Wizard Vows

[Ts_]

Originally Posted by Kromm

I'd give -15 points for that one. :)

I think Kuroshima would want to play a NERFed Mystic Knight. Would that still be a -15?

More seriously, why is "no edged weapons" worth -10 points? I just don't see it unless the PC has already put points into edged weapons. And even then, you can still use training weapons with cr instead of cut damage at full skill. You could get +2 Striking ST for this after all.

Sure, it sounds like a severe thing, but let's compare it to Vow ("Never speak") [-15]. That makes a wizard completely useless (unless he has very high skill). The "no edged weapons" only inconveniences a fighter (the class that is supposed to depend on weapons). Also, "Never speak" applies in way more situations than just combat. It affects anyone using social interactions. It's bad for Leadership/Tactics in combat etc. There's a reason "Mute" is worth [-25] even to character concepts that don't especially rely on speech. So why is "Never speak" only [-15]?

From this I draw the conclusion that Vow ("Never speak") [-15] is appropriately priced, but "no edged weapons" is way too munchkinny. You could also say that a Vow should cost as much as the disadvantage it represents and price Never Speak as [-25]. I don't agree but I also think Vows can be broken on rare occasions without lasting consequences (if you try to restore yourself in front of your god etc), so they aren't quite as severe as the real disadvantage. (I've already tried to expand on this upthread to accomodate different kinds of Vows, in particular those that cannot be broken ...)

Thanks for any insight into "No edged weapons"!
Ts

[Darieltis]

Originally Posted by Ts_

More seriously, why is "no edged weapons" worth -10 points? I just don't see it unless the PC has already put points into edged weapons. And even then, you can still use training weapons with cr instead of cut damage at full skill. You could get +2 Striking ST for this after all.

I would imagine it has to do with damage type...edged weapons can do cutting damage or impaling (some anyway), and both of those types get multipliers for penetrating damage...plus the ability to amputate limbs etc. Blunt weapons do crushing damage only iirc.

[Anaraxes]

Vow: Do One-Third to One-Half Injury To All Targets [-10]

[Ts_]

Originally Posted by Darieltis

I would imagine it has to do with damage type...edged weapons can do cutting damage or impaling (some anyway), and both of those types get multipliers for penetrating damage...plus the ability to amputate limbs etc. Blunt weapons do crushing damage only iirc.

Originally Posted by Anaraxes

Vow: Do One-Third to One-Half Injury To All Targets [-10]

"no edged weapons" in my understanding would allow imp weapons like a spear, many fencing weapons and a bow. Is it a Vow against anything sharp or just against things with an edge? That's where my problem my stem from.

By the way, if it's -10 because edged weapons are so good, how about "no cr weapons", which would also seem like -10 on Kromm's list (not RAW, but a good starting point).

Regards
Ts

[Lord Carnifex]

Originally Posted by Ts_

"no edged weapons" in my understanding would allow imp weapons like a spear, many fencing weapons and a bow. Is it a Vow against anything sharp or just against things with an edge? That's where my problem my stem from.

To my mind, "no edged weapons" also encompasses "no pointed weapons". In GURPS terms, that means weapons that only do crushing damage. As a GM, I would also read that to mean no weapons that could be used as impaling or cutting, so no using the butt ends of spears or flats of swords.

I'd also suggest that the value of the vow is not simply because crushing weapons are inherently worse than cutting or impaling ones (arguably, they're not), but because the character is sealing himself off from 2/3rds of the low-tech weapons in the world. If the character breaks into an armory and finds only swords, he's out of luck. If the monster can only be killed by piercing its eyes, then the character must rely on allies or run away. He's limiting his options pretty severely.

[Flyndaran]

But what's such a wizard's rationale for a blunt weapons only vow?
I mean, I may think that many collections of beliefs seem pulled out of rears, but they must have reasons if only ones that make sense only to themselves.

[David Johnston2]

Originally Posted by Flyndaran

But what's such a wizard's rationale for a blunt weapons only vow?
I mean, I may think that many collections of beliefs seem pulled out of rears, but they must have reasons if only ones that make sense only to themselves.

I thought about it and decided that the wizard's vow of only using things like staffs and knives could be a compromise of an original ethic that said "no weapons" period. So they only carry things that can be described as having other purposes but can be used as a weapon if needed. A knife for eating. A staff for helping you walk.

[Ts_]

Originally Posted by Lord Carnifex

I'd also suggest that the value of the vow is not simply because crushing weapons are inherently worse than cutting or impaling ones (arguably, they're not), but because the character is sealing himself off from 2/3rds of the low-tech weapons in the world. If the character breaks into an armory and finds only swords, he's out of luck.

Some characters don't have any sword skill, and would at most get a incompentency quirk for that. (Besides, the munchkin in me would argue that striking with the flat blade is allowed under such a Vow. Or just use an improvised club. Besides, you're a freaking wizard ...)

Originally Posted by Lord Carnifex

If the monster can only be killed by piercing its eyes, then the character must rely on allies or run away. He's limiting his options pretty severely.

That is exactly an argument that cut/imp/pi is better than cr and doesn't explain why "no blunt weapons" should also be -10.

Really, what are the game mechanical effects that make the restriction of a wizard to staff, club, shields, tonfa, net, bolas, maybe sling a -10 disadvantage? You could build a perfectly fine wizard around that and most people wouldn't even notice that he cannot use a sword or a pickaxe. That it isn't much of a restriction unless the PC has points in those weapon skills. Which the wizard presumably doesn't care about. He doesn't need to improvise with broken bottles (use pool cues) or pick up a weapon when he couldn't bring his own because he's got build in weapons.

And please, compare that to a wizard that has sworn "keep silence at all times", which is also a -10 vow (not even -15) in the Basic Set. Tell me why that character isn't entirely useless. (Yes, dance a.k.a. gesture-only magery would help. But it comes with a big build-it discount, so this would be double-dipping imho.)

I really don't get it. A fighter can be quite competent with a -10 vow that just screams "I'm bad for fighters". A wizard can be completely obliterated by another -10 vow but should still be allowed the same -10 vow designed against fighters? Huh? Something isn't priced right here. If you think that the weapon restrictions is a -10, please make the vow of silence a -20 at least or even the full -25 for mute.

Regards
Ts

[Bruno]

Originally Posted by Ts_

And please, compare that to a wizard that has sworn "keep silence at all times", which is also a -10 vow (not even -15) in the Basic Set. Tell me why that character isn't entirely useless. (Yes, dance a.k.a. gesture-only magery would help. But it comes with a big build-it discount, so this would be double-dipping imho.)

Why? The character can't talk - the effect on spellcasting is only part of it (and even then high enough skill eliminates it). Would you tell a Dance Mage that they can't get -30 points back from Mute because they can still cast spells?

Never mind that a Dance Mage isn't just a gesture mage - they need to be standing with their legs free and on a good enough surface to dance on. It's like a sub-skill-12 mage without the time penalty and the added shouting.

[Kromm]

Originally Posted by Ts_

"no edged weapons" in my understanding would allow imp weapons like a spear, many fencing weapons and a bow. Is it a Vow against anything sharp or just against things with an edge?

"Anything that does cutting, impaling, or piercing damage" is what it means . . . it definitely outlaws arrows, rapiers, spears, and other stabbing weapons, as well as bullets.