more or less realistic rules. Ridiculous weapons have explicitly fantastic rules but are highly optional.

That's not a bad idea -- maybe call it "Cinematic Weapons"...

[Attika]

Have to nerf the Naginata polearm's damage. 1d6 + 2 is way WAY to much for a Str 10 weapon that you can charge with.

I remember (back in the day) a Gen Con convention I attended where they (Metagaming?) was introducing the Microquest Treasure of the Silver Dragon and I signed on to be part of a questing group taking part in an introductory play-through. You got to design your own character...

I specifically remember TWO people (in a party, I believe, of 8) who were Hobbits with Naginatas, Horse Bows, and Missile Weapon skills.

Just a tad unbalanced.