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 07-11-2016, 04:48 AM   #11
Anaraxes
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Default Re: Realism; Strength is not important for swordsmanship(?)

Quote:
Originally Posted by mhd View Post
People generally have a much lower threshold for acceptable wounds than PCs do.
Especially when they're just playing at a sport, as with HEMA.
Anaraxes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-11-2016, 05:08 AM   #12
Tomsdad
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Brighton
Default Re: Realism; Strength is not important for swordsmanship(?)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerrard of Titan Server View Post
Is that even true in a real and meaningful sense? For a heavy object, I can more easily buy that, but swords only weigh 2 to 4 lb. Historical one-handed maces weighed 2.5 lb or less. Etc. Real historical lowtech melee weapons are exceptionally light compared to modern expectations. ....
It's not so much you need great strength to swing a realistic weapon fast, it's more that you need to be reasonably strong and fit to comfortably keep your weapon under control while still swinging it as fast as you want, for asw long as you want. This last is impotent as fatigue is also factor for which I recommend last gasp which also has ST playing a tangential role.

That said as others have already posted strength is not the primary stat in GURPS for melee combat (nor is it in real life either), DX or more precisely skill is.


For 5 point's of ST I can but at the least 12 levels in a melee skill, with that kind of skill advantage it will be a quick sword fight. (of course +5 ST has a wider application than that +12 in a melee skill).


Of course surrounding all this is the question of what is realistic ST (or more precisely what is a realistic portrayal of realistic ST)!

Last edited by Tomsdad; 07-11-2016 at 05:16 AM.
Tomsdad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-11-2016, 05:14 AM   #13
Tomsdad
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Brighton
Default Re: Realism; Strength is not important for swordsmanship(?)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gollum View Post
...

GURPS doesn't take the skill into account for damage. But it still allows to take it into account through advantages. A good swordsman may for instance have Striking strength and many other advantages that improves damage rather than a flat high basic strength.
IMO it does. With enough skill you can hit more precisely, which means you can bypass armour or hit more damaging targets. The net result is you do more damage. It's not direct like the way ST does but, but its a constant enough effect to count IMO

I do know some have suggested house rules for using trained ST and melee skills though
Tomsdad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-11-2016, 05:21 AM   #14
Gerrard of Titan Server
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Default Re: Realism; Strength is not important for swordsmanship(?)

To Tomsdad
Sure, but consider one of my earlier examples. Consider two people, one ST 13, and one ST 7. Both are using a "bastard sword" with two hands. Both have equal skill in the sword (and both have equal DX). Both are going to have the same hit rate, but one is going to do about twice the damage as the other on a hit. At face value, that seems to contradict what I've read and heard from HEMA experts regarding the usefulness of Strength for swordfighting.

Perhaps in a real swordfight, a hit from the ST 7 or the ST 13 person are both incapacitating, which is one way that I might try to square the rules with reality, but I'm tempted to say that this is not correct.

Does anyone have any reliable sources for the impact force, energy, and momentum of a sword swing with "proper form / technique" as used in a one-on-one swords duel, and the same for a mace, and the same for outside of combat against a fixed target and swinging as hard as one can? Is my earlier source actually accurate? If so, that still seems to suggest that the basic GURPS damage formula for swords is entirely wrong, specifically the damage for the "bastard sword" strikes of the ST 13 and ST 7 persons should be much closer.

Or as I've been saying, maybe I'm completely wrong about everything.

...

To Gollum
Sure. I understand that a character with low ST can buy advantages to increase damage with a bastard sword. However, that doesn't answer my question: Is it realistic that that a ST 13 char does twice the damage as the ST 7 char with a "bastard sword", witn no further chargen to affect bastard sword damage, and all other chargen being equal? Should Strength really make that big of a difference absent specific chargen to increase sword damage?

Hell, should Strength even make that big of a difference in damage for swinging a bat or a mace in combat with proper form and technique, given some of the evidence that I can find for max bat swing speeds for children and professionals?

Last edited by Gerrard of Titan Server; 07-11-2016 at 05:24 AM. Reason: quick edit after posting to increase clarity of content
Gerrard of Titan Server is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-11-2016, 05:33 AM   #15
Tomsdad
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Brighton
Default Re: Realism; Strength is not important for swordsmanship(?)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerrard of Titan Server View Post
To Tomsdad
Sure, but consider one of my earlier examples. Consider two people, one ST 13, and one ST 7. Both are using a "bastard sword" with two hands. Both have equal skill in the sword (and both have equal DX). Both are going to have the same hit rate, but one is going to do about twice the damage as the other on a hit. At face value, that seems to contradict what I've read and heard from HEMA experts regarding the usefulness of Strength for swordfighting.
Actually they won't. A bastard sword wielded in two hands has a MinST10, so that ST7 fighter will be at -3 to skill compared to their ST13 opponent.

It's one way ST does act as a limiting factor.

Remember a ST7 adult is going to be pretty weak!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerrard of Titan Server View Post
Perhaps in a real swordfight, a hit from the ST 7 or the ST 13 person are both incapacitating, which is one way that I might try to square the rules with reality, but I'm tempted to say that this is not correct.
Well nothing is for certain, ST7 will be doing 1d Sw cut or 1d Thr Imp*

"incapacitating" is subject to some variability in GURPS. You could possibly incapacitate someone with the above but you'll likely need to leverage some favourable factors. Hit location, a good damage roll, a failed knock down test etc. Some of which can be made more likely with skill.


As you say ST13 is going to be doing a lot more damage, and will have to rely much less on such favourable factors.
A good example of Skill vs. Raw Strength, remember that for the 60 points that ST difference is worth you can buy another 15 levels of skill. Which even with the -3 penalty for less than MinST** will be net +12.


And as has been mentioned there are issues with ST based Melee damage once ST gets high (and what 'high' means).

So that all said given the issue and the fact that you'd like to make differences in ST less of a factor in damage, I'd recommend one of the several house rules for alternative ST progression that reduce Thr/Sw. This will proportionally increase the importance of the weapon's adjustment to damage.

*sorry I'm assuming a bastard sword with a point

** I wouldn't recommend dropping ST this low for a PC that intends to get into a lot of fights though, even if they intend to use the saved points to buy skill (it comes with other disadvantages on top of the fact that the MinST penalty just negated 12 points spent on skill)

Last edited by Tomsdad; 07-11-2016 at 06:36 AM.
Tomsdad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-11-2016, 06:29 AM   #16
mhd
 
mhd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Land of the Beer, Home of the Dirndls
Default Re: Realism; Strength is not important for swordsmanship(?)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerrard of Titan Server View Post
At face value, that seems to contradict what I've read and heard from HEMA experts regarding the usefulness of Strength for swordfighting.
Well, they're selling sword training, not gym memberships. This sounds more like "you don't have to be huge to get some HEMA lessons", or that proper form is more important than being able to bench a lot. Not that it doesn't hurt to have bit more heft after you know how to hit well and properly.
(Decreasing someone's damage if they're just using Broadsword by default sounds like a case for applying the skill penalty to Trained ST, but if Auntie May and Arnold both have Broadsword-13...)

Proper technique in stage combat decreasing impact force doesn't really say a lot, either.
mhd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-11-2016, 06:39 AM   #17
Mailanka
 
Mailanka's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Eindhoven, the Netherlands
Default Re: Realism; Strength is not important for swordsmanship(?)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tomsdad View Post
Actually they won't. A bastard sword wielded in two hands has a MinST10, so that ST7 fighter will be at -3 to skill compared to their ST13 opponent.

It's one way ST does act as a limiting factor.

Remember a ST7 adult is going to be pretty weak!
That's an interesting point: high skill compensates for low ST, but only to a point. Your ST 7 fighter, if he's skill 18, is as effective as the ST 10, skill 15 opponent when it comes to pure skill. Increasing his ST by 3 would give him an effective boost of +3 skill, but further increases in ST would make no further increases to skill.

As for Gerrard's point, skill should impact knowing more than just how to get your sword connected with your opponent, but also how to make that impact do as much as possible. High skill does cover hit locations, which includes armor gaps and chinks, and high skill with unarmed attacks does offer techniques to improve striking damage in limited ways (Hammer fists, exotic hand strikes, etc). I know of no such techniques for melee weapons, but Martial Arts does include all rules necessary to do something like that, if you wanted to allow characters to improve their damage with skill in specific ways.
__________________
My Blog: Mailanka's Musing. Currently Playing: Psi-Wars, a step-by-step exploration of building your own Space Opera setting, inspired by Star Wars.
Mailanka is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-11-2016, 06:44 AM   #18
Tomsdad
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Brighton
Default Re: Realism; Strength is not important for swordsmanship(?)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mailanka View Post
That's an interesting point: high skill compensates for low ST, but only to a point. Your ST 7 fighter, if he's skill 18, is as effective as the ST 10, skill 15 opponent when it comes to pure skill. Increasing his ST by 3 would give him an effective boost of +3 skill, but further increases in ST would make no further increases to skill.
Yep it's limiting in one direction only (in the other direction MinST limits you in a different way)


Quote:
Originally Posted by Mailanka View Post
As for Gerrard's point, skill should impact knowing more than just how to get your sword connected with your opponent, but also how to make that impact do as much as possible. High skill does cover hit locations, which includes armor gaps and chinks, and high skill with unarmed attacks does offer techniques to improve striking damage in limited ways (Hammer fists, exotic hand strikes, etc). I know of no such techniques for melee weapons, but Martial Arts does include all rules necessary to do something like that, if you wanted to allow characters to improve their damage with skill in specific ways.
I've seen some proposed house rules using the Trained ST concept, that work well (subject to the issues of hand held Melee damage). But yep as you say you could build a technique around increasing damage

Last edited by Tomsdad; 07-11-2016 at 06:48 AM.
Tomsdad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-11-2016, 07:30 AM   #19
cdru
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Default Re: Realism; Strength is not important for swordsmanship(?)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gollum View Post
Try to cut wood with an axe and compare your effectiveness with the one of a professional woodcutter. Even if you are generally stronger than him, his blows will be stronger than yours because he is very used to do that. He did that thousands of time!
This is modelled in GURPS: Forced entry allows you to hit harder against inanimate objects
cdru is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-11-2016, 08:15 AM   #20
DanHoward
 
DanHoward's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Maitland, NSW, Australia
Default Re: Realism; Strength is not important for swordsmanship(?)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerrard of Titan Server View Post
PS: As a historical fact, I find this particular fact to be absolutely fascinating. For example, when we dig up bones from European battlefields, we can tell who the English longbow archers were, because their back and arm bones were deformed in a very particular way, which was the result of very specific and extensive strength training for longbow use.
Those skeletal deformities are not a result of strength training but were caused by actually using the bow.
__________________
Compact Castles gives the gamer an instant portfolio of genuine, real-world castle floorplans to use in any historical, low-tech, or fantasy game setting.
DanHoward is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
combat, hema

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 02:59 PM.


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