My thoughts on Staves

[Peter V. Dell'Orto]

Originally Posted by Icelander

So I reduce the damage of all weapons used with Staff* to thr+1 cr and sw+1 cr. That way, if a character wants to make a powerful swing, he has to use Two-Handed Sword skill for it and if he wants to thrust for thr+2 damage, he needs to use Spear skill or Reverse Grip.

The thing about doing this is that it's suddenly doing the same damage as a lot of one-handed wooden swinging weapons (like the light club, hook sword, knobbed club, small round mace, bokken used in one hand...). My personal experience with staves, and what I've gotten from folks who contact-spar with them, and what little physics I remember, says the two-handed staff should be doing more damage than them. If you fix this by lowing those one-handed weapons in damage, you have to spill that fix all the way down the line to include just about any one-handed weapon.

It also oddly implies that this weapon is most effective as a weapon when used as if it was another weapon entirely. That's...boggling on a lot of levels. Not the least of which is that I'm not sure why Two-Handed Sword would teach you a better, more effective swinging for a 6' stick than the actual Staff skill would. They don't mutually default, either, so you couldn't ever learn that one clever grip-and-swing technique to get +1 damage without learning a whole new skill. Spear is a less glaring case, but I'm not sure what you are learning in Spear School that makes you poke better with blunt weapons than the folks who actually learn to fight with that specific blunt weapon.

The mid-point Parry bonus approach isn't a bad idea, though, but damage gets funky when you try to move points around. As you know, the upcoming GURPS Low-Tech does that, but generally we moved a few underpowered (and thus underused) weapons up, since there isn't much room to create more spread in the exiting range of weapons.

[lwcamp]

Originally Posted by Icelander

So I reduce the damage of all weapons used with Staff* to thr+1 cr and sw+1 cr. That way, if a character wants to make a powerful swing, he has to use Two-Handed Sword skill for it and if he wants to thrust for thr+2 damage, he needs to use Spear skill or Reverse Grip.

Maybe instead of making a staff master learn lots of different skills, you could just say that for sw+2 or thr+2, he must forfeit the +2 to parry for his round. Using the +2 to parry gives you sw+1 and thr+1.

In fact, you could extend this to all pole weapons. Spears used at -1 to damage get +2 to parry. Halberds used at -1 to damage get +2 to parry. And so on. Heck, even a 2 handed sword held with one hand well along the blade might qualify for +2 to parry at -1 to damage (they were historically often used like this).

Luke

[Peter V. Dell'Orto]

Originally Posted by lwcamp

In fact, you could extend this to all pole weapons. Spears used at -1 to damage get +2 to parry. Halberds used at -1 to damage get +2 to parry. And so on. Heck, even a 2 handed sword held with one hand well along the blade might qualify for +2 to parry at -1 to damage (they were historically often used like this).

Maybe some kind of Defensive Grip (Martial Arts p. 110), or Defensive Attack (Martial Arts p. 100), you mean?

That's pretty much what those rules are there for, and what they do (especially in combination). I know this won't make the staff-is-too-powerful crowd happy, but frankly I don't see why it's so powerful.

Damage: sw+2/cr or thr+2/cr? Nice, but it's merely 1 point better than most 1-handed weapons, it's not better than any two-handed weapons, and it's only crushing, so you don't get any damage bonus past DR.

Defense: +2 to Parry, lots of improved defenses if you turn all the optional rules on. Good stuff, making it defensively worth it. A strong point in its favor but not as good as, say, fencing weapons vs. multiple attacks.

Reach: 1,2 is pretty sweet, but lots of two-handed weapons have that - swords have it too for their big swing attack, which is what they mostly get used for.

Odds-and-ends: It's two handed, so you can't keep using it after you get an arm or hand crippled. That's a big downside. It's terribly ineffective against missile attacks, like most melee weapons, and you can't supplement with a shield to get a Block score. If you have cinematic skills like Parry Missile Weapons, or if you are also a very-high-Dodge character, this is less of a problem, but then it's in-genre for you to be kicking ass all over the place. Even then, other melee weapons can replicate this effect.

I've been running GURPS a long time, but the killer wave of staff monsters has never come. Even killer staff NPCs are really annoying until someone with a higher skill just kills them anyway, or someone with a good ranged attack blows them away. The two-handed nature of the weapon is a real limiter in actual play, nevermind having to always tote around this big non-concealable stick. The damage is the next big limiter, because crushing just isn't that exciting, especially if you do sw+2/cr for like 2d+2 and your buddy is doing sw+/1 cut for like 2d+1 one-handed and has a shield or another weapon. Finally the lack of missile defenses is really annoying, so you have to be Staff Monster and Dodge Monster...and if you are Dodge Monster, who cares about the staff's superior Parry anyway? You go get something higher damage because defenses are already covered.

[Ulzgoroth]

Originally Posted by Toadkiller_Dog

Defense: +2 to Parry, lots of improved defenses if you turn all the optional rules on. Good stuff, making it defensively worth it. A strong point in its favor but not as good as, say, fencing weapons vs. multiple attacks.

Unless you're using the 'Parrying with Two-Handed Weapons' rules from MA123, in which case it's superior.

Originally Posted by Toadkiller_Dog

Odds-and-ends: It's two handed, so you can't keep using it after you get an arm or hand crippled. That's a big downside. It's terribly ineffective against missile attacks, like most melee weapons, and you can't supplement with a shield to get a Block score. If you have cinematic skills like Parry Missile Weapons, or if you are also a very-high-Dodge character, this is less of a problem, but then it's in-genre for you to be kicking ass all over the place. Even then, other melee weapons can replicate this effect.

Parry Missile Weapons is not cinematic (MA58), but other than that, yeah. Though if you did the sensible thing and used a spear as your staff, you can still use it in a one-handed spear grip.

[Peter V. Dell'Orto]

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

Unless you're using the 'Parrying with Two-Handed Weapons' rules from MA123, in which case it's superior.

If you using them, they're slightly better compared with a single fencing weapon. Most fencers in my games used either two fencing weapons (so you had two weapons to cascade down for penalties) or used a shield (against missile weapons). And Staff doesn't gain a +3 from Retreat like Fencing Weapons do, but a mere +1...which makes them a lot more functionally equal defensively compared one staff vs. one fencing weapon.

Compare:
Smallsword-16 gives Parry 11, -2 for additional parries after the first, +3 for Retreat.
Staff-16 gives Parry 13, -2 for additional parries after the first using the rules from MA123, +1 for Retreat.

So with retreat they both have a 14. Additional parries for smallsword are at 9, 7, 5, and of which get a potential +3. The staff gives 11, 9, 7, any of which get a potential +1.

And yeah, off-hand parrying will affect two-handed fencers, but I've yet to see a two-weapon user who didn't just pay his or her 1 point to get rid of that penalty entirely.

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

Parry Missile Weapons is not cinematic (MA58), but other than that, yeah. Though if you did the sensible thing and used a spear as your staff, you can still use it in a one-handed spear grip.

True. The skill isn't cinematic - but it's not very effective at a low point investment, and the +2 Parry for the staff does little more than eat up the -2 to parry quarrels and arrows. And it's another P/H skill to learn and improve, since it doesn't go up as you improve Staff.

If you use a spear as a staff, you'll need to learn two skills - not many weapons using two skills turn into a Reign of Terror in my games, because you could have gotten 2x as good at one of those skills. Staff @ DX+8 (32 points) is generally more attractive than Spear @ DX+4 and Staff @ DX+4 (16 points each).

...and I guess I'm wondering, does making Staff do -1 damage "solve" all of this? Does adding an additional layer of defensive weapons use on top of the two rules that already exist help? Does reducing the +2 parry to +1 for certain staff weapons equalize them? And is staff so damn awesome now that you need to do all of this to fix it?

This is why I didn't try to change any of this stuff in MA or in Low-Tech. It doesn't seem to be a problem that needs fixing in the first place, to me.

[Kromm]

I somewhat like the idea of a sliding +2 bonus: Base damage is unmodified swing or thrust crushing, base Parry is 0, and you get +2 – total – to allocate between damage and Parry at the start of each turn. This would reflect various transitional grips, and be independent of whether you selected All-Out Attack, Committed Attack, Attack, Defensive Attack, or All-Out Defense, which would give all their usual bonuses and penalties . . . although naturally, someone who planned to pick All-Out Attack (Strong) or All-Out Defense (Increased Parry) would lump the +2 into damage or Parry, respectively. It would also be independent of combat options. Thus, a staff fighter could get the listed damage with no special Parry bonus, the listed Parry with weak damage, or something in between, and the justification for this extra level of trim would be the relative ease with which one can adjust staff grips.

[vicky_molokh]

Makes me wonder if all those Arena reports are an exaggeration.

[Ulzgoroth]

Originally Posted by Toadkiller_Dog

If you use a spear as a staff, you'll need to learn two skills - not many weapons using two skills turn into a Reign of Terror in my games, because you could have gotten 2x as good at one of those skills. Staff @ DX+8 (32 points) is generally more attractive than Spear @ DX+4 and Staff @ DX+4 (16 points each).

Well it ought to be, considering spear and staff cross-default at -2, so Staff at DX+8 includes Spear at DX+6 for free.

[Icelander]

Originally Posted by Toadkiller_Dog

And yeah, off-hand parrying will affect two-handed fencers, but I've yet to see a two-weapon user who didn't just pay his or her 1 point to get rid of that penalty entirely.

Goose, gander.

If we're assuming a style perk for all fencers, we should certainly assume that all staffmen have Grip Mastery (Staff) and thus another +1 to Parry, relatively.

Originally Posted by Toadkiller_Dog

...and I guess I'm wondering, does making Staff do -1 damage "solve" all of this?

Not at all and not meant to.

A staff ought to be brilliant defensively. I just have problems visualising how one manages to get the same damage from it while holding it near the middle and ready for another +2 Parry as one gets while holding it near the end and swinging full force.

Originally Posted by Toadkiller_Dog

Does reducing the +2 parry to +1 for certain staff weapons equalize them?

Note that here I did not propose reducing the +2 Parry, but of increasing the 0 Parry that duelling polearms used with Staff skills in MA to +1.

While not as balanced as a quarterstaff, they do seem to have some of the defensive advantages. And I'm always more comfortable with a smoother sliding scale than a gaping abyss between two extremes.

[Peter Knutsen]

Originally Posted by Icelander

Does the hive mind believe that I'm totally off here?

I once read, probably in an Usenet post, that during a certain long period in medieval England, more murders were committed with quarterstaves than with all other weapons combined. They can really injure people.

The main problem is perhaps that a quarterstaff isn't efficient at all at injuring armoured opponents, especially ones wearing metal armour, even more so rigig metal armour. AFAIK GURPS doesn't simulate that fact at all. So maybe that's what you should look into?