Peculiar Weapons

[tomc]

We never had a problem with them as written. We took "peculiar" to mean "rare". That, coupled with "Thou Shalt Not Disgruntle the GM" kept them from being abused.

If playing primarily as a tactical board game, instead of as an RPG, then it makes perfect sense to nerf/delete them.

Either way, I still have my original copy. :)

[Jim Kane]

I would NOT delete; I would go 180 Degrees the other direction and define, refine, and expand the individual PLAY RULES for each and every weapon, so that they ALL play different in their handling - even if the damage delivered is properly equalized and abusive-rules eliminated.

One of the great features of say Net & Trident, is the expanded and unique rule-set, which makes that weapon-set PLAY different from say using a Javelin and Bola in combination.

A Thrown Dagger should PLAY different than Sha-ken, and a Katana should PLAY different than a Broadsword - even if the delivered damage is properly scaled and equalized.

Changing a name, and assigning a different damage does nothing to affect how that weapon PLAYS different in your character's hand; the difference in feel is solely reflected in-play by the individual and unique rules-sets for a specific weapon.

Define, Refine, and Expand the individual weapons rules, and make them better!

JK

[Kirk]

This is an interesting topic, and I'm glad SJ is giving the rules a think.

Lots has already been said, but just for my two cents after having played this game since 1977 with a first edition Melee, we housed ruled a lot of these special weapons or they often became the go to, especially for hired thugs or one trick pony PCs.

So with bolas, we allowed cutting them off for removal with any bladed weapon to effectively destroy them after one use, as an example. The others often were not "available" by order of the GM, based on location or time period or culture. Boomerangs could break or be lost in the woods or off cliffs, etc.

If available, great cries were often heard by the PCs when a throwaway gang of NPCs were armed with poisoned sha-ken that put a quick end to the PCs in time to play some other game that evening, to everyone's dismay.

So even poison can be a problem if not handled well by the GM, but how all of this should be handled, whether by availability or decree, is up to SJ. Hopefully the genius that gave us the original system is still available to give us the just-right porridge to make a very good game great!

[Bayarea]

I say nerf them a little, bolas and whips are basically fine as they are.

For the Naginata make it spear damage but allow a sweeping blow after all it as used that way.

Sha-ken probably do to much damage as I can not see them penetrating Leather armor let alone chainmail. Maybe 1 die divided by 2 max 3 damage unless double or triple damage. Only allow one star to be thrown for aimed shots.

The others can be modified slightly to fall in line with the other rules.

My biggest thing would be to move their rules to another section so the basic rules are all together. For example pole arms and shield rush rules should be before any of the peculiar weapons stuff.

[Chris Rice]

No!!!! Thou shalt not delete the Peculiar Weapons! To me, these were another of the unique features of the system, and to delete them would be an appalling crime. Don't do it!

We always played with them pretty much as written with no real problems. However, as GM I'd restrict the availability of the weapon and/or Talent. For instance, only Dwarves in my campaign could use gunpowder weapons, as the propellant (powdered Dragon bone) was only available from the Dwarf mines and was jealously guarded. The theft of a large quantity of this was the subject of a whole mini-campaign.

As another example, Naginatas were only available to a certain caste of warrior Monks, etc.

I appreciate that such restrictions are harder to build into the rules, and without them the peculiar weapons may be open to abuse, but please don't do away with them. At least keep them as optional rules.

[Skarg]

Originally Posted by Bayarea

I say nerf them a little, bolas and whips are basically fine as they are.

Little Jim (32 points)
ST 9 Bola, Whip, and/or Lasso
DX 15 (17 thrown) Satchel full of boomerangs 2d
IQ 8
MA 10
Thrown Weapons, Boomerang, Bola, Whip, Lasso

Supro The Great (53 points)
ST 19 Very Fine Pike Axe 2d + 4
DX 19 Very Fine Great Sword 3d +3
IQ 15
MA 10
Sword, Pole Weapons, Warrior, Veteran, Fencing, Unarmed Combat I

The problem with Bolas, Whip, and Lasso, is that if Little Jim can use any of them on Supro The Great, he can knock down Supro by making his to-hit roll (which is mostly going to be nearly-certain) and Supro won't be able to get up next turn, so Supro is more or less doomed. i.e. there are almost no ways to not be taken out by those weapons except to somehow not be hit, making the skills of the target irrelevant, and making these weapons a "take anyone down" device. Whips also ignore intervening figures (meaning Little Jim can stand behind some hobgoblins using Defend to avoid getting engaged, and still easily knock people engaging the hobgoblins down), and Lasso uses missile weapon to-hit modifiers (meaning Little Jim can easily lasso people and knock them down (and keep them down unless they have ST20) up to 15 hexes away).

i.e. they need more difficulties/uncertainty and saving throws.

[Rick_Smith]

Originally Posted by Skarg

...

The problem with Bolas, Whip, and Lasso, is that if Little Jim can use any of them on Supro The Great, he can knock down Supro by making his to-hit roll (which is mostly going to be nearly-certain) and Supro won't be able to get up next turn, so Supro is more or less doomed. ...

i.e. they need more difficulties/uncertainty and saving throws.

Hi Everyone, Skarg.
I totally agree with you. I use the peculiar weapons in my campaign but I've rewritten them so that these weapons have contests and saving throws.

I would be perfectly happy if they stay in TFT, but they need to be reworked.

Warm regards, Rick.

[David Bofinger]

There are certainly huge problems in this section but I would try to save some of the weapons at least because variety is good and TFT doesn't have much.

For naginata I would

• Delete the requirement to buy an extra talent: I don't think they're harder to learn to use than e.g. halberds, if anything easier because they only really have one attack mode
• Keep the low ST: they were historically considered a good weapon for low ST characters, e.g. women
• Eliminate the charge bonus damage: many naginatas have the end of the blade so curved over they can't jab
• Keep the charge priority and jab rights: for length
• Reduce the damage to fit: 2-2 would probably be OK, 1+1 might be a little harsh
• Perhaps add another weapon with similar characteristics, larger damage and higher ST requirement, called a glaive.

For other weapons I'd err on the side of nerfing but I'm not sure of details.

[ecz]

in my opinion the peculiar weapons are a distintive trait of TFT that should be mantained.

I understand the possible abuse, but a wise GM should be able to limit their use to (N)PC that have a realistic reason to use them.

Also, if played in conjunction with rules about talents learning, teachers, weapon's damage/usure, and difficult to find/manifacture them due their inherent rarity, they are a resource for the game and a possibile source of adventure by themselves.

As regards the "unidirectional" characters specialized in just one thing, again the wise GM can make happen things that prove this is a sucidial choice.

We need just a paragraph explaining their use and limits during a CG.

[Skarg]

Originally Posted by David Bofinger

For naginata I would

• Delete the requirement to buy an extra talent: I don't think they're harder to learn to use than e.g. halberds, if anything easier because they only really have one attack mode
• Keep the low ST: they were historically considered a good weapon for low ST characters, e.g. women
• Eliminate the charge bonus damage: many naginatas have the end of the blade so curved over they can't jab
• Keep the charge priority and jab rights: for length
• Reduce the damage to fit: 2-2 would probably be OK, 1+1 might be a little harsh
• Perhaps add another weapon with similar characteristics, larger damage and higher ST requirement, called a glaive.

Ooh! I like the idea of adding pole weapons that have the jab & attack priority but not the charge damage!