Rules Question

[FireHorse]

For whatever it's worth — I don't know the conversion rate for My 2¢ into AEC (Anyone Else's Currency) — everything I've ever read or heard on the subject suggests that a Shield is properly considered a kind of Weapon. Even a big one (such as a Norman "kite" or a Roman "wall" style) lets you bulldoze over people, and that's an offensive move, not defensive.

And with smaller ones (such as bucklers), smashing the other dude in the face is literally the intended, proper usage of the thing (or part of it, anyway) — if you used it only for defense, and not as a Weapon, you'd be using it wrong.

Or to put it another way, a Shield is not just some extra Armor on your arm.

[larsdangly]

Originally Posted by FireHorse

For whatever it's worth — I don't know the conversion rate for My 2¢ into AEC (Anyone Else's Currency) — everything I've ever read or heard on the subject suggests that a Shield is properly considered a kind of Weapon. Even a big one (such as a Norman "kite" or a Roman "wall" style) lets you bulldoze over people, and that's an offensive move, not defensive.

And with smaller ones (such as bucklers), smashing the other dude in the face is literally the intended, proper usage of the thing (or part of it, anyway) — if you used it only for defense, and not as a Weapon, you'd be using it wrong.

Or to put it another way, a Shield is not just some extra Armor on your arm.

For sure; there are rules in the game for using your shield offensively (shield rush, and a spiked shield's damage). And it would be reasonable (and likely fun) to make up more ways a shield could be used this way. I'd even permit someone to do a shield rush and a weapon attack on the same turn if they took the -6 penalty or the 0/-4 penalty for two weapon talent. BUT where I give a hard 'no' is any gamesmanship with the wording of talents that lets you double-dip.

[JLV]

Originally Posted by larsdangly

For sure; there are rules in the game for using your shield offensively (shield rush, and a spiked shield's damage). And it would be reasonable (and likely fun) to make up more ways a shield could be used this way. I'd even permit someone to do a shield rush and a weapon attack on the same turn if they took the -6 penalty or the 0/-4 penalty for two weapon talent. BUT where I give a hard 'no' is any gamesmanship with the wording of talents that lets you double-dip.

Amen to that! TBH, I generally don't like it when someone spends all their time investigating the bleeding edge of the game's rules in order to try and "put one over" on the system and their fellow players at my gaming table. It kind of defeats the purpose of roleplaying (a shared, team experience) to my mind...

[Chris Rice]

Originally Posted by larsdangly

For sure; there are rules in the game for using your shield offensively (shield rush, and a spiked shield's damage). And it would be reasonable (and likely fun) to make up more ways a shield could be used this way. I'd even permit someone to do a shield rush and a weapon attack on the same turn if they took the -6 penalty or the 0/-4 penalty for two weapon talent. BUT where I give a hard 'no' is any gamesmanship with the wording of talents that lets you double-dip.

Amen to that. You will always find some people who will twist the rules to give themselves an advantage. Sometimes this helps the play of the game but sometimes it's only to give themselves an unfair or unexpected bonus. You could certainly interpret a shield to be a "weapon" and find evidence for that in the rules. I don't believe that was the intention and even if it was, I won't play that way.

[Skarg]

I can think of some balance concerns, but mainly I think it seems like not the intention of the Two Weapons talent, which is about using two weapons such as swords, not just the (only) way to get better shield protection.

If a table wants another talent to increase shield protection, sure, but why would it be Two Weapons, which is about using two weapons, and gives various other abilities that sword & shield users generally wouldn't use?

[hcobb]

ST 9 DX 12 IQ 11
Two very fine Javelins(1d+1, $400 each!) +1 for WE = 1d+2
Pole Weapons(2), Two-Weapons(3), Weapon Expertise-Pole Weapons(3)

Charge attack with one Javelin for 2d+2, -1 DX and 2 hits stopped from melee attacks.

ST 9 DX 12 IQ 11
One very fine Javelin(1d+1, $400) +1 for WE = 1d+2, Small Shield(1+1)
Pole Weapons(2), Shield(1), Shield Expertise(2), Weapon Expertise-Pole Weapons(3)

Charge attack with one Javelin for 2d+2, -2 DX and 2 hits stopped from melee attacks.

The shield option is the same number of skill points, with one more point of DX subtracted from attackers.

[larsdangly]

That scans about right. I support any game that encourages you to fight with a weapon and shield, like a normal person, rather than with a javelin in each hand, like a weirdo.

[Don Hawthorne]

Originally Posted by FireHorse

For whatever it's worth — I don't know the conversion rate for My 2¢ into AEC (Anyone Else's Currency) — everything I've ever read or heard on the subject suggests that a Shield is properly considered a kind of Weapon. Even a big one (such as a Norman "kite" or a Roman "wall" style) lets you bulldoze over people, and that's an offensive move, not defensive.

And with smaller ones (such as bucklers), smashing the other dude in the face is literally the intended, proper usage of the thing (or part of it, anyway) — if you used it only for defense, and not as a Weapon, you'd be using it wrong.

Or to put it another way, a Shield is not just some extra Armor on your arm.

Exactly.

There's a story about a British tank commander in WW2 complaining to his German captor that it wasn’t very “sporting” of them to use anti-aircraft guns against his tanks. The German replied that it wasn’t very sporting of the British to field tanks with such thick armor that it required an anti-aircraft gun to knock them out.

For too many people, if they do it, it’s brilliant strategy; if the other guy does it, it’s a cheesy exploit.

There’s no “gamesmanship” or “hacking” involved with interpreting Two Weapons skill as allowing a character with it to be more effective with a Shield. A Shield, as we have already established, is a weapon.

In fact, it goes more toward the spirit and intent of the rules to _encourage_ taking Two Weapons to increase the efficacy of a Shield.

Carrying a Shield and gaining its basic benefit costs 1 INT; learning Two Weapons costs 2 and requires a minimum DEX, and it can allow a Shield to stop an extra 2 hits simply because the Talent is being used to maneuver the Shield more effectively.

The end result is a character who is pretty well-protected even without armor...

... from the Front.

And again... yet AGAIN... any decent GM is not going to be running games in a vacuum. Whatever PCs can do, NPCs can do.

Just because we might not like the way a rule application works, or lack the knowledge to understand it, or don’t have the imagination to have thought of it first doesn’t make it a “hack”; the other guy got there first, is all.

Innovation, after all, is part of what makes good roleplaying.

[warhorse11h]

Found this in Interplay magazine #8, Q&A section, "Q. Can one of the two weapons in the Two Weapon talent be a one- handed spear or javelin? Dave Carter
A. No - the Two Weapons talent applies to cutting/bashing weapons."

Of course, it is non-canon, but it does seem the answer is pertinent to the discussion.

I would have to say that I do not believe I would combine shield with two weapons. Without belaboring the point, I don't think it is supported by the rules.
If that is what your group has agreed on, then feel free to do so.

I will leave you with one final quote from Steve Jackson, who, after all is the only one who is entitled to say that something is or is not valid.
$210K Stretch Goal - Three Heretical Variants, Steve Jackson, August 16, 2018, "I hope you have not been completely terrified by this look into my heretical musings. In fact, if any of them sound interesting, DO try this at home. One of the strengths of the system is that, being simple, it’s easily tweaked. I have always considered my TFT rules to be suggestions – well thought out suggestions, I should hope, but still suggestions. If something might work better for you, don’t hesitate to give it a try. And if it works, tell the world!"

[FireHorse]

Perhaps this is a good middle ground:

1: Different Types of Shield Attacks

The Rules already do this for the Spike Shield, which has a kind of attack that other shields don't.

Likewise, the 'Shield Rush' should only be possible with medium or larger shields — the Rules never address very small styles of shield, but logically, you just can't bulldoze somebody with a 6 lb. targe, or a buckler that's not much bigger than your fist. (Unless you have some Unarmed Combat talent, in which case you could do it with no shield at all).

But conversely, you can't lift a huge 35 lb. tower shield and fast-punch somebody right in the teeth with it. Nor could you use it to Parry like a main-gauche, which you can do with a buckler.

Maybe there should be a distinction between a Shield Rush and a Shield Bash — the former being a bulldozing move that is combined with a charge, and the latter just a smashing strike without a charge (and which may cause damage, depending on the shield).

In that sense…

• A buckler (which is so Tiny it isn't even big enough to call a 'Small' shield) would be great at Bashing but worthless for Rushing — and also blocks fewer hits than even a Small, but it gets Parrying to make up for it.
• A somewhat larger (but categorically 'Small') shield like a targe loses the Parry but blocks more hits (and gains the Rush?).
• a 'Large' (Medium?) shield can be used for both Rushing and Bashing, but excels at neither.
• A 'Tower' (actual Large?) is great for Rushing, but not as good at Bashing.

…and…

2: Require Shield Expertise to Use Shield with Two Weapons

You need the Shield talent to use a shield at all, and Shield Expertise to use it well in a Shield Rush; so let's say you need both Shield Expertise and Two Weapons to make the most of a shield's offensive properties.

Furthermore, I would argue that the Two Weapons talent should be specific — fighting with two short swords is not the same thing as fighting with a trident and a net — so you ought to need a separate instance of the talent for each general combination. (It doesn't need to be especially nitpicky, and general categories should suffice, so just add Shield as another category.)



EDIT: Or alternatively, make up a new talent called Shield Mastery, which does the same thing as Two Weapons (with a shield), and has Shield Expertise as a prerequisite.