Main-Gauche
 

Created a number of characters today.

My question for myself and everyone else: What was I *thinking* with making the left-handed dagger -2 to the user's DX? Why would anyone ever take it instead of a shield? And why would anyone ever stab with it if it messed up their main attack by -4?

I cannot recapture my thought process on that rule. It's stood for 40 years and no one has picketed my office, but . . . (derp)

Proposed better rule, but not tested at all:

A left-hand dagger is a parrying weapon and reduces by 1 the DX of any hand-weapon attack made against you. It does not give this protection against polearms, missile weapons, or two-handed weapons. It does not prevent damage if you are hit.

If you attack with a main-gauche, it does not protect you against any attacks that turn. Roll the dagger attack at -4 DX.

Re: Main-Gauche
 

I can't even find the rules for the main-gauche! However, I can only assume that, under the original rules, the advantage comes once DX gets higher; then the -4DX is less important.

The problem I have with the new rule is the "parry". So you can parry with a dagger but not a shield? This seems to be moving the rules into some new territory.

Re: Main-Gauche
 

Well, indeed you do not parry with a shield. It is reasonable in a vacuum that they have different effects.

But yes, along with the penalty to attacking DX in some of the advanced fighting talents, it's adding a new dimension, in the maths sense, to combat. And I'm not sure that is best.

Re: Main-Gauche
 

Hi Steve,
I thought the Main-Gauche was underpowered, so I gave it bonuses in my Dagger ii and Dagger iii talents.

But I have LOTS of talents!

Warm regards, Rick.

Re: Main-Gauche
 

I think I DO like the revised version better than the existing one. It seems to me that it captures the effects of a Main Gauche better (at least according to the swashbuckling rules and novels I've read over the years). It also makes it more attractive as an exchange for a Shield of some kind.

Of course, I can't speak from personal experience, since they aren't "legal" in modern sports fencing...

Re: Main-Gauche
 

I have thought TFT Main Gauche was not a very good weapon ever since I started playing Melee when I was 11. I rarely gave it even to NPCs except for novelty (or the strange comedy that comes out of making thousands of NPC characters - like, it's a funny way to tease your players to have one of their expensive mercenaries reveal their preference for the main gauche after you're already days into the wilderness...).

It is slightly better if you take the Advanced Melee paragraph on page 13 as correcting the DX penalty to only -1 (even though the ITL/AM tables still show it as -2). But it's still -1 DX for a more limited version of what you get with a small shield at -0 DX.

(Imagine if you could actually parry and stop an entire attack with one... or a shield...)

On the other hand, it does weigh a lot less than a shield, and if you have a high DX, it does give you an extra 1d-1 attack. So all you high-DX fighters with nothing better to do with your left hand could kill nuisance creates or Images twice as quickly. And if someone jumps you in HTH, you'll already have a dagger ready. All those compelling advantages. Ironically, under the new Weapon Master talents, in could theoretically be very strong because presumably you'd get the extra 1d or 1d+2 added to that attack too.

(Main gauche rules are on Melee page 11 or Advanced Melee page 13, under LEDT-HAND DAGGER/WEAPONS.)

I think I like this, at first consideration.

Well yes, it makes me want to be able to do the same thing with the sword in my right hand, or the shield I'd rather be using than the main gauche. ;-)

Re: Main-Gauche
 

Real world use? Yes, one does parry with a shield. The smaller the shield, the more you must parry with it to be protected by it; the bigger, the more effort is required to parry with it. The standard heater is VERY much an active defense tool, and has some offense uses, too.

That said, I've parried greatsword simulator (6' of rattan and ducktape) strikes with a 14" diameter round targe.... it's not about stopping the sword (or simulator), but about making it not hit you.

Re: Main-Gauche
 

They are legal in ARMA, HEMA, SCA-Rapier, SCA-Cut-And-Thrust, and SCA-Broadsword. Modern "olympic" fencing is all single-sword, with no sign of the variety of historical defense weapons. SCA allows all of the following off-hand weapons: sword, dagger, buckler, short-cloak, baton (≤4' long), and wooden rubber-band-gun (the shooting is restricted to melee scenarios, but the gun is allowed as a parrying implement in duels). Some kingdoms allow great-cloak, as well, and I've used a wool great cloak. It's the hardest to actively parry, and the heaviest of the lot.

The goal is to make the opponent miss you with your main gauche/dagger, and hit him with your sword while he's focused upon your dagger.

The ability to eviscerate your opponent with a main gauche is secondary.

Off-hand weapons require some practice to get right... (and that's a bad bad intentional pun.)

Re: Main-Gauche
 

I fenced Olympic style. As I said, I have no experience with them because they were illegal there. I've never been a member of SCA.

Re: Main-Gauche
 

I agree main-gauche is not a good tactical choice, but it arguably had a niche in the original rules.

But is main-gauche really worth the trouble of introducing a new and unique defensive mechanic for equipment (ie makes you harder to hit but doesn't stop damage)? And if that mechanic were to be introduced, it does sound a lot like what a real-life shield would do.

So as others have raised, why have this kind of quirky dagger do things that the entire range of shields cannot.

Re: Main-Gauche
 

Agreed. In my 40 ish years of playing TFT I can’t remember anyone taking a main-gauche. And the rule is awfully fiddly for a 1d-1 weapon.

I propose a simpler solution if you must have them. Make Main Gauche a one point talent that requires Knife (or sword). Let characters use it as a small shield (against hand weapons only) or as a dagger each turn (at no DX adjustment).

Re: Main-Gauche
 

Main-Gauche is not a rational choice in the full rules, but I feel like it might have been the only way you could do two melee attacks in the same turn before ITL was published (though I haven't dug into the archives to confirm).

The revision is a good idea; it uses a new mechanic for defensive value, but that mechanic is also introduced in the draft rules for expert weapon skills so it seems to be a more general innovation steve is deliberating. If so, it introduces to TFT something akin to the PD scores in GURPS, which I approve of. Let's see if he has the moxie to use the same idea for shields - a change I would heartily endorse!

Re: Main-Gauche
 

Plus, let's face it, any swashbuckler worthy of the name should take this skill -- otherwise Alexandra Dumas will never write "The Three Wizardly Musketeers" on Cidri... ;-)

Re: Main-Gauche
 

Because you can't bring a shield to dinner theater?

:-)


More seriously, the main-gauche isn't a battlefield weapon the way a shield is, and if it works out that medium/large shields are THE choice when in battle or adventuring, that's all to the good, supported by rather a lot of history.

The smaller stuff is there for portability, though I've been consistently AMAZED at how much area denial a 12-18" buckler can provide. I'll stop there, only to add that the comment about how actively heater shields were used is bang-on, and the extent to which the shield is the primary weapon, not just an ancillary part of the defense (or, "in DnD, it just sits there giving +1/+2 to AC; in GURPS, it just sits there giving Defense Bonus until it's time to stop an arrow"), was a real eye opener to me as I started studying fighting that was modeled on the manuals and lethal intent.

Re: Main-Gauche
 

I needed to add a smiley or else be MORE pedantic. The word as I was taught it is 'block' with a shield, 'parry' with a dagger. Tomato, tomotto.

Whether you call it a block or a parry, the EDGE of the shield is what does the work, and you want to move the shield the minimum possible unless you think you can pull off a shield disarm, which is NOT something I want to try to represent in the rules.

I totally believe that a buckler would be a good defense against a greatsword. You use the edge to knock the sword offline, rather than trying to hold the shield where it will STOP the blow, right?

I fear that it is far too late for any "shields now subtract from foe's DX" rule - that would strike at the underpinnings of the system and character design as now exists. For instance, if you are striking with an adjDX of 10 now, and the foe's shield reduces your DX by 2, you are now striking at adjDX 8 - you have fallen off the wrong side of the bell curve. Of course, if you yourself had a shield, it is no longer reducing your DX. But that removes the penalty to carry a large vs. small shield, and as a small fighter, I can tell you that the difference is real.

Re: Main-Gauche
 

It would change things quite a bit, though the part I would've tended to mention that would feel wrong would be if someone had say DX 15, and being reduced to 13 by a shield wouldn't feel like much, especially compared to the reduction from 10 to 8. That mechanic feels off to me, though I might prefer it to the existing one where e.g. a missile that does more damage than a shield stops can never be blocked by a shield, nor can it miss the shield and hit someone for full damage. But I don't have a great simple mechanic to represent that...

[HOWITZER] the best I have is the normalized DX mechanic combined with a minus to-hit replacing the damage reduction (the normalization mitigates the weirdness of the curve effects) I'm still loving the way that works, but it seems regarded as too different to be more than an optional/house rule.[/HOWITZER]


I don't follow. Why would you remove the DX penalty from the wearer of the shield?

Re: Main-Gauche
 

Exactly.

The use of a center-handle buckler, against a thrusting blade, you push it forward to create a "cone of defense" ... and you keep it positioned such that their blade has to be pushed past their arm length to hit you.

Larger shields, really meaning strapped to the forearm types, have several defensive techniques.

• pop the shield out in the direction of the incoming blow - this is the classic "block"... the push out is to allow room to soak the energy.
• Move the outside edge back so that the wrap doesn't hit your back nor thighs.
• angle the shield so the blow skips along the shield face and over you. This is done mostly with smaller shields.
• pop an edge so that the blade runs the edge around you.
• use a corner to sling the blade aside with a shield rotation. Only reliably done on square, kite, and heater types.

larger Shield offensive techniques include...

• The shield slam — ram the shield face into the target to push them
• The edge hook — use your on-hand side to hook their shield and throw it outward
• The arm slam — slap their shield arm with the shield.
• The punch — hit them in the chest with the inner edge of the shield. Especially effective with a diamond shield (a rotated square or a parallelogram - use that pointed corner)

Shields are not a good passive defense... if you passively hang it, it'll just be used to break your arm and/or teeth...

Re: Main-Gauche
 

Honestly, I think that level of change to the rules might need to be postponed until The Fantasy Trip II: Fantasy Boogaloo hits the market. Right now people (including me) are having a hard-enough time wrapping their heads around a few new talents and the new XP/Attribute Caps ideas! ;-)

Re: Main-Gauche
 

It's fine; if the treatment of shields in TFT were a real problem people never would have fallen in love with the game. GURPS treats them better (I would say much better). And in a way that could be translated to TFT without complicating the game (not all differences are complications). But, in the end its a matter of taste and several different approaches could result in similarly good games. The saving grace here, I would say, is that TFT is a very 'gamey' game - it has a certain level of versimilitude, but really it is a chess-like game and not a simulation. So long as shields work within the broader system, and are a sensible part of the 'trade space' of character abilities, then its good.

Re: Main-Gauche
 

Well said.

Re: Main-Gauche
 

The advantage of a main-gauche is that there are social situations and environments where you can carry a main-gauche but can't carry a shield. But yes, it would make sense to make it better.

I don't see why a main-gauche can't parry, say, a spear. Parrying with a weapon is done using the forte, the half or so closest to the hand, with the bit furthest from your hand used offensively. So the main-gauche is more or less as good at parrying as a sword.

It would be reasonable to give a parrying bonus, whether to hit or hits stopped, to one-handed swords, daggers, main-gauches and shields. This would help to differentiate the different kinds of melee weapons: axes do more damage but swords are better defensively.

Re: Main-Gauche
 

My HEMA club often goofs around with mixed-weapon sparring, and I'm pretty sure it is ridiculous to imagine parrying any pole arm or two handed sword with a main gauche, other than the rare lucky deflection.

Re: Main-Gauche
 

If so, comparing to the rule change Steve put up for discussion, how about a one-handed spear? Would you say it's actually the two-handedness that should be the deciding factor? If a one-handed spear seems un-main-gauche-parry-able to you, how about a javelin?

Realists might also quibble about the morningstar (assuming it means a spiked ball & chain flail), which is a one-handed weapon.

Re: Main-Gauche
 

A thrusting polearm might be deflectable. The leveraged sweep of a big two-hander - that is scarier.

What is HEMA?

Re: Main-Gauche
 

Sounds as though, to clean it up wile remaining compatible with existing shield rules, the MG should just be treated like a small shield except (advantage) you have a dagger in hand (disad) it does not protect in any way against missile attacks or the attack of a two-handed weapon.

Re: Main-Gauche
 

Historical European Martial Arts - reenactment sports, which have lately become more popularly visible/known lately thanks to spectacular videos (some using blunt but full metal weapons including polearms and maces and full metal armor - also popularizing the idea/knowledge that armor actually mostly stops most/all damage from medieval weapons) that have been shared around.

Wiki:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Histor...n_martial_arts

Videos:
https://youtu.be/xYxQR5haqTs
https://youtu.be/3mQfaog_JPE
https://youtu.be/LyFOZMWJ6Es
https://youtu.be/GSJgPVQJGyk

Oh, and I would also say, raising awareness that full plate armor doesn't really give a -6 DX penalty (nor even -4DX) to hit people.

Re: Main-Gauche
 

To fill in the 'side bar' on HEMA, armored combat is not a central activity; 99 % of HEMA is focused on sport fencing using weapons, training manuals and rules that are similar to those handed down to us from 15th to early 19th century european sources. The longsword-like 'federschwert' is arguably the main weapon system used in competition, but there is also lots of fencing done with arming sword and buckler, rapier, military saber, messer, and a fair amount of european folk wrestling. Also cutting competitions. Most of the competitive fencing uses protective gear including a normal looking fencing mask, a heavy jacket, some kind of rigid cover on hands, elbows and knees. Lots of clubs play around with spears and other pole weapons, though these are not heavily represented at tournaments.

And, in answer to the question above about spears, it is true that a two handed spear is super difficult to parry using a light hand weapon or buckler, because of the combination of tremendous agility with the point, extreme reach, and great weight and power. A 1 handed spear is comparatively easy to deflect. But, I think the only reliable protection against a 2H spear is another long pole arm or a large shield.

Re: Main-Gauche
 

Personally and conceptually, I like this a lot. Treating shields and off-hand objects as weapons that also help deflect blows, with bonuses for size and the ability to absorb arrow attacks for shields, nicely unifies things.

Re: Main-Gauche
 

That sounds sort of perfect to me...

Re: Main-Gauche
 

Yes, I like that, too. Clean and neat.

Re: Main-Gauche
 

It's not that clean. It says there's something superior about the 2+0 damage of a halberd, compared with the 2+0 damage of a broadsword. So what about a wolf bite, or a dragon? Does it maybe cause a point of damage in that case, instead of protecting the user? If parrying works against thrusts and not chops does that mean the two-handed bastard sword can be parried since historically it was a thrusting weapon? It raises the question of why a sword can't parry, if a main-gauche can: wouldn't a guy with a sword be better protected than a guy with an axe? If so, can a sword parry a halberd? Can a main-gauche parry a one-handed mace?

To me it feels like pulling a thread. And isn't that a big part of why Steve wanted to change the rule originally, that the original rule was a special case, which raised as many questions as it answered?

To be honest, though, I don't have a better idea. My preference is to give parry rights to some or most of the swords, to differentiate them from axes and hammers, and reduce sword damage to compensate. That leaves the question of whether they can parry the least subtle weapons, but I'd be inclined to let them do it because it's getting a little fiddly for TFT.

Re: Main-Gauche
 

Mass alone makes that a problem; it's theoretically possible to aid it over you, but the mass/leverage/speed issue.

Plus, the main gauche and the buckler are both primarily for use vs thrusting weapons; a 1-h spear, it's plenty good enough for; a glaive, only when it's thrusting.

Still, the buckler, used right, can do what the MG cannot - use its own mass as a significant term in the calculus.

Re: Main-Gauche
 

Thanks I hadn't heard of HEMA before. Although after watching the end of the video below, it is clearer to me that:

A. Blunt weapons can definitely hurt you even wearing metal armor.
B. A buckler can do BIG BUCKET LOADS of damage
C. This couldn't have been UCV, so I suppose Brawling?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VlCQ2pBob5Q

I assume the HEMA people here are saner than to participate in this kind of combat?

Re: Main-Gauche
 

Sheesh, I'm glad cutting and stabbing wasn't allowed!

Re: Main-Gauche
 

Cutting looks pretty allowed except those aren't sharpened and the armor stops it.

Looks like a shield being used to do damage in and out of HTH to me, too.

Re: Main-Gauche
 

That's not HEMA. This is HEMA:

https://www.nytimes.com/video/sports...-fighting.html

Re: Main-Gauche
 

Wow! I like the look of that. Confirms my thought I'd rather have a spear or bill (or bow!) on a battlefield. Always better to outreach the enemy.

Re: Main-Gauche
 

[HOWITZER]
I defy -- DEFY -- anyone to watch a few of these videos and then suggest they would prefer to go into medieval style combat as an unarmored martial artist. Honestly the guy getting creamed with the buckler would be dead without a very good helmet (even then? Do we KNOW he lived?)

For myself I'd probably go with full tubular plate + double-vested helmet + metal buckler + hammer/pick.
[/HOWITZER]

Re: Main-Gauche
 

Both of the profferred videos are HEMA in the meaning of Historical European Martial Arts.

For which, dozens of organizations do variations upon.

Rebated steel will readily bruise right through plate.

Even the SCA, whose Rattan is 1.25" diameter, still bruise people through plate routinely. (The SCA uses rattan for several reasons - one of which is how it mushes rather than breaks sharp; second is that it's only marginally heavier than the live steel it emulates.)

Concussions do happen - but hearing damage is also an issue - helms can ring like bells.

Re: Main-Gauche
 

Agreed. You'd have to be a total moron (or else poor and had no choice) to go into that sort of situation without significant armour. However, adventuring/dungeoneering is about a lot more than fighting; negotiating narrow ledges, water hazards, slippy floors, poor light conditions, climbing running away, etc. All of these are harder in armour. So there's still a balance there.

Re: Main-Gauche
 

There isn't a meaningful argument about what HEMA is: It's an acronym for specific organizations that you can join, pay dues to, and that sanction clubs and run events. A good comparison between armored cage cage fighting and HEMA might be between rugby and the NFL: rugby is a sport that looks kind of like football, but there is nothing you can do on a rugby pitch that will make you an employee of an NFL team. The guys doing MMA cage fights in plate armor are not part of the HEMA scene; as far as I know, there is little or no overlap between the groups. There are a lot of SCA people in HEMA, and the start of some SCA groups adopting HEMA sport combat practices. But even there they are different organizations doing different things.

Re: Main-Gauche
 

Puts me in mind of one story about O-Sensei...

Re: Main-Gauche
 

And a bit of a tangent, but here's a writeup of a longsword exchange in GURPS, showing the sheer amount of wow that can happen over a one second time scale.

https://gamingballistic.com/2014/09/...s-gets-it-rig/

Re: Main-Gauche
 

I think simplicity and consistency almost demand the implementation of Steve's solution here unless changes are going to be made to core game mechanics, though I would only have the main-gauche bypassed by Missile Attacks (not two-handed weapons) to make interaction with the Two Weapons Talent easier to handle as detailed below. (I would love to have the Active Defenses of Block, Parry, and Dodge in TFT, but they would GURPS-ify the game too much.)

It seems necessary to also clarify that a main-gauche dagger can be used in a second, off-hand attack at -4 DX to both the main-hand and off-hand attack rolls, but then it may not be used to block any hits of damage on that turn.

Spiked small shields (i.e., bucklers) are also possible. They function as small shields unless used in an off-hand attack at the same -4 DX penalties to both attack rolls as described for a main-gauche. When used as a weapon, they inflict 1d-2 damage (one less than a dagger) and do not block any hits.

Two Weapons Talent would eliminate the DX penalty to the main-hand attack but the off-hand attack is still at -4 DX with a main-gauche or spiked shield. When using a normal-sized, one-handed melee weapon larger than a dagger in the off-hand, this Talent allows for the off-hand weapon to stop 2 hits of damage (but not from Missile Attacks). A main-gauche or spiked small shield still only stops 1 hit (though the shield would affect Missile Attacks).

Using two full-sized weapons and parrying with both while making NO attacks can block 4 hits, but if a main-gauche or spiked shield is used as the off-hand weapon, then they only block 3 hits total. Missile Attacks are only affected if the off-hand weapon is a spiked small shield, but the shield still only blocks 1 hit from such attacks, not 3 or 4.

NOTE: Remember that already having a dagger in hand is an advantage in HTH combat. Two-weapon fighters are able to focus on gaining specific advantages by wielding either two normal weapons, a normal weapon and a main-gauche dagger, or a normal weapon and a spiked small shield.

Re: Main-Gauche
 

It's been a generic acronym since the early 90's. The Group is actually HEMAA or HEMA Alliance.

Re: Main-Gauche
 

My question about the MG is this. Why would anyone take a MG Iver a dagger if the dagger does 1d+2 in HTH combat, while the. MG still just does 1d-1 damage in the same situation? Also while the dagger still apparently has the same parrying capabilities as the MG. Or did I miss something? I have only gone through the basic melee rule book. So idk if anything is revised in ITL...

Re: Main-Gauche
 

*over a dagger

Re: Main-Gauche
 

Especially if characters are assumed to have a dagger by default in the first place?

Re: Main-Gauche
 

Also, there was a mention of there being a -2 to the users dx when using a MG. But I don't see that in the book anywhere, the the -4 to dx when using it in your off hand. Nor do I see anything about -dx for using any weapon. Just for armor and shields. Am I missing something?

Re: Main-Gauche
 

Re. main-gauche vs. dagger; for most users (barring people with specialized talents the MG provides a point of protection (like a small shield) whereas the dagger does not.

Re. the -2 DX penalty rule, that was in the original Melee edition. It was edited out in the Legacy edition. I don't have all the details in front of me at the moment, but I believe there are actually 4 different 'official' treatments of the main gauche floating around: original Melee, original Advanced Melee, LE Melee and LE ITL. I'm pretty sure no two of these are exactly the same. Plus the LE version seems to have a typo in all representations of the main gauche in the weapon tables. So, basically, good luck!

Re: Main-Gauche
 

This is how I read it as written in ITL. No DX penalty, blocks 1 non-missile, non-2-handed attack from the front 3 hexes and can be used with the attack option against the same foe at -4 to DX (both attacks) but you give up the protection when you do that.

I assumed the ‘1’ in the DX column on page 110 in ITL was a typo. <shrug/>

You can’t shield rush with a main-gauche, but you have it if you’re sucked into HTH. I don’t know, Steve, it seems like a viable choice for a little protection, but this makes me wonder why not just allow this with any old dagger in the left hand?

Re: Main-Gauche
 

The rule book said that either the dagger or the MG gives you the -1 from hits. And that the -4 dx is for attacking with the left hand. But that is in the melee rules. I haven't read ITL so idk if that is changed. But, thanks for clearing up the -2 dx question for me. But it says verbatim on page 13 of melee, "The left-hand dagger, or main-gauche, acts as a shield to parry 1 hit per attack, from non-missile, one-handed weapons only, from your front hexes. If you take an attack option, you can also make a separate dagger attack against the same enemy. It is rolled at -4DX. A main-gauche gets 1D-1 in HTH combat. A fighter may not use two daggers, or a main-gauche and dagger, in HTH combat."
So it seems that a dagger does anything a MG can do, but does 1D+2 in HTH combat. And it doesn't say anything about not being able to make the separate left hand attack when you parry. That was literally the entire left-hand dagger paragraph on page 13 of melee. Does any of that change in ITL?

Re: Main-Gauche
 

The MG does the same damage as a dagger in HTH (ITL; 122)

In The Labyrinth also mentions that a dagger or MG is based on ST on this table +3

8 or less 1d-4
9 or 10 1d-3
11 or 12 1d-2
13 or 14 1d-1
15 or 16 1 die
17 to 20 1d+1
21 to 24 1d+2
25 to 30 1d+3
31 to 40 2d+1
41 to 50 3d+1

If you don't have In the Labrynith yet...I suggest you do so. It's great and the PDF version (which I assume will be updated at times) is $18 at Warehouse 23

Re: Main-Gauche
 

Or I could not be lazy and read ITL for myself lol. But it seems like a shield and dagger combo could be potentially deadly, if you can manage to knock your opponent down. They still have to take a whole turn to get up. So you could, in theory, shield rush, knock the person down and already be in HTH, the person then takes a turn to get up, then on your turn you start shankin. But that really only works if shield rushing puts you on this hex, the rules in melee doesn't really specify this though. But even if it doesn't, they still have to take the turn to get back up, and if you move before they do you could move into their hex while they are prone on your next turn... Idk though...

Re: Main-Gauche
 

Thanks for the clear up JimmyPlenty. I do have ITL, just haven't got around to reading it. But is that damage for just normal attacks with dagger or MG, or does that attack damage also apply in HTH also? In melee, it says that both dagger and MG do 1d-1 normally. But in HTH, the dagger does 1d+2, whereas the MG still only does 1d-1 in HTH... I guess either way, at the end of the day it's all up to the GM how anything works. SJGames has always stressed that point lol. But being fair is important also.

Re: Main-Gauche
 

No problem!

The HTH damage is what I showed you. The normal damage for a dagger or a MG is 1d-1. So they both do the same in any situation.

The only real difference is the MG gets a -1 hit / -1 DX tradeoff and cannot be thrown.

Just thinking now, I was wondering, to make the MG a little juicer, to make it -2 hits when using a defend maneuver. Not much, but an extra incentive to use it.

Re: Main-Gauche
 

Thanks again JP... Ok so there is indeed considerable changes in ITL from melee then. In melee rules, the dagger seems way better than MG since both can parry one hit. And MG still can't be thrown in melee whereas the dagger can... But neither one pits penalty on dx in melee rules. From what your saying, it seems like they balanced the MG and daggers better. Because in melee, daggers are just straight up superior to MG. And it's a default weapon.

Re: Main-Gauche
 

The Main-Gauche is great, if you're a Fencer.

Attack with Rapier and parry with the Main-Gauche for 1 hit native plus 2 hits for the off-hand parry. Compare with 2 hits for small shield plus Shield Expertise (with an additional -1 DX on the attacker that also applies against Lightning bolts.)

Re: Main-Gauche
 

But the dagger can also parry one hit in off hand as well... In melee that is, idk in ITL...

Re: Main-Gauche
 

1) As far as I can tell, nowhere does it say you forego the 1 point of protection from a main-gauche when you opt to do the off handed attack. And, in LE ITL at least, it does not say that your main attack suffers the -4 penalty. So, basically the off handed -4 attack is a freebee that you should always do.

2) A off handed dagger that is not a main gauche does not provide 1 point of protection. In principle, I think it could provide 2 points of protection when used with the Two Weapons talent, but that is a special exception.

Re: Main-Gauche
 

I agree with the first point. But still not sure on your second point..... But it says verbatim on page 13 of melee, "The left-hand dagger, or main-gauche, acts as a shield to parry 1 hit per attack, from non-missile, one-handed weapons only, from your front hexes. If you take an attack option, you can also make a separate dagger attack against the same enemy. It is rolled at -4DX. A main-gauche gets 1D-1 in HTH combat. A fighter may not use two daggers, or a main-gauche and dagger, in HTH combat.".... I mean it clearly says dagger or main-gauche gives the one point of protection... But again that is in the melee rules, still not clear if it is changed in ITL. And even if it is wouldn't it sill be up to GM on which rule to use?

Re: Main-Gauche
 

I also just looked at the weapon table of ITL on page 109. The main-gauche isn't even listed. But it is in melee.

Re: Main-Gauche
 

See ITL page 110

Re: Main-Gauche
 

Ok so in page 111 of ITL, it also says,"The left-hand dagger, or main-gauche, acts as a shield to parry 1 hit per attack, from non-missile, one-handed weapons only, from your front hexes. If you take an attack option, you can also make a separate dagger attack against the same enemy. It is rolled at -4DX. A figure with the Two Weapons talent can fight effectively with a regular weapon in each hand. A person who does not have this talent may attempt the same feat, but his DX will be -6 for each attack, and he gets do defensive advantage." So it seems like, according to ITL, that you would need that talent to get the 1hit protection. And it also says dagger or MG... So idk. But the first part of Left-Hand weapons in ITL pg. 111 and Left-Hand Daggers in Melee pg. 13 is exactly the same. Idk

Re: Main-Gauche
 

Ok I see now hcobb. So if you go purely by weapon table that makes sense. Also in melee it says the dagger does 1d+2 in HTH while the MG still does it's normal 1d-1. So in that light, I would say that the dagger would not give the 1point of protection as per the table in ITL on page 110, but would still do the 1d+2 damage in HTH as per the table in melee on page 14. So you would give up the extra damage with the dagger in HTH to get the 1 point of protection with the MG... And of course the Daggers can still be thrown... I guess?

Re: Main-Gauche
 

And the ST modifiers in ITL on page 122 would still apply to both weapons...

Re: Main-Gauche
 

I agree that it is potentially confusing that the description of the main gauche uses the word dagger, but I really don't think the intent was that you were supposed to interpret that as evidence that a dagger held in your left hand has the properties of a main gauche. They each get their own line in the weapon tables; they differ in cost and weight; and all the technical explanations of how a main gauche work refer to it by its 'proper' name. I'm almost 100 % sure that this was just a case of the author trying to explain the meaning of a possibly unfamiliar word, without considering that this clause might be taken as an 'actionable' rule. It's almost impossible to play TFT coherently unless you understand that the rules have a super precise structure, like a board game, but are not written with the precision of the more technical board game instructions. There is a lot of loose, imprecise language mixed in with the actual rules.

Re: Main-Gauche
 

I see your point larsdangly, and that does make sense. A lot of people probably don't realize that the MG is basically s short rapier, used mainly for thrusting attacks irl(that is, of course, a simplified description of the weapon). And, like a rapier, the MG is also designed to parry. But I would still use the 1d+2 for the dagger in HTH as per melee rules, and not have the 1 hit protection. That seems like a pretty fair trade off, since a dagger is designed to get up in your grill. While the MG is a slightly longer weapon than your standard dagger. The rules for the 2 weapons talent is still a bit confusing though, is it -6dx for both weapons with out that talent, and then just -4DX for your off hand with the talent?

Re: Main-Gauche
 

Visually MG in TFT is a reference to the dagger with a fancy guard style:

http://therionarms.com/reenact/therionarms_c942.html
(one pound)

and not the sword breaker (Assassins Creed style at 12 ounces)

or the Sai (2 pounds)

Compare to a 20 cm long (total length, blade is 3 inches), 90 grams, throwing dagger. (How exactly does this qualify to do a Defend option?)

Re: Main-Gauche
 

Melee/ITL has a relatively high level of 'versimilitude' as an engine for resolving skirmish combats, but a lot of its more granular details, including the stats for individual weapons, shouldn't be thought of as attempts to accurately represent a specific weapon or piece of armor. All the gear needs to be shoe horned into the trade-space of costs and benefits that define the game, and they don't all have a perfectly good fit. Thus the properties of 'Chainmail' aren't that great of a representation of historical chainmail, but there needs to be a name attached to the item that provides 3 pts of armor in exchange for 3 pts of DX reduction, and 'chainmail' is as good as any. The main gauche is clearly an attempt to abstractly represent a variety of historical off-handed parrying weapons, but it also has to have a mix of traits that don't make it useless or a super-weapon. The end result is one person's idea of what that compromise should look like.

Re: Main-Gauche
 

Right you are hcobb, that makes perfect sense to me now. And thanks again larsdangly. Can you clarify the 2 weapons talent question I had in my previous post?

Re: Main-Gauche
 

In that sentence, "The left-hand dagger, or main-gauche" refers to the same weapon - the main-gauche, whose name is French for "left hand". It is not talking about ordinary daggers held in the left hand.

Re: Main-Gauche
 

Yes. It's perhaps clearer if you also study the Two Weapons talent description in ITL on page 41.

With two full-sized weapons and the Two Weapons talent, you can attack with one weapon at no penalty and another weapon at -4 DX.

With two full-sized weapons but NO Two Weapons talent, you can attack with both weapons, but both attacks will be at -6 DX.

Re: Main-Gauche
 

Thanks Skarg, for the clarification. And thanks to everyone else who helped me clarify things as well. Y'all have all been very helpful and patient. But just one more question. If you don't have two weapns talent, and say you are using a sword and MG. Does the -6DX still apply, or is for if you are using t swords, or sword and axe, etc... Again thank for all the help. Y'all are great.

Re: Main-Gauche
 

Nevermind, I just found it. So all is well. Thanks again. It's amazing what you learn when you actually read stuff lol. Thanks again Skarg for the page number reference.

Re: Main-Gauche
 

I realize I am way late on sticking my oar in this and probably off base as well, but, I checked my copy of original Advanced Melee and found one bit of text that is different than today's version. The original rules allowed that one could attack with the main-gauche and still use it to stop one hit of damage on the same turn. Rules also indicated it was only -1 DX used as a shield, but the shield armor table says, -2 DX/-4 DX. It is long past remembering what we used to do with this, but I think we made the main-gauche -2 DX only on a turn where we used it as a shield and attacked with it.

If this doesn't help, please excuse me for my intrusion.

Re: Main-Gauche
 

No it's all good warhorse. In the new melee rules it basically. Just says that you can parry the 1 hit, as well as, use the extra attack on the same figure at -4DX for the attack, but no dx penalty for MA.

Re: Main-Gauche
 

Yes. The new Legacy Edition changed some things about Main Gauche and Spike Shields, and both editions have some typos on their Main Gauche entries on the weapon tables. IIRC Advanced Melee weapon table mirrors original Melee, but the text says something different.

Re: Main-Gauche
 

I guess at the end of the day, it's all up to the GM to determine how the rules will actually play out. I feel like, as long as the GM and players are in agreement or can make a fair compromise, then all the better. The long and skinny is that the game should be fun and fair for everyone involved. And if that's the case, then everyone wins. Until they take an axe to the face anyway... Lol