10-29-2013, 04:04 AM | #31 | |
GURPS FAQ Keeper
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Kyïv, Ukraine
|
Re: Rescaled Melee Damage and Couched Lances.
Quote:
Why double? The calculations seem to assume a head-on collision by default. If not, could you point out the page/quote? |
|
10-29-2013, 05:34 AM | #32 | ||
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Brighton
|
Re: Rescaled Melee Damage and Couched Lances.
Quote:
But basically a quarterstaff is designed to do damage despite its material, a jousting lance is designed with the opposite intention in mind. However not sure if this rather semantic distinction is worth a 0.5 multiplier! Quote:
or put it this way if it was head on and only has one move value factored in, how would it do a stationary target? Also i'm guessing the most likely scenario is a stationary target* this so that what's the example was for. However it's not 100% head on (otherwise you'd crash into each other). So assuming a 45deg angle I added a (Move+Move)*0.75 multiplier. Actually given my jousting/real combat distinction made earlier, I wondering how common head on charging was in combat. I guess it must have happened, but it was my impression that the mounted charged was designed to break infantry formations even despite chivalric notions of knight charging each other in open field that jousting emulated. *although if the target had taken a full move action I'd factor it in, especially if it he was running away so you have bonuses from rear attacks etc, etc. Last edited by Tomsdad; 10-29-2013 at 05:57 AM. |
||
10-29-2013, 06:11 AM | #33 | |
GURPS FAQ Keeper
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Kyïv, Ukraine
|
Re: Rescaled Melee Damage and Couched Lances.
Quote:
The slam rules take collision velocity. Whether the target is stationary and the slammer is approaching the target at 5y/s, or the slammer is stationary and the target is approaching the slammer at 5y/s, has no bearing on the collision velocity. GURPS is based on (simplified for playability) real physics. |
|
10-29-2013, 06:29 AM | #34 | ||
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Brighton
|
Re: Rescaled Melee Damage and Couched Lances.
Quote:
Quote:
I'm talking about both of them approaching each other at the same time, i.e relative velocity, I think that's in the collision rules isn't it? No one is stationary at the point of contact in the joust. You're going to to do a lot more damage if your travelling at move 8, and your opponent is travelling at move 7 if you crash head on into each other (relative move 15). Than if you've slammed him while chasing after him (relative move 1) |
||
10-29-2013, 06:43 AM | #35 | |
GURPS FAQ Keeper
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Kyïv, Ukraine
|
Re: Rescaled Melee Damage and Couched Lances.
Quote:
|
|
10-29-2013, 07:27 AM | #36 | |||||
Join Date: Jun 2013
|
Re: Rescaled Melee Damage and Couched Lances.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
If you have a light horse that's been trained for war but not for jousting (because if it's not strong enough for jousting, nobody's going to train it for that), you could probably manage decently well, although if you weigh too much for it you're going to be going at a lower speed. My point is that speed is the only contribution the horse's ST makes to the joust. You don't average the horse and rider's ST in any sort of way - instead, you resolve the attack using the rider's ST and the horse's speed. Quote:
Quote:
You can disagree with the author here, but do keep in mind he has actual experience, while (unless I'm mistaken) we're all just making educated guesses. EDIT: This being GURPS, I suppose it's possible you could have a rider with ST that is very close to (or even exceeds) that of the mount. In that case, you limit damage to rider TSTx1.5+(Saddle bonus) or mount ST, whichever is lower. This is because the rider is using his legs (and the saddle) to transmit some of the impact force to the mount, hence the reason he gets a nice little multiplier. So, that's a case where the mount ST comes into play other than in terms of encumbrance - but it's most certainly an edge case! Last edited by Varyon; 10-29-2013 at 07:39 AM. |
|||||
10-29-2013, 08:06 AM | #37 | |
Join Date: Jul 2008
|
Re: Rescaled Melee Damage and Couched Lances.
Quote:
Between that and the claim that the critical technology for heavy cavalry to really rise was advanced saddles, I'm not sure I'd assume the bareback jouster is the one with the perfect historical relevance.
__________________
I don't know any 3e, so there is no chance that I am talking about 3e rules by accident. |
|
10-29-2013, 08:48 AM | #38 | |
Join Date: Jun 2013
|
Re: Rescaled Melee Damage and Couched Lances.
Quote:
Of course, the discussion is about how a charge works, not necessarily how it was historically developed. Physics today aren't any different than they were back when jousting was a big deal, so if it's possible to use a lance bareback now, it was possible to do so back then. All I'm saying is, if historians claim something was necessary for a lance charge, they're using incomplete historical data of what existed and was used when. If someone is actually doing experiments to determine what is possible, then unless the author is simply lying I'm inclined to agree with his conclusions over those of historians. |
|
10-29-2013, 08:58 AM | #39 | |
Join Date: Jul 2008
|
Re: Rescaled Melee Damage and Couched Lances.
I would note that lances clearly dd pose a significant penetrating damage risk, because if they didn't surely nobody would have needed specialized jousting armor.
Quote:
__________________
I don't know any 3e, so there is no chance that I am talking about 3e rules by accident. |
|
10-29-2013, 09:05 AM | #40 | |
Join Date: Jul 2012
|
Re: Rescaled Melee Damage and Couched Lances.
Quote:
|
|
Tags |
alternate rules, couched lance, deadly spring, melee damage, pyramid 3/33 |
|
|