Using Cinematic Weapons in Realistic Campaigns

[AlexanderHowl]

I was wondering what people would do if a PC attempted to build and use a cinematic weapons (like sword-chuks or whip-blades) in a realistic campaign? I am thinking that I would let them use it, but normal failures with a cinematic weapons would be treated as critical failures with realistic weapons and critical failures with cinematic weapons would automatically deal maximum damage to a random body part as the user loses control of the weapon in a potentially lethal fashion. What do you think, would you allow insane PCs to make and use sword-chucks or whip-blades in a realistic campaign?

[Phantasm]

IME, most such weapons would normally have built-in skill or parry penalties, which in cinematic games could be bought off with the Exotic Weapons Training perk. In a realistic game, that perk would essentially be unavailable.

I'd only make "all failures are critical failures" part of an uber-gritty GRIMDARK! setting.

[sir_pudding]

Yeah, just the normal rules for exotic weapons and the fact that realistic stats for a lot of these things are going to suck should be enough.

[mr beer]

Hit penalties with unwieldy weapons, Parry 0U and critical failures with silly weapons are more likely to injure the user. That seems fair.

[sir_pudding]

"All failures are crits" is likely to feel cartoonish with anything short of flaming chainsaw chucks.

[malloyd]

Originally Posted by AlexanderHowl

What do you think, would you allow insane PCs to make and use sword-chucks or whip-blades in a realistic campaign?

Sure, but not with cinematic stats. If you want to use sword-chucks, that's fine, they count as an ordinary flail with an improvised weapon like skill penalty (something like -2), and inflict crushing damage appropriate for their weight, not cutting.

Most cinematic weapons will "work" in reality - as an improvised club. The thing that makes them cinematic is often that the damage somehow outperforms that. Reduce it to appropriate crushing damage for their weight and assign a small skill penalty to Axe/Mace skill to use them and you're good. Just don't let the fact that it has a sharp edge or point fool you into automatically thinking it inflicts extra damage or counts as cutting or impaling.

[Bengt]

Does "sword-chucks" even qualify as a cinematic weapon? Googling seems to mostly produce jokes...

[Phantasm]

Originally Posted by Bengt

Does "sword-chucks" even qualify as a cinematic weapon? Googling seems to mostly produce jokes...

I think we can blame the 8-Bit Theatre webcomic for popularizing them (Red Mage: "Wait. HOW many swords is he [Fighter] wielding?"). That's definitely a cinematic if not over-the-top setting, so of course most hits are going to be from there or inspired by it.

[Mailanka]

Originally Posted by Bengt

Does "sword-chucks" even qualify as a cinematic weapon? Googling seems to mostly produce jokes...

I've noticed a trend at SJGames to move away from using the term "silly" to mean "absolutely not feasible" to "cinematic." The reason being that there's a lot of "serious" weapons or moves or campaign styles that are also absolutely ridiculous. Many weapons from the Final Fantasy series spring to mind, as well as Darth Maul's lightsaber, but if you call them "silly," then fans of the series become offended. On the other hand, if you call sword-chucks "cinematic, then 8-bit theater fans don't get up in arms, so the latter is becoming the de facto term.

[Bengt]

Ok, I guess I would use "parody" for a weapon that only appear in a parody comic. Once a weapon has appeared in many or one rather large "serious" work I would use cinematic. So weapons from a Final Fantasy game could qualify as the franchise is both quite large and tend to be oh so very earnest. But that's just me. :)

Out of curiosity, how does sword chucks work visually? It doesn't seem like it would be very much like a nunchakus unless you plan to hold on to a sharp bit.