Entangling weapons fix

[Shostak]

Untested idea for bolas:

Aimed shot not necessary. If the bola hits, it inflicts 1d (1d-2?) MA penalty. If a figure is reduced to MA 0, they fall to the ground. A bola may be removed like Rope.

[phiwum]

Originally Posted by larsdangly

Do you enforce aiming penalties? That might reduce chances of success enough that you don't need to impose further restrictions.

I don't thus far. It strikes me that the aiming penalties are part of the "optional rules" while the bola, etc., are described in the standard rules, so it would be a stretch that the aiming penalties were intended for use with the entangling weapons.

Of course, intended or not, the penalties might balance the weapons out. But a -4 DX penalty (minimum for each throw) would be pretty damned dramatic. It would be offset by the +2 DX bonus for the prerequisite Thrown Weapons Skill. But a character with a "natural" adjDX of 12 (counting armor, etc.) would have at best an adjDX of 9 for any throw of the bola -- and that assumes the target is only one hex away. He has, therefore, a 38% chance to hit.

The way I'm playing it, the same character can throw only every other turn but in the above situation, he would have an adjDX of 13, so would hit 84% of the time.

We could take away the +2 DX for thrown weapons (with or without taking away the ready-and-throw features), and the same guy would hit 63% of the time.

Right now, just taking away ready-and-throw has left the bola pretty darned good weapon. I may nerf it a bit more some time, but I'm not sure I like the drop in odds that the aimed penalties produces.

ETA: Two comments more.

First, I agree with Axly's thematic point that at least hitting the legs should be relatively easy with a bola. I'm not sure about arms, though RAW suggests that should be easy too.

Second, again for reasons of realism, I guess that a bola ought to have a minimum distance like the lasso. I'm not sure that you really could throw it just one hex away. I doubt I'll do anything about this concern, partly because I don't have any confidence that I know what the minimum distance should be (my guess would be two or three hexes).

[larsdangly]

Originally Posted by Shostak

Untested idea for bolas:

Aimed shot not necessary. If the bola hits, it inflicts 1d (1d-2?) MA penalty. If a figure is reduced to MA 0, they fall to the ground. A bola may be removed like Rope.

But then it becomes implausibly ineffective. If you threw such a bola at its intended target type (game animals), it wouldn't bring anything down until you'd wrapped literally a dozen bolas around it.

[larsdangly]

Originally Posted by phiwum

I don't thus far. It strikes me that the aiming penalties are part of the "optional rules" while the bola, etc., are described in the standard rules, so it would be a stretch that the aiming penalties were intended for use with the entangling weapons.

Of course, intended or not, the penalties might balance the weapons out. But a -4 DX penalty (minimum for each throw) would be pretty damned dramatic. It would be offset by the +2 DX bonus for the prerequisite Thrown Weapons Skill. But a character with a "natural" adjDX of 12 (counting armor, etc.) would have at best an adjDX of 9 for any throw of the bola -- and that assumes the target is only one hex away. He has, therefore, a 38% chance to hit.

The way I'm playing it, the same character can throw only every other turn but in the above situation, he would have an adjDX of 13, so would hit 84% of the time.

We could take away the +2 DX for thrown weapons (with or without taking away the ready-and-throw features), and the same guy would hit 63% of the time.

Right now, just taking away ready-and-throw has left the bola pretty darned good weapon. I may nerf it a bit more some time, but I'm not sure I like the drop in odds that the aimed penalties produces.

The penalties are a problem. I tried to see the best 'lawyer-talk' argument in favor of them above, but am also troubled by what they do to weapon effectiveness. We have to remember that these 'wonder weapons' sit in a competitive landscape where the default expectation is that most weapons carried by most competent combatants can kill or incapacitate you in one good hit.

[Shostak]

Originally Posted by larsdangly

But then it becomes implausibly ineffective. If you threw such a bola at its intended target type (game animals), it wouldn't bring anything down until you'd wrapped literally a dozen bolas around it.

The MA penalty could be higher. 2d? or 3d if aimed at legs? I'm just trying to do away w/the outcome of complete success on a hit. Bolas don't always wrap as effectively as one would want.

[phiwum]

Originally Posted by Shostak

The MA penalty could be higher. 2d? or 3d if aimed at legs? I'm just trying to do away w/the outcome of complete success on a hit. Bolas don't always wrap as effectively as one would want.

I think an issue is that a horse has an MA of 24 or so while a man has MA of 12 at most (14 for elves with Running). If you use 3d, say, it would take on average three bolas to bring down a horse and one bola to bring down an average man. There would be a little less than 50/50 chance *NOT* to bring down a man with one bola, and a horse would be considerably slowed after one bola, but it could not be brought down unless there was a critical hit (and such hits apply to the die roll, which would be totally reasonable).

Now, this issue is probably mostly a matter of "realism" and not game balance. I think a bola is effective at bringing down a horse and it doesn't take three of them to do it. But in game terms, it's fair to say that most bolas are not thrown at such speedy animals and so you might think this is a reasonable fudge.

[larsdangly]

The outcome (brought to the ground on a solid hit that wraps limbs and body) probably should scale with the target's ST in some way. The unrealistic outcomes that have been suggested are a dozen bolas needed to strip up a rabbit and one bola bringing down a horse. in reality, any bola that touched a rabbit would detonate it, and you could throw bolas at horses all day without one of them falling over. So, somehow all of the ideas that have been suggested (mine included) are no good. The humanoid targets that are most relevant to in-game uses are frustratingly ambiguous. I actually have no physical intuition about how hard or easy it would be to make a person fall to the ground using a bola. And I doubt anyone else really knows either.

[Shostak]

Originally Posted by larsdangly

So, somehow all of the ideas that have been suggested (mine included) are no good.

This is why I hate bolas (and the other exotic weapons, for that matter).

I actually have no physical intuition about how hard or easy it would be to make a person fall to the ground using bolas. And I doubt anyone else really knows either.

The fact that they weren’t standard issue in the Roman legions should be a clue. I’ve read that they were used by Inca soldiers, but not in any more detail than that.

From what I’ve been able to learn, bolas are usually used against fast-moving targets. They might be useful to slave-hunters, but they just don’t seem to have made much of a mark on military history. If I’m wrong, I’d be happy to learn how the bolas are more practical a weapon than I give them credit for.

[TippetsTX]

I think a little common sense is warranted.

As @Shostak (and others) has mentioned, bolas were primarily designed for hunting and livestock management. Their size or length is dictated by the size of their target and I expect any version of the weapon designed to be used against man-sized bipedal figures would at least require a full unobstructed hex-width to spin up and a couple rotations before release. This means (for me) NO ready-and-throw in the same round. This also means you can't use them against adjacent foes so normal thrown weapon range penalties probably shouldn't apply. That said, they will also have very limited effectiveness against a stationary target. They are designed to bring down something moving... ideally something moving quickly. The target's momentum enhances the weapon's impact.

Considering factors like these has always been sufficient for managing bolas in my own game.

[Axly Suregrip]

We've discussed bolas before. Just over a year ago:

http://forums.sjgames.com/showthread...highlight=bola

The weapon in TFT is over powered. Both from a game balance perspective and from a historical/reality perspective. It would be nice if the game had a new edition where this would be addressed instead of each GM coming up with their own fixes.

Bolas, whips, lassos and nets all need to be revisited.