Re: Talent for the weak: Cestus
 

The timing of this tangent is serendipitous. I got me an idea the other day...
https://forums.sjgames.com/showthread.php?t=194816

Re: Talent for the weak: Cestus
 

My point was more that the hands were bound. Cannot hold a weapon so it would be harder to grip someone you are grappling with. Thus the DX penalty should remain.

Re: Talent for the weak: Cestus
 

I was thinking out loud. I probably wouldn't impose such fatigue but wouldn't have to in most cases even if I did due to the battle duration. If the battle were to drag on, fatigue would be a concern for the GM to take into effect. Did you mean 2 lbs. for a rapier? If one has the talent for it, fatigue should probably not be a concern in typical battle scenarios.

If I recall, professional boxers tend to use lighter gloves (<10 oz.). They probably have little to no fatigue imposed by their gloves due to their strength and physical condition.

Re: Talent for the weak: Cestus
 

Perhaps. I'll have to think about that some. With two cesti, one can hook an arm around the foe. With one cestus, there is a free hand for grappling.

Re: Talent for the weak: Cestus
 

Hi, Bill.

No. Rapier is listed as 1 lb (16 oz.) in my copy of ITL, which makes it 2 oz. heavier than the 14 oz. boxing gloves you mentioned (unless the listed weight is for the pair, rather than per glove).

Re: Talent for the weak: Cestus
 

Thanks for the explanation. I would probably need to check to make sure but, from the way that my arms felt after 3 minutes of swinging them around, I'm inclined to believe that each glove was 14 oz. LOL!

The combat would have to drag on longer than most for such a fatigue to be imposed. And, to be truly accurate, a GM would have to take into account the amount of time that the PCs were actually in combat and swinging them.

So, if it takes 12 turns of active combat while wielding the weapons, if there are a couple of turns where that does not happen, how many turns of recovery does that represent and how many turns does that add to the count?

This is why I probably wouldn't impose such fatigue. First, it's unlikely to come into play and, if it does, it would just be too complicated for what it's worth to the game.

Now, if you have characters that aren't hitting or inflicting damage inflicting damage after a long number of turns, a GM may want to start taking fatigue into account.

Re: Talent for the weak: Cestus
 

I usually try not to "weigh in" on this type of thing, but since there has been some mention of historical verisimilitude on this thread. . .

Examples of historical rapiers found in museums and private collections usually run from 2.5 to 4 lbs.

Examples of historical smallswords come closer to the 1lb average.

Re: Talent for the weak: Cestus
 

Yeah, the weights in ITL are not necessarily realistic. But they are the listed weights.

Re: Talent for the weak: Cestus
 

Personally I consider the weapon names to be suggestive and if the player wants a heavy sabre or a light claymore then pick the weapon with the "right stats" and rename it.


Which is why I lean towards Fencing is just Sword Expertise.

Re: Talent for the weak: Cestus
 

Yes, I totally agree.

Fencing is limited to Sabers and lower because it is better than Weapon Expert (Shrewd blow is easier). So, Weapon Expert with Swords starts with Short Swords and up.

-

Neither of which is about Cestus. My apologies to the OP.