Reducing the number of weapon skills

[kirbwarrior]

Originally Posted by maximara

You missed the point I was raised ie the standard skills come of better than the weapon wildcard skills.

Which makes me think you missed my point. If you strip off all the fun benefits of wildcard skills like impulse points, extra damage, etc. and leave just the skill use, I'd argue Sword! wouldn't be worth it as a regular VH skill, let alone a wildcard skill. Further take away the side skills like Acrobatics (Only while wielding a sword) and its even more lacking. Add in being able to use any melee weapon and you have something probably on par with other VH skills like Alchemy, Computer Hacking, Surgery, etc. Optional specialties being common and recommended bring things closer in line and Kromm's perk idea further balances things.

[Fred Brackin]

Originally Posted by Anthony

My point is that I think that ordinary (non-wildcard) skills should be much broader, .

If we're doing that, Broadswrd is an odd place to start. It's already a very "broad" Skill.

If I was fixing overly narrow Skills I'd do it some place where overspecialization is much more obvious. Perhaps in that tangle of Skills affected by Business Acumen.

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by Fred Brackin

If we're doing that, Broadswrd is an odd place to start. It's already a very "broad" Skill.

You may have missed my proposal to reduce all melee weapons to a single "melee weapons" skill with optional specialization...

[Fred Brackin]

Originally Posted by Anthony

You may have missed my proposal to reduce all melee weapons to a single "melee weapons" skill with optional specialization...

No, I didn't miss it. I simply ignored it as a bad idea.

Or possibly a theoretical solution in search of an actual problem. I've run in the past for groups that wanted simple combat. I've never even seen anyone who wanted a Technical Grappling level of detail but I've also never seen anyone who complained about having to have different Skills for broadswords and axes.

[Anders]

Originally Posted by Fred Brackin

No, I didn't miss it. I simply ignored it as a bad idea.

Or possibly a theoretical solution in search of an actual problem. I've run in the past for groups that wanted simple combat. I've never even seen anyone who wanted a Technical Grappling level of detail but I've also never seen anyone who complained about having to have different Skills for broadswords and axes.

I've had people complaining about the various sword skills, wanting to simplify them to one.

[Polydamas]

Originally Posted by Fred Brackin

No, I didn't miss it. I simply ignored it as a bad idea.

Or possibly a theoretical solution in search of an actual problem. I've run in the past for groups that wanted simple combat. I've never even seen anyone who wanted a Technical Grappling level of detail but I've also never seen anyone who complained about having to have different Skills for broadswords and axes.

The current rules are a real issue, they make changing hand weapons crippling when really it was routine. High-status warriors learned all the hand weapons in their cultures and swapped between them as needed.

Its odd because GURPS combat rules are based heavily on the SCA, and SCA fighters have to learn a range of weapons as weekend warriors.

[AlexanderHowl]

Which would be easily solved by having a DX/H Fencing skill and a DX/H Sword skill (which would default to each other at -4). The individual fencing and sword skills then become optional DX/A specialties. SCA people tend to specialize in a preferred weapon combination in my experience, though they dabble with a few others.

[Polydamas]

No, I mean changes like "charge and break your lance, draw an estoc, drop the estoc, pull out a hammer, beat their helmet in, put it away and draw a cutting sword ..." Historically, high-status warriors, the kind who would have several skills around 12-14 in GURPS Tactical Shooting terms, carried as many sidearms as they could and swapped as needed.

To make that happen in GURPS, the price of being competent in a variety of weapons has to be competitive with the advantage of having just the right weapon. If its easier to just make your best weapon work, characters will do that. That means less harsh defaults between skills and probably fewer skills.

[Tyneras]

If I were doing it, I'd Split them up as One-Handed, Two-Handed and Long Reach. Fencing would a special property/technique of One-Handed weapons that are exceptionally light compared to the users Basic Lift. Balanced vs Unbalanced would be either mandatory specialization/technique or another division, making 6 skills total. Whips would be a difficult technique of one-handed weapons (do two handed whips exist?).

[AlexanderHowl]

Originally Posted by Polydamas

No, I mean changes like "charge and break your lance, draw an estoc, drop the estoc, pull out a hammer, beat their helmet in, put it away and draw a cutting sword ..." Historically, high-status warriors, the kind who would have several skills around 12-14 in GURPS Tactical Shooting terms, carried as many sidearms as they could and swapped as needed.

To make that happen in GURPS, the price of being competent in a variety of weapons has to be competitive with the advantage of having just the right weapon. If its easier to just make your best weapon work, characters will do that. That means less harsh defaults between skills and probably fewer skills.

People who were highly skilled at multiple forms of combat were historically very rare (and are likely best modeled with higher levels of DX). Even a professional fighter would only have a few combat skills at 14, several at 12, and the rest at default. Since the majority of combatants throughout history were conscripts, levies, or militias, I doubt that they had more than one combat skill at 12, a couple at 10, and the rest at default.