Main-Gauche

[Steve Jackson]

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.

[Chris Rice]

Originally Posted by Steve Jackson

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.

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.

[Steve Jackson]

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.

[Rick_Smith]

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.

[JLV]

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...

[Skarg]

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.

Originally Posted by Chris Rice

I can't even find the rules for the main-gauche!

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

Originally Posted by Steve Jackson

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.

I think I like this, at first consideration.

Originally Posted by Chris Rice

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.

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. ;-)

[ak_aramis]

Originally Posted by JLV

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...

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.)

[ak_aramis]

Originally Posted by Steve Jackson

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.

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.

[DouglasCole]

Originally Posted by Steve Jackson

Why would anyone ever take it instead of a shield?

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.

[Steve Jackson]

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.