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 > GURPS

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-09-2009, 11:58 AM   #1
The Wrathchild
 
The Wrathchild's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: A nice, warm rock with an excellent view of the Damned
Default Staves

Hi all

I have participated in - and am currently running - a combat tournament game set in a fantasy milieu.

As can be seen in another thread somewhere (edit: There it was!), the question has been raised about the Staff being just a bit of an über-weapon with it's +2 Parry bonus.

I wonder if what lead the staff to get that +2 Parry in the Basic Set isn't really what has become the "Parrying with Two-handed Weapons (Multiple Parries)"-rule. Or the Defensive Grip-rules for that matter - or the combination of the two - and that while it's fine to just go with the +2 Parry in a simple, Baic Set game, it should really be removed in a Martial Arts game, and those other rules utilized to the full instead?

Is that realistic? A better representation of the RW properties of the Staff? or is the +2 dead on?

Make sense?
__________________
The Wrathchild

Last edited by The Wrathchild; 03-09-2009 at 12:01 PM.
The Wrathchild is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2009, 12:43 PM   #2
SuedodeuS
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Default Re: Staves

IDHMBWM, so I can't compare the options from MA, but I do know that a staff is very easy to parry with. Provided the person knows what they're doing, it can be very difficult to get a hit in - the size of the staff, and the way in which it's generally held, makes it very easy to maneuver into position to block just about anything thrown at it.

My big problem with the GURPS staff, however, is how difficult the blasted thing is to break. Most of the defensive maneuvers I know of that benefit from the staff's shape involve dead-on blocks rather than proper parries. The breakage rules, however, are for proper parries rather than dead-on blocks. So while a pudao (heavy horse-cutter) would probably break right through most staves, it generally takes several parries before it does so in GURPS. Heck, I think the only weapon from basic set that even threatens to break a staff is a maul.

Note that I've never done any staff-fighting and am basically working off of how it seems things should work, so I could be completely off here. I do seem to recall a story of someone going after my brother with a meat-cleaver of some sort while he had a quarterstaff, and I distinctly recall said staff changing from being a decent length to being two rather short staves.
__________________
Quos deus vult perdere, prius dementat.
Latin: Those whom a god wishes to destroy, he first drives mad.
SuedodeuS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2009, 01:34 PM   #3
Bruno
 
Bruno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Canada
Default Re: Staves

The weapon breakage rules are a "gameable" abstraction, and unfortunately some things get lost below the existing resolution.

A workable hack would be to note that staves, when wielding with the Staff skill instead of Two-handed Sword, count as half their real weight when parrying a swing/cutting weapon. Possibly swing/cutting and swing/crushing, depending on input from folks familiar with the weapon.

Slight sidetrack:

A detailed, hardcore system would toss out the breakage 1d roll and weight comparisons, and instead could specify HP, DR (including the various notes from the damaging objects appendix, like flammable, semiablative to a minimum of X DR, etc), and HT for each weapon, and would provide to-hit penalties for repeatedly striking a damaged location to exploit weaknesses from ablated DR. You'd also want a way of determining your chance of randomly hitting a weakened location when being parried repeatedly.

You'd roll damage every time you were parried and apply it to the weapon as per the usual rules. You'd want hard rules for the effects of 1/3 HP on a given weapon (or class of weapons), also at the 0 HP point, and clearly state what is implied by "death" for a busted weapon.

And you'd probably roll shield damage into the same system, and you'd probably want to re-do shield DR and HP (again!) to keep them consistent. Shields are currently superheroically tough, IIRC. Personally I go the other way and subject shields to the usual weapon breakage rules, but I'm playing Dungeon Fantasy.
__________________
All about Size Modifier; Unified Hit Location Table
A Wiki for my F2F Group
A neglected GURPS blog
Bruno is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2009, 01:56 PM   #4
Kromm
GURPS Line Editor
 
Kromm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Montréal, Québec
Default Re: Staves

Or just treat staffs a little like shields, and say that if the +2 makes the difference between success and failure on a parry, you roll the attacking weapon's full damage and apply it to staff DR and HP. Thus, even light weapons could eventually chop a staff to splinters unless the user were good enough to ward off blows rather than hide behind his stick.
__________________
Sean "Dr. Kromm" Punch <kromm@sjgames.com>
GURPS Line Editor, Steve Jackson Games
My DreamWidth [Just GURPS News]
Kromm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2009, 02:13 PM   #5
The Wrathchild
 
The Wrathchild's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: A nice, warm rock with an excellent view of the Damned
Default Re: Staves

Well, that didn't take long to derail ;-)

Breakage was not my question even if that needs to be adressed as well ;-)
__________________
The Wrathchild
The Wrathchild is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2009, 02:29 PM   #6
WingedKagouti
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Default Re: Staves

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Wrathchild
Well, that didn't take long to derail ;-)

Breakage was not my question even if that needs to be adressed as well ;-)
Well, the question was answered in the first sentence of the first reply, so all that was left to do was to derail the thread. ;)
WingedKagouti is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2009, 02:32 PM   #7
Kromm
GURPS Line Editor
 
Kromm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Montréal, Québec
Default Re: Staves

No, the +2 isn't replaced by the rules for defense with long weapons. Long weapons can obstruct attackers and trade distance for time regardless of how good or crappy they are at parrying. And they can be used in a Defensive Grip whether or not that's a good idea. The staff is simply better at parrying, because it has no bits that the user can't safely touch, and nothing that tends to snag or overbalance. I'll grant that this is based largely on the word of Silver and Swetnam, and the tale (legend?) of Richard Peeke, with a small dose of Robin Hood. But it does seem that the staff has a major defensive advantage over most weapons. What keeps this in check in real life is the tendency for the staff to get whittled away, so breakage is in fact directly relevant to the question.
__________________
Sean "Dr. Kromm" Punch <kromm@sjgames.com>
GURPS Line Editor, Steve Jackson Games
My DreamWidth [Just GURPS News]
Kromm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2009, 02:56 PM   #8
SuedodeuS
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Default Re: Staves

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bruno
A workable hack would be to note that staves, when wielding with the Staff skill instead of Two-handed Sword, count as half their real weight when parrying a swing/cutting weapon. Possibly swing/cutting and swing/crushing, depending on input from folks familiar with the weapon.
Well, staves are fairly resilient to a single trauma (this I actually know from experience, although it's related to chopping wood for the fireplace), so that would probably make them a bit too light. I think I would prefer to use that hack for determining if they can break other weapons, though - a staff breaking a katar doesn't sit quite well with me (unless it's being wielded like a Two-handed sword). Kromm's suggestion to treat it like the DB of shields would probably work fairly well, though.

If you all don't mind me derailing this thread a little further... what if we were to extend this to other weapons? Basically, let them parry with a small bonus (+1), but risk damage. I think it's easier to block with a weapon than do a proper parry, which could justify the bonus, but it also risks seriously damaging your weapon. Maybe extend the threat range a little - so that if you succeed with MoS 1 or lower (at MoS 1, you should've just parried - oops!), your weapon takes damage. The 1d breakage rules in this case simply represent the weapon being too massive to push aside, and in cases where both rules come into play the weapon both takes damage and has a chance to break outright. Under this concept, cross-parries would always be considered as blocking in this manner (and maybe get an extra +1), but damage might be equally distributed (so that it ends up negated by hardness). Just throwing things out here.
__________________
Quos deus vult perdere, prius dementat.
Latin: Those whom a god wishes to destroy, he first drives mad.
SuedodeuS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2009, 04:12 PM   #9
Anthony
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Berkeley, CA
Default Re: Staves

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kromm
What keeps this in check in real life is the tendency for the staff to get whittled away, so breakage is in fact directly relevant to the question.
Well, one significant flaw of the staff as a weapon is that realistically, it has very poor performance against armor (this is not reflected in GURPS). Another is that it can't do much against archery. Robert Silver, in the Paradoxes of Defense, was rather enamored with the forest bill and similar short pole weapons, at least for single combat, and realistically, short polearms (including the short spear) have many of the defensive advantages of staves, combined with superior offense.
Anthony is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2009, 07:12 PM   #10
Peter Knutsen
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Europe
Default Re: Staves

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anthony
Well, one significant flaw of the staff as a weapon is that realistically, it has very poor performance against armor (this is not reflected in GURPS). Another is that it can't do much against archery. Robert Silver, in the Paradoxes of Defense, was rather enamored with the forest bill and similar short pole weapons, at least for single combat, and realistically, short polearms (including the short spear) have many of the defensive advantages of staves, combined with superior offense.
If a character is sufficiently cinematically skilled and badass, parrying an arrow with a quarterstaff is no harder than parrying an arrow with a sword.

Yes to the armour thing. Also staffs ought to have low damage (I presume GURPS handles this) compared to something like a shortsword.


I tend towards make quarterstaves fairly badass weapons in Sagatafl, although with some significant limitations: Low damage (a broadsword does d10 per Success, and a heavy quarterstaff does IIRC d6, or d5 for a slender and more breakable walking staff) and very poor versus-armour performance (AP 0.0, compared to AP 0.5 for a shortsword, 1.0 for a broadsword, 1.5 for an axe or mace, and 2.0 for a combat pick). That tends to make them into defensive tools (parrying and disarming) rather than offensive tools (hurting people, especially people in even light armour - a couple of d5s or d6ses versus even AV 2 won't accomplish much).


Back to GURPS, part of the problem may be Wizards and similar characters in DF campaigns who get the full +2 bonus to parry rolls after just 1 CP in the Staff skill.

To work around that, one could use a similar rule saying that skill must equal DX in order to qualify for a +1 parry bonus, and skill must equal DX+2 in order to qualify for the full +2 parry bonus. That way, the staff remains a superb defensive tool, but only in the hands of a well-trained user.

Alternatively, bump the Staff's normal bonus down to +1 to parry and then require a 1 CP Perk to get the other +1 parry bonus, called Defensive Staff Usage. The problem with this is, pretty much any character would take it (IIRC is is the equivalent of 1 level of Enhanced Parry for one weapon, which normally costs 5 CPs althouhg that can of course be stacked in cinematic campaigns - this perk is not intended to be taken more than once).
Peter Knutsen is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
holding a foe at bay, obstruction

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 08:39 AM.


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