Re: Slicing vs Hacking
 

Axes and halberds have a higher base damage and this is what helps compromise armour. The edge protection rule will still deliver damage to the victim, but as crushing, not cutting.

Re: Slicing vs Hacking
 

... huh? Draw cut is not going to target the Vitals - they're in a bit too deep for that. It also needs to work on limbs, which a "only targets Vitals" technique cannot do. I'm having difficulty imagining it somehow being more difficult to Dodge or Parry. Also, a draw cut (as generally advertised) is essentially the opposite of an impaling attack - it is more cutting than Cutting.

Finally, your damage profiles look like some sort of house rule. The damage multiplier for Vitals replaces the normal multiplier. Also, it is x3 for piercing and impaling, x2 for tight beam burning. Cutting cannot target the Vitals at all.

Re: Slicing vs Hacking
 

Then, would I be correct in assuming that Low Tech will increase the damage for those weapons? In the Basic Set, they do a bit more damage than swords: sw+2 vs. sw+1 for axe vs. broadsword and sw+3 vs. sw+3 for greataxe vs. two-handed sword. It ain't much. That said, I've always been partial to axe and shield. They complement each other so well.

Re: Slicing vs Hacking
 

Well, colour me disappointed. I thought this was a comparison of hacking and the Star Wars universe equivalent, slicing. :(

Re: Slicing vs Hacking
 

It definitely needs to work on limbs. My understanding of the real attraction of the draw cut in longsword fighting is that you can parry, reposition your blade by using your opponents blade as a fulcrum or by repositioning, and then deliver a draw cut to an area like the arms or the face. It's a valuable technique because it allows you to deliver an attack off of a defense without compromising your own defenses much. The downside is that it isn't likely to inflict a serious wound. It's the sort of thing that hurts your opponent, makes him bleed, but probably isn't going to take him out of the fight on its own.

Re: Slicing vs Hacking
 

A fendente cut is a draw cut and is taught as a basic downward blow from the Fiore school of training. I doubt it counts as a Hard maneuver or even as a separate maneuver at all--it part of learning to use the sword as a weapon, period. We were taught it about 30 minutes after having picked up the waster.

Re: Slicing vs Hacking
 

I also agree that draw cutting shouldn't be a special technique, because both slicing and hacking are basic parts of using a sword to cut with. Some schools prefer one or the other, but others (like Fiore's system of fighting) don't mention the distinction.

In GURPS, I think we can assume that a skilled character uses whichever is appropriate at the time. A weak draw cut from the bind to an exposed area would be a Defensive Attack for example.

Re: Slicing vs Hacking
 

Humm, I definitely did not put enough thought into that technique, completely disregard it.

My justification for targeting vitals, while wrong, was opperating on: you can't just cut across the ribs, it's got to be somewhere with soft bits, be it the belly, arm, neck, or groin so take the target the vitals penalty and you can aim for the stomache/muscle in arm/etc. But it was wrong- there must be a better way to model this.

However my statement about the math of it remains; damage should not increase, just the wounding modifier/armor absorption- Perhaps a drawn cut could be a combat option for balanced cutting weapons that: quadruples foes DR (grants DR 2 to unarmored foes), doubles wounding penalty (so you can be reduced as far as -8), reduces damage required to cripple a limb/induce shock to 3/4

Re: Slicing vs Hacking
 

Yeah I think damage has been increased by +1. An unbalanced weapon should do more damage than a balanced weapon of the same weight.

Re: Slicing vs Hacking
 

I was so sure this was a thread about cyberpunk computer-system intrusion.