The Forge Archives

Inactive Forums => The Riddle of Steel => Topic started by: Jake Norwood on May 21, 2002, 06:16:34 PM



Title: Qualities of Real Weapons
Post by: Jake Norwood on May 21, 2002, 06:16:34 PM
Someone mentioned this as a good idea, so I figured I'd get the ball rolling. What are the real qualities of the weapons we all love and adore? I know a lot about swords and the like, especially concerning their application (as opposed to their make, carbon numbers, etc), and would like to talk about some of this stuff. I'll have a lot to say and I'll try to answer questions about my own area of knowledge, and I'll defer when clueless (or I'll give my guess but also mark it as such). The only stipulation is that it all has to tie into TROS...how would a certain quality be codified in the stats? What culture in Weyrth would use this and why? And so on...whatever fits this forum in conjuction with weapons and stuff.

Waiting for the crap to hit the fan...
Jake


Title: Qualities of Real Weapons
Post by: Bankuei on May 21, 2002, 07:39:36 PM
Things I like(random assortment):

Leaf blades(knives or swords), in real life, used by the Moros of the Phillipines, NW American Native tribes, and a few other places.  ROS usage: The religious warriors of the east.  Real life results: nastier wounds, harsh bloodloss.  Rules: Treat all stabs as being even harder to heal, add more blood loss.

Shark tooth "clubs", real life, used by Polynesian islanders.  ROS usage: any island/coastal locale with lots of sharks and a lack of metal.  Real life results: Gruesome tissue damage, horrid infections, nasty bloodloss.  Rules: Probably counts as a club, just with wicked shock/bloodloss bonuses.  Weak vs. armor.  Also probably nasty to heal(infection, shark tooth bits,etc.)

Aztec Stone clubs, real life, Aztecs(duh!), has real nasty jagged edges.  Real life results: Stone clubs with saw edges=bad for victim.  ROS usage: hmm, any place with non-metal working folks.  Rules: Worse ATN/DTN than mace/morningstar, possibly higher damage/shock due to weight involved.

Chinese "Soft" sword, looks like a typical double edged taichi blade, but real thin blade makes it "wobbly" Real life results:  like a rapier that can cut as well, required skill to use.  ROS Usage: Eastern countries Rules: Like a rapier(maybe only Str +2 to thrust, ATN 6), but also can cut as well.

Kwan Staff(also known as the Kwan-dao), pole arm with massive blade on the end, existing pieces with 20-40 lbs as the blade alone...  Real life results: Turns horses into tripeds, popular with several variations.  ROS Usage: Eastern nations Rules: Probably has terrible DTN and a so-so ATN, but awesome damage.  

Hunting Boomerangs, 1 meter long, used to hunt kangeroos.  Real life results: breaks both legs of kangeroos, and flipped a full sized refrigerator(god I love the science channel...).  ROS usage:  Savannah type areas with herds of large grazers.  Rules: Requires significant space to throw it, but probably does a gross amount of damage(pick any horizontal plane along your body you'd like to have every bone broken...)

Jake, feel free to throw any stats my way, these are just some "out there" weapons I think are cool.

Chris


Title: Qualities of Real Weapons
Post by: Brian Leybourne on May 21, 2002, 08:01:34 PM
Speaking as someone who used to be fairly proficient in the use of a boomerang (Aussie is not that far away) and used to practice a lot on our familys 5 acre farm when I was younger, I confirm that they are a very very nasty weapon. Damned tricky to be very precise with (you don't throw at your target, but to the side so it'll swing in towards them) and although they do return to you if you miss (sometimes, that's hard too) it's actually tricky to catch them, and if you miss the catch you get it heavily in the guts (with less force than the target would get it, but pretty hard).

That said, I used to practice with sticks pushed into the ground as targets, and a real peach of a shot would smash right through a 3 inch thick piece of hard wood as if it were tindling. I would hate to see the result of hitting  a person, particularly the neck or head.


Title: Qualities of Real Weapons
Post by: Rattlehead on May 21, 2002, 09:55:51 PM
Hmm... some weapons I'd love to see rules for....

If you're going to do a boomerang - which I'd like to see also - you might make similar rules for a bola. This probably could be covered by the thrown weapon/object rules though...

Another "weapon" you see in a lot of fantasy stuff is the whip... Popular with the villans, of course. The "Cat 'o Nine Tails" could be a nasty sort of flail too.

That's all I can think of right off. I'm not so useful as to add any suggestions for rules for them though.  Anyone have suggestions?

Brandon


Title: Qualities of Real Weapons
Post by: Ron Edwards on May 22, 2002, 05:52:15 AM
Hey,

A stick. 'Bout two feet long, solid stock. Also called a nightstick, a baton, or many other names.

You can mess someone up really, really badly with one of these, with even a modicum of familiarity. Given some specialized training, even someone in protective gear/armor is in trouble, as the stick is handy for tripping and similar things.

Best,
Ron


Title: Qualities of Real Weapons
Post by: Jake Norwood on May 22, 2002, 08:23:28 AM
Quote
Another "weapon" you see in a lot of fantasy stuff is the whip... Popular with the villans, of course. The "Cat 'o Nine Tails" could be a nasty sort of flail too.


I've spent some time with a bull whip, but one thing that strikes me about both the bullwhip and the cat o' nice tails is that neither is going to have much damage at all, and will probably even cap out at a level 2 or 3...but the shock (and pain?) values are likely to be considerable. I wouldn't consider either one a viable weapon in any kind of life-or-death situation...rather something good for keeping an opponent at bay when you've got room to move around in (in the case of a whip), or for making someone talk (as with the cat o nine).

My initial proposition, then, is:
(Bull)whip
Range: long/very long (depending on build)
ATN: 7 or 8?
DTN: 10 or 12?
Dam: ST -3b (or cutting?)
Notes: Doubles (Triples?) Shock modifiers before WP is subtracted. Pain is normal. No bonuses against armor of any kind.

Cat o' Nine Tails
R: Short or Medium
ATN: 6
DTN: 7 or 8
Dam: ST-3c
Notes: Doubles (Triples?) Shock modifiers before WP is subtracted. Doubles Pain modifiers before WP is subtracted. BL +1. No bonuses against armor of any kind.

Anyway, just a stab at it. Comments? Thoughts?

Jake


Title: Qualities of Real Weapons
Post by: Jake Norwood on May 22, 2002, 08:24:44 AM
Quote
A stick. 'Bout two feet long, solid stock. Also called a nightstick, a baton, or many other names.

That's the club on p. 254. The only guys with ogre clubs are, well, ogres.

Jake


Title: Qualities of Real Weapons
Post by: Ron Edwards on May 22, 2002, 08:52:52 AM
Hey,

Oh, I know it's there, Jake. The ROS rules for club (and for that matter, the quarterstaff) suit me just fine. I'm merely soundin' off about a weapon that in most RPGs is worth diddly-squat, but that I personally consider to be truly dangerous, especially in everyday, non-battlefield life.

Best,
Ron


Title: Qualities of Real Weapons
Post by: Ace on May 22, 2002, 09:41:59 AM
Quote from: Ron Edwards
Hey,

Oh, I know it's there, Jake. The ROS rules for club (and for that matter, the quarterstaff) suit me just fine. I'm merely soundin' off about a weapon that in most RPGs is worth diddly-squat, but that I personally consider to be truly dangerous, especially in everyday, non-battlefield life.

Best,
Ron


Well said.

The staff rules are pretty good but lets not forget "half staffing" afaik this was mainly a sport style (hands were too vulnerable) but it is pretty well known as a style and has its uses.

Also  another dangerous weapon that could use a bit of coverage are nunchaku.

They are really hard to use but once mastered, they hit  hard.
 In addition there a number of nasty "nutcracker" joint lock moves and choke holds used with these things.

OTOH a weapon that gets "mad props" in RPG's but is mainly useless IRL is the shuriken. It does very little real damage to anyone unless you hit an eye or throat .

Its mainly a distraction or for the foolhardy ninja types a poison payload delivery system.

Oh and can I second Rattleheads request for bolas? They aren't exactly period weapons but they are fun.


Title: Qualities of Real Weapons
Post by: Bankuei on May 22, 2002, 10:33:07 AM
I gotta chime in and second Ron on the value of a good stick.  I'm also glad to see quarterstaves got their props as valid "oops, was that your leg?, sooo sorry..." devices.  Haven't got a chance to see knives in play yet, but I'm sure they also live up to their potential.

Chris


Title: Qualities of Real Weapons
Post by: Jake Norwood on May 22, 2002, 10:36:08 AM
Bolas, huh? Anyone here worked with Bolas enough to guestimate stats?

Jake


Title: Qualities of Real Weapons
Post by: Clinton R. Nixon on May 22, 2002, 10:42:06 AM
Speaking of quarterstaves, we found something in play last week that you might like, Jake: traditionally, quarterstaves were often used to trip others in combat. The "Hook" manuever has excellent mechanics for this, but represents a hooking motion with an axe or polearm. We made a new manuever, Trip, that uses the same mechanics, except you must swing at the legs, and is applicable to any handled weapon with a long reach (quarterstaves, polearms, etc.) and the result is that your opponent is thrown to the ground.


Title: Qualities of Real Weapons
Post by: Jake Norwood on May 22, 2002, 10:43:49 AM
I like it! I'll have to start using it, too.

How's play going, btw?

Jake


Title: Qualities of Real Weapons
Post by: Bankuei on May 22, 2002, 11:01:27 AM
You can check out the thread under Actual Play, "Free Artis".

Small real world weapon note of interest:
The funky red furry tufts on Chinese spears was designed to stop blood from running down the handle and making it slippery.  The crazy ribbons and cloths tied to the bottom of the handles of swords and knives makes them fly better when thrown. :P

Also, when are we going to get rules for limb breaks with grapples?  I'm sure the fine art of grappling still has the old Imperial lineages and masters around(The Riddle of Locks?).

Chris


Title: Qualities of Real Weapons
Post by: Jake Norwood on May 22, 2002, 11:06:36 AM
Funny, I heard another reason for the tassles and red ribbons...makes you wonder...

As for locks and breaks, see "grappling to trap" at the end of the Defensive maneuvers section. While it gives rules for punching and kicking from a trapped grapple, limb-breaking is actually very easy to do and is a mainstay of WMA grappling...so I just use the damage for a punch or kick, applied to the swinging/bludgeoning damage tables, with all the bonuses inferred in the Grapple to Trap section. That is how it was intended.

Jake


Title: Qualities of Real Weapons
Post by: contracycle on May 22, 2002, 11:27:29 AM
What was the other reason?

A word of... well, not exactly caution, perhaps rather something that bugs me - mix-n-match weaponry.  I know its fun to apply your system to every weapon but there are concerns about what effect the menagerie of armaments can have on a game - it can really blow a mood by challenging the sense of internal continuity.  I also worry that it caters to the "I've got the better weapon" approach rather than I am the better fighter, which I suspect is not the intention of the game.  

As for weapons to see explored, I have to vote for the venerable spear - your common or garden six-foot stick with a pointy bit.  I've seen a couple of reconstructions of spear-fighting and the odd chinese drill, so I'd be interested to know for one thing what sort of manouver actions and values you assign the spear, seeing as I'm not going to see the book till it hits the shelves.

Lastly, there is another virtue to refraining from detailing too many weapons - it gives the fans something to chew on forever and you don't have to take the rap. :)


Title: Qualities of Real Weapons
Post by: Jake Norwood on May 22, 2002, 11:54:24 AM
Quote from: contracycle
What was the other reason?


I heard that they were there to distract the opponent and make it hard to follow the spear or sword point. But, as I said, I just "heard" this, and while I consider myself to know a decent bit on western stuff, my eastern knowledge is pretty scant in comparision.

Quote
A word of... well, not exactly caution, perhaps rather something that bugs me - mix-n-match weaponry.  I know its fun to apply your system to every weapon but there are concerns about what effect the menagerie of armaments can have on a game - it can really blow a mood by challenging the sense of internal continuity.  I also worry that it caters to the "I've got the better weapon" approach rather than I am the better fighter, which I suspect is not the intention of the game.  


I agree. What I actually wanted to do with this thread was 2-fold. (1) Discuss the realities of the weapons we all know and love (longswords and rapiers, for example), especially for those folks who have gotten their only knowledge about them from RPGs and Movies (and I'm not sure which is worse). (2) The other one is to come up with stats for other weapons that we want to see and use, but primarily on an unofficial basis. There really is no need for a 37-page weapon list for TROS, but "talking shop" and trying to apply the TROS paradigm is fun.

Quote
As for weapons to see explored, I have to vote for the venerable spear - your common or garden six-foot stick with a pointy bit.  I've seen a couple of reconstructions of spear-fighting and the odd chinese drill, so I'd be interested to know for one thing what sort of manouver actions and values you assign the spear, seeing as I'm not going to see the book till it hits the shelves.


I've done some spear training western-style (which is nearly identical to the q-staff, I might add), and I believe that TROS has good stats for them. There's a lot that can be done with a spear, I agree.

With a spear in TROS you can:
Bash, Beat, Feint, Hook/trip, stop short, (obviously) thrust, counter, and parry. The spear was the greatest battlefield weapon probably ever--easy to learn, use, and make, and deadly to boot.

Quote
Lastly, there is another virtue to refraining from detailing too many weapons - it gives the fans something to chew on forever and you don't have to take the rap. :)


True, true. But I'm a fanboy at heart myself, too.

Jake


Title: Qualities of Real Weapons
Post by: Bankuei on May 22, 2002, 02:21:19 PM
Ok, here's an idea for the classic Leaf blade weapon:

•Used primarily by followers of the 7 Vows
•Most are +1 DTN(extra weight, less balanced)
•Inflict +4 bloodloss on stabs and -2 dice to heal(very nasty)
•Usually knives up to medium reach swords

Rules for stone weapons(in case anyone wants to take ROS to Sorcerer and Sword places)

•Used primarily by cultures with little metal, or metalworking
•+1 DTN(heavy)
•+1 Damage(on top of normal damage)
•These rules are for mass weapons, not knives or spears.

And finally, something else that I think is a useful weapon in any campaign with farmers/woodsmen, the machete

•Farming/wood clearing tool, carried by lots of folks
•ATN(cutting only) 7(same as axe), DTN 8 (same as axe), reach- short, Damage ST+1C
• Probably isn't banned or outlawed in most countries, so anyone can carry it....

Any comments?

-Edited to reflect Wolfen's comments below-

Chris


Title: Qualities of Real Weapons
Post by: Brian Leybourne on May 22, 2002, 02:36:16 PM
Quote from: Jake Norwood
Quote


My initial proposition, then, is:
(Bull)whip
Range: long/very long (depending on build)
ATN: 7 or 8?
DTN: 10 or 12?
Dam: ST -3b (or cutting?)
Notes: Doubles (Triples?) Shock modifiers before WP is subtracted. Pain is normal. No bonuses against armor of any kind.

Jake


A bullwhip has a few other uses as well, of course.

(I'm speaking from films and books here, as I have no personal experience with whips, so if this is wrong then try not to flame me too hard *grin*)

Assuming films and books have *not* lied to me all these years, the whip should allow the use of the trip maneuver, and should have it's own special maneuver for disarming opponents by lashing around a weapon and pulling it out of the opponents grip.

Perhaps make an attack roll at the default whip ATN (7/8 as you suggested, Jake). Opponent can evade or block, but cannot parry or counter etc. If successful, make a contested Strength roll (TN is opponents Strength). Attacker gets +1 die on this roll per 2 points in the attack margin of success. (Not one-for-one because striking the weapon with the whip doesn't add strength, but you should get *something* therefore 1 for 2). If successful, weapon is ripped out of opponents hand, and lands x feet away (roll on the grappling disarm table and multiply result by 2 since a whip can flick something pretty far away).

What do people think of that idea?


Title: Qualities of Real Weapons
Post by: Lance D. Allen on May 22, 2002, 05:46:21 PM
One comment on the machete, Chris.. My take on the machete is that it's basically a shortsword designed for cutting only. Due to this focus, I can see the damage being ST+1, but +2? I can't see it. Comparing it with other weapons which are +2... a bastard sword on the thrust, a half-sworded dopplehander, a thrusting estoc, a cutting longsword, and the falchion.. I don't see the machete measuring up to these other weapons.


Title: Qualities of Real Weapons
Post by: Bankuei on May 22, 2002, 05:59:50 PM
Quote
Due to this focus, I can see the damage being ST+1, but +2


My bad, I was looking at 2 handed #'s for the axe... I'll go ahead and fix that.

Machetes are weighted towards the business end of things for maximum swinging and chopping power.  They are designed to chop through wood and easily go through an inch thick branch without much of a swing.  They're also the preferred weapon of third world farmers around the world, and are responsible for lost arms and limbs.  They pretty much do the same thing as axes tho.  

Chris


Title: Qualities of Real Weapons
Post by: Valamir on May 22, 2002, 06:32:39 PM
See the Falchion (Fall-Chin) for an actual historical sword which was basically a medieval machete.


Title: whips 'n chains....
Post by: Rattlehead on May 22, 2002, 07:52:29 PM
Quote from: Jake Norwood
I wouldn't consider either one a viable weapon in any kind of life-or-death situation...rather something good for keeping an opponent at bay when you've got room to move around in (in the case of a whip), or for making someone talk (as with the cat o nine).


I think your stats for these weapons are good. And I agree that they aren't so much damaging as painful. But, considering the impact of pain and shock in this combat system, they may be more effective than many weapons! Especially if you want to capture an opponent rather than kill them.

I also think the whip would require it's own proficiency, since untrained use would be nearly impossible - and dangerous. I second Lance's statement regarding the entagle and disarm maneuvers for whips also. I doubt you could parry very well with one, though... ;-)

Brandon


Title: Qualities of Real Weapons
Post by: Lyrax on May 26, 2002, 09:11:32 PM
Whip - DTN 22: Unbelievable.  :-D

Some of my friends have been looking for axe variants, like Lochaber and such.  I would personally like to see Caltrops at least pointed out in the appendix.  It also wouldn't hurt to make up arquebus stats, like so:

ATN: 5
Range: +1 ATN every 15 yards
Damage: 8 base damage (same as longbow), +2 vs. hard armors, +1 vs. soft armors
Prep Time: 15-20 rounds

What do you think?


Title: Qualities of Real Weapons
Post by: Jake Norwood on May 26, 2002, 10:55:11 PM
I'd make the range mod a lot uglier and the prep time longer.

Jake


Title: Qualities of Real Weapons
Post by: Atomic Requiem on May 26, 2002, 11:39:41 PM
Quote from: Lyrax
It also wouldn't hurt to make up arquebus stats, like so:


What's next, TRoS psionics? :)

Sorry, firearms and psionics are my two "favorite" things to see in a fantasy campaign. But that's neither here nor there, since "If you don't like them, don't use them" is the rule du jour.

<cough> I really should've deleted this post, as it isn't too useful. I know they have a historical, realistic place in the game, so I really shouldn't said anything. Don't let my pessimism here slow you down.

I'm not sure how to reflect its advantages versus bows either. You can't make them cheaper, I don't think. If you have rules for weapon creation (or they're coming out) you could certainly have something there reflecting what was said below. I tend to think an arqubus etc. would do more damage on the whole than a bow, and it would have additional effects versus armour, as the original poster pointed out.

That prep time will be a killer though. :)

*AR*


Title: Qualities of Real Weapons
Post by: Jake Norwood on May 27, 2002, 08:31:18 AM
There were actual several kinds of firearms in the midieval period, and the late midieval/early renn period (TROS setting) many were actually getting reliable. The kozaks (cossaks of earth) were feared marksmen, in fact. I'd like to involve some firearms later on, maybe in TFOB.

Jake


Title: Qualities of Real Weapons
Post by: Jaif on May 27, 2002, 08:44:26 AM
An arquebus has an ATN of 5? 5! That's as accurate as a rapier!

An arquebus is a crappy, unrifled gunpowder toy that was used by and against massed formations and tended to really scare the crap out of people.  It was not a sniper rifle, and should, if anything, have the worst ATN in the game.

The advantages that an arquebus had is something that probably won't translate well into the game:

1) Arqs were cheap and easy to make compared to longbows and xbows, and
2) Arg ammunition was smaller, so a formation of arqs could sustain fire for a longer period of time.

Just to stress this: an arquebus should have the worst ATN of any missile weapon.

-Jeff


Title: Qualities of Real Weapons
Post by: Jake Norwood on May 27, 2002, 08:49:54 AM
Quote
Just to stress this: an arquebus should have the worst ATN of any missile weapon.


I heartily agree. Now, then, what would its stats be?


Title: Qualities of Real Weapons
Post by: Jake Norwood on May 27, 2002, 10:41:14 AM
Quote
Anyway, the point is that if Dopplehanders can be half-sworded, so should staves. A short staff should probably have long/medium range, depending on grip.


You're absolutely right. It's a fun technique; I find the q-staff to be a devastating weapon (and ol' George Silver would agree).

Isn't the damage you're proposing for the Arq. a bit low? That wouldn't even injure most people with so much as a lvl 1 wound, assuming you even hit them.

Jake


Title: Qualities of Real Weapons
Post by: Bankuei on May 27, 2002, 10:54:18 AM
Thanks for the link... My character uses a quarterstaff... I recall reading the article that originally mentioned the Englishman fighting off the Spanish, part of which made me really respect it as a vicious and deadly weapon.

Chris


Title: Qualities of Real Weapons
Post by: Jake Norwood on May 27, 2002, 10:56:55 AM
Doh!

I accidentally deleted your post, Jeff, with the link and everything. If it's not too much trouble, could you re-post?

Jake


Title: Qualities of Real Weapons
Post by: Jaif on May 27, 2002, 12:01:12 PM
Ok, first the Q-staff link:

http://www.ejmas.com/jwma/jwmaart_docherty_0501.htm

Second, my pitch that the short staff should have two ranges, one long & one medium, depending on whether you use the quarter or half grip.  In principle, the same as a dopplehander.

I know next-to-nothing about these techniques, but in my mind's-eye a half-gripped short staff is more defensive, so would have the TNs reversed (7/6 instead of 6/7).  I would also have no or minimal penalty to switching grips; the point of the q-staff is it's flexibility in handling (smooth wood, symmetric design).

Third, an arq link I just found:

http://www.strategypage.com/cic/reader.asp?target=CIC02

Remember that this article approaches the various weapons as they'd be used in a formation, not their maximum capabilities.

Last, my suggested stats for the arquebus, based on nothing but a little book learnin (kids, don't try this at home):

ATN: 9, +1/10 yards.
Reload time: 30 rounds (2-second rounds assumed, arqs had 40-odd steps between reloads).
Eff St: 3
DR: 3+2b (5 total) (MOD: +1 vs hard armors, +x shock)

Quote
Isn't the damage you're proposing for the Arq. a bit low? That wouldn't even injure most people with so much as a lvl 1 wound, assuming you even hit them.


I modified the stats a bit so it would operate more like a mass weapon. I also checked the stats on a short bow, and modified the damage up to keep it inline.  It's now a shortbow for damage, better vs armor, but crappy accuracy.  However, remember a few things:

1) An arquebus purposefully had a low charge to keep the recoil down.  This isn't a modern weapon, all the blast had to go somewhere.

2) I've never read anything that claimed the arq was terribly damaging, though it was still effective against hard armor.

3) An arquebus was intended for use against formations, not individuals.  We're not even talking matchlock pistol accuracy here.

I really have no idea how accurate the above numbers are: I've only given it a little though.  However, I do know that an arquebus was a worse personal weapon than either the longbow or xbow, and really was a good choice only for reasons outside of the scope of the game (ammo size, training, cheap-to-build).

-Jeff


Title: Qualities of Real Weapons
Post by: Ace on May 27, 2002, 01:03:25 PM
Jaif I have some proto styles modified from my Fanatsy games for "Stick Dance" which includes quarter and half staffing, Twin Swords School style which is a distant cousin of Escrima.

Would you like me to post these?


Title: Qualities of Real Weapons
Post by: Jake Norwood on May 27, 2002, 01:10:37 PM
Quote from: Ace
Jaif I have some proto styles modified from my Fanatsy games for "Stick Dance" which includes quarter and half staffing, Twin Swords School style which is a distant cousin of Escrima.

Would you like me to post these?


Are these the one's we've been waiting for? By all means, post them.

Jake


Title: Qualities of Real Weapons
Post by: Ace on May 27, 2002, 02:09:39 PM
Quote from: Jake Norwood
Quote from: Ace
Jaif I have some proto styles modified from my Fanatsy games for "Stick Dance" which includes quarter and half staffing, Twin Swords School style which is a distant cousin of Escrima.

Would you like me to post these?


Are these the one's we've been waiting for? By all means, post them.

Jake


No Problem. BTW this is a long post



I only have two that really matter in game terms. The others are too similar to styles in the book or are to world specific philosophical styles.

The complete list (from my world Midrea all rights reserved yada yada)

Vinyarn 5 elemants method - This is Sword and Shield with the names and serial number filed off. Manuevers have different names, a high thrust might be called "Tongue of fire" for example.  A simple center block would be called "Wall of earth" and so on. The fifth element refered to here is shen aka "Spirit" specifically a warriors  spirit and soul.
Masters of this style will have a faily high Will stat and meditation score.

12 Fold Path swordmans ship- Use Longsword style with some Katana elements. Talk a lot about the number twelve and the Zodiac and anything related. The style heavily emphasizes cominations of the 12 basic attacks, 12 basic defenses and so on. A lot of riddleseekers wil use this style

Hala unarmed method - Karate and Judo mixed.


Bandii speed fighting- Another /Armed Unarmed form, like Wingchun more or less. The favored weapon is a short spear used with a lot of circling punctuated by periods of furious jabbing.  

Discipline of the Forms (loosley like the Agrippa magic circle schools only with all of the Pythagorean solids included.)  In TROS Use Rapier. Add hermetic style mumbo jumbo. Stir....

Barrakia stick dance- With text strait from Midrea

Occupied during the Hujasani "movements" and forbidden the use of most arms The Barrakia developed this style using the best weapon availble to them, the staff.  Typical staves used in this style are 5-6 feet long.

Masters of the style will have good stealth related skills, dancing (uded to disguise the weapon training)  and may be proficient in Spear, Sling (easy to hide) Knife and Unarmed combat.

Tros Stats:

Offense-----

Bash (0)
Beat (0)
Thrust (0)
Feint (v)
Sweep (1) -- treat this move as a hook. Basically the staff is used to sweep an opponents legs
Stop Short (0)
Half Staff (v) --- treat this move as half swording except that the staff user may also bash as well as thrust. DTN is reduced by 1 however any penaltys to hit the hands are reduced to 0
Kick (1)

Defense----
Counter (2)
Parry (0)
Expulsion  (2)
Evasive attack (1)

Defaults
cut and Thrust -4
dagger -2
double hander -3
mass weapon and shield -4
pole arms -2
pole axe -2
brawling -1
rapier -4
Sword and Shield -4
case of rapiers -4
Longsword -2
wrestling -2


Spellblade form- Not usuable with TROS magic due to casting times. Closest real world equivilant Dreamblade Occult Swordsmanship filtered through Mercedes Lackey.  It was here http://www.chaosmatrix.com/dreamblade but the site is no more. If you are interested let me know I will send you the info.
TROS terms Use Cut and Thrust style and maybe an arming glove. The other hand will be casting spells!


Kirinian reflective form- Something like a Gim used in southern chinese styles. Mix in a little Tsing I and Pau Kua orient to Katas and you are good to go. TROS versions  might be used in Yone until I figure something out use Cut and thrust style

Twin Swords School-- The basic idea of a gentlemans school and the two shortswords was given to me by my Rolemaster GM but here is the Midrea version

The Brin Republic is not noted for its extensive martial culture however over the years several dueling and skirmish oriented styles have been created.  The best known is the Twin Swords School
Students of the two swords school are trained in swordsmanship, scholarship and the arts.

In TROS terms a Twin Swords graduate should take Academic and Swordman package. Most will know a form of art as well.

Game note: The Brin Republic is "clockpunk" in technology. Standard arms for the Military include breachloading flintlock rifles and airguns as well. Bayonet training and knife play replaces sword use.

In TROS they should have matchlocks if the other forces have handgonnes or less.

Aslo note Brin fighter tend wear light armor other than helmets. The climate of the Republic is hot, think Southern California with a bit more
moisture.

TROS Stats:

Offensive-----

Beat (0)
Bind and Strike (0)
Double Strike (0)
Feint (1)
Simulaneous Strike and Parry (0)
Thrust (0)
Cut (0)
Grapple (2) usually with a stick -1 to ATN for leverage if unarmed
Kick (2)

Defensive-----
counter (2)
expulsion (2)
grapple (2) usually with the stick dtn -1 for leverage if unarmed
parry (0)

This style is used with short swords, short sticks, knives and bare hands.

Defaults
Case of rapiers -3
cut and thrust -2
dagger -1
great sword -4
mass weapon and shield -4
polearms -4
brawling -1
wrestling -1
Rapier -3
sword and Shield -3
Doublehander -4
longsword -3


Title: Qualities of Real Weapons
Post by: Lance D. Allen on May 27, 2002, 05:44:52 PM
All this talk of staves has got me itching to recreate Gothrek. Hmm.. I wonder how hard it would be to create a Gol PC...

Seriously though, having read various classical fiction novels (Robin Hood by Pyle leaping to the front of my mind) I think that the staff has gotten a major bad rap in such games as D&D and others influenced by it. It was a "weak" weapon relegated to wizards and other non-combatants. Gothrek was a character I created, a "gentle giant" orcish monk who used a quarterstaff. My use of the weapon was based off of a character I thought was cool from David Drake's "Lord of the Isles" series, Cashell. He was impressive with that staff, and I wanted to recreate that with Gothrek, but found it more effective to use my monkish bare-handed style than the weapon at all.

I'm curious though.. How similar is quarterstaff to the bo-staff maneuvers used in eastern martial arts?


Title: Qualities of Real Weapons
Post by: Jake Norwood on May 27, 2002, 07:53:18 PM
Quote
I'm curious though.. How similar is quarterstaff to the bo-staff maneuvers used in eastern martial arts?


It's really not at all from what I've seen. The quarterstaff was longer (8' + on average), harder (Ash or Hickory, not Oak or Waxwood), and was used held at the "quarter," leading to different techniques. The only places I've seen "half staffing" are (1) close fighting (2) armor fighting and (3) sport q-staff. Still, a long stick is a long stick...

Jake


Title: Qualities of Real Weapons
Post by: Bankuei on May 27, 2002, 11:00:03 PM
Quote
I'm curious though.. How similar is quarterstaff to the bo-staff maneuvers used in eastern martial arts?


Aside from the "for show" or fancy moves, it's the same the world round.  One fun little bit of historical use in the east, was during a major battle between samurai and rebellious monks, two cases of monks deflecting arrows with their staves spinning.  Monks still lost though..

Chris


Title: Qualities of Real Weapons
Post by: Jaif on June 01, 2002, 07:20:28 PM
Jake, are you going to make 'official' changes to the short staff and quarterstaff allowing them to be used at different ranges? Or is this home-grown time?

As for the arquebus, the bottom line is that real world firearms of the period wouldn't find much use in a standard RPG game; if you want the firearm feel I would suggest making something up and explaining it away with some fantastic element (e.g. magical metals, Uglub's sorcerous smiths, etc...)

-Jeff


Title: Qualities of Real Weapons
Post by: Jake Norwood on June 01, 2002, 08:21:49 PM
Quote
Jake, are you going to make 'official' changes to the short staff and quarterstaff allowing them to be used at different ranges? Or is this home-grown time?


Home grown, mostly because the manuscript is out of my hands at this point, and because I think that anyone that cares enough will (a) do it that way anyway or (b) come to the web and see it there.

Let's face it--we've all mauled our favorite games to make them do what we want.

Jake


Title: beating a dead harquebus
Post by: Ben on June 02, 2002, 04:17:29 PM
Jaif says,
Quote
ATN: 9, +1/10 yards.
Reload time: 30 rounds (2-second rounds assumed, arqs had 40-odd steps between reloads).
Eff St: 3
DR: 3+2b (5 total) (MOD: +1 vs hard armors, +x shock)


I have have to disagree with this. Not with the arquebus being fairly inaccurate but rather the way it's conveyed.  I am reasonablly certain that hitting someone 10yrds away was a bit easier than TN9.  I think ATN 6, +1/4yrds(or worse) will better represent its inaccuracy.

The reload time sounds about right, give or take 10 rounds either way. Preping those old muzzle loaded match locks can be tricky. If one were to suggest that the user make some sort of skill roll, they wouldn't be accused of being crazy. I hope. :)

I also have to disagree on the damage. The old lead balls tended to do a lot more damage than the calibered bullets. Well, that's not quite right, lets just say they did a different kind of damage. Most modernish shaped bullets have a tendancy either to lodge themselves into a bone or richet off chipping or fractering the bone and occationally will pass right through. The old shot rarly ever exited the body and if it ever hit bone would splenter often shattering the bone as well. Good call using bludgening damage but I still would increase the damage by 1(maybe even two) to more accuratly capture the severity of the powderball wounds.


Title: Re: beating a dead harquebus
Post by: Bob Richter on June 03, 2002, 12:39:10 AM
Quote from: Ben
Jaif says,
Quote
ATN: 9, +1/10 yards.
Reload time: 30 rounds (2-second rounds assumed, arqs had 40-odd steps between reloads).
Eff St: 3
DR: 3+2b (5 total) (MOD: +1 vs hard armors, +x shock)


I have have to disagree with this. Not with the arquebus being fairly inaccurate but rather the way it's conveyed.  I am reasonablly certain that hitting someone 10yrds away was a bit easier than TN9.  I think ATN 6, +1/4yrds(or worse) will better represent its inaccuracy.

The reload time sounds about right, give or take 10 rounds either way. Preping those old muzzle loaded match locks can be tricky. If one were to suggest that the user make some sort of skill roll, they wouldn't be accused of being crazy. I hope. :)

I also have to disagree on the damage. The old lead balls tended to do a lot more damage than the calibered bullets. Well, that's not quite right, lets just say they did a different kind of damage. Most modernish shaped bullets have a tendancy either to lodge themselves into a bone or richet off chipping or fractering the bone and occationally will pass right through. The old shot rarly ever exited the body and if it ever hit bone would splenter often shattering the bone as well. Good call using bludgening damage but I still would increase the damage by 1(maybe even two) to more accuratly capture the severity of the powderball wounds.


Early firearms were actually far more dangerous to the user than to...a man standing a mere 10 yards away. In that, I think these stats are fairly accurate. After all, if you get a finely constructed Arquebus, you can get the ATN down to 8...:)

Personally, I think 8b damage would be more or less appropriate.

And something about a chance of exploding without fine-quality ammunition...


Title: Re: beating a dead harquebus
Post by: Furious D on June 03, 2002, 07:47:33 AM
Quote from: Bob Richter
Bob Richter says,


Early firearms were actually far more dangerous to the user than to...a man standing a mere 10 yards away. In that, I think these stats are fairly accurate. After all, if you get a finely constructed Arquebus, you can get the ATN down to 8...:)

Personally, I think 8b damage would be more or less appropriate.

And something about a chance of exploding without fine-quality ammunition...


With the ATN 6 +1 per 4 yds, you get roughly the same inaccuracy at 10 yds, but you actually have a chance at hitting someone when they are at 1 yd distance.  My perception of the difference was that the base ATN reflected how difficult it is to aim the weapon, whereas the length of the range increments reflects accuracy (or lack thereof).  Inaccurate or not, you should be able to reliably hit a target less than 10 feet away.


Title: Qualities of Real Weapons
Post by: Lyrax on June 03, 2002, 09:28:00 AM
If you're going to make an arquebus, you'll have to incorporate some sort of misfire rule...


Title: Qualities of Real Weapons
Post by: Shadow on June 04, 2002, 05:10:22 AM
My post here is focused on translating real-world qualities of weapons into Weapons Statistics for use in TROS.  Before continuing, I provide my interpretations/definitions of the Weapon Statistics:

1) Grip/Length: This rating represents the optimal distance at which a weapon is used.  All the other ratings are based on the assumption that the weapon is striking at its optimal distance (EX: the ratings of a shortsword assume it is in use at short range).  A longer weapon can often be thrust into a foe who wields a shorter weapon before he can close for his own attack.  A weapon used outside of its optimal range will be more difficult to strike effectively with.  Additionally, a longer weapon suffers defensively when used at shorter range, representing the disadvantage faced when one's foe is inside his guard.

2) Attack TN: This represents the ease with which a weapon's user can achieve an effective strike upon the foe (with differing ratings for cut, thrust, etc depending upon the weapon in question).  Quickness and balance are the primary factors here.  Attack TN will result in damage being more easily delivered; the quick thrust of rapier and shortsword are examples of this (both have ATN 5).

3) Defensive TN:  Represents the ease with which a weapon can be used to deflect an incoming blow.  Quickness and balance are primary factors, as well as stiffness and build of a weapon (especially against a non-thrusting attack).  Objects/weapons which can cover a large area on the defense (i.e., shields and maybe tridents if they are added to the game) also benefit it terms of lower DTN.

4) Damage Rating:  This represents the level of trauma that will be inflicted upon a body when the weapon strikes effectively.  Weapons with more mass to their heads or width to their blades will do more damage in general; however, blades with thin and flexible cross-sections may do less on the thrust but more on the cut, compared to a stiffer, narrower blade (EX: Arming Sword vs. Cut & Thrust Sword).

On an older thread I have posted on Weapon Statistics, primarily questioning the high damage rating of the Rapier, though also touching upon the damage rating of the shortsword.  Rather than rehashing previous material, my question here is on the real-life qualities of weapons in relation to their ratings, primarily the damage rating.

More specifically, what feature of the rapier leads to its high damage?  The rapier has good length combined with balance, and quickness on the thrust derived from these same qualities (though they are not light for one-handed weapons).  I would judge these qualities represented in the low ATN and in longer reach (assuming the longer variety of rapiers can be rated as "long" instead of medium).  My question is what real-world quality of the rapier translates into its (thrusting) damage rating of +3?

By comparison, a spear is also a weapon of good reach (long).  It does not strike as swiftly as the thrust rapier (spear ATN 6 on the thrust), nor is it as quickly maneuvered on the parry (DTN 7).  Most spears I have seen have broader heads than blade the rapier (often less than 1" wide), yet do less damage (DMG rating +2 for spear vs. +3 for rapier); my thought is that the spear should do more damage than the rapier, as with is broad head combined with a good point, it will make larger wounds.  With the spear left at +2, I would say the rapier should be +0 or +1, unless there is some quality I am missing.  The rapier will do extra damage due to its low ATN, which I agree with.

A second comparison is the Cut & Thrust swords.  IRL, these are similar to arming swords but usually with narrower blades but thicker cross-sections (and in some cases a raised "ridge" down the cross-section for improved stiffness on the thrust).  The rapier's length combined with balance allows for a quicker strike (ATN 5 for rapier, ATN 6 for Cut & Thrust).  The C&T sword has a good point and stiff blade, broader than the rapier's (about 1.5" for a C&T, to 1" or less for the rapier) so I would think it should have a greater damage rating than the rapier (or at least equal to it), but C&T is rated at +1 damage vs. +3 for the rapier.  Also, the C&T swords has twin sharpened edges, which should lead to more severing of arteries & such when combined with its (relatively) broad blade.  If the rapier was rated +0 its low ATN would make its damage about equal to the C&T, a +1 would still lead to rapier's doing more damage than C&T... and the +3 makes them do way more damage than C&T.

The final comparison I make here is rapier to short sword (again, using the Roman gladius as the model, as opposed to a medieval archer's shortsword).  The short sword is quick (ATN 5), but has a broad blade (2"+) along most of it's length (nearly all of its length for the Pompeii variety), and has a very good point and a cross-section supporting the thrust.  I would think that the shortsword should do very good damage on the thrust, a broad blade should find more arteries on the thrust than a narrow one.  The ancient Greeks (or at least Greek historian..) were horrified at the wounds the roman sword inflicted, they being more accustomed to spear-thrusts (and probably being trampled underfoot by opposing phalanx formations).  I would think maybe +1 or +2 damage for the shortsword, on the thrust?  

Anyway in short, my question is what real-world quality(s) of the rapier lead it to have such a high damage rating, relative to other weapons that are good thrusters but should leave larger wounds.  I have discussed most qualities of the rapier that I understand (except for lack of armor-piercing capability, but that is already addressed on another thread by Jake).

I'll post thoughts on other weapons as I find the time, but am interested in any follow-up on these weapons (and my definition assumptions) people have to offer.  Thanks,

Shadow

p.s.- Thanks Jake for the updates on shields on another thread, I'll be making use of those changes in my game)


Title: Qualities of Real Weapons
Post by: Bob Richter on June 04, 2002, 05:35:57 AM
Quote from: Shadow
My post here is focused on translating real-world qualities of weapons into Weapons Statistics for use in TROS.  Before continuing, I provide my interpretations/definitions of the Weapon Statistics:

1) Grip/Length: This rating represents the optimal distance at which a weapon is used.  All the other ratings are based on the assumption that the weapon is striking at its optimal distance (EX: the ratings of a shortsword assume it is in use at short range).  A longer weapon can often be thrust into a foe who wields a shorter weapon before he can close for his own attack.  A weapon used outside of its optimal range will be more difficult to strike effectively with.  Additionally, a longer weapon suffers defensively when used at shorter range, representing the disadvantage faced when one's foe is inside his guard.

2) Attack TN: This represents the ease with which a weapon's user can achieve an effective strike upon the foe (with differing ratings for cut, thrust, etc depending upon the weapon in question).  Quickness and balance are the primary factors here.  Attack TN will result in damage being more easily delivered; the quick thrust of rapier and shortsword are examples of this (both have ATN 5).

3) Defensive TN:  Represents the ease with which a weapon can be used to deflect an incoming blow.  Quickness and balance are primary factors, as well as stiffness and build of a weapon (especially against a non-thrusting attack).  Objects/weapons which can cover a large area on the defense (i.e., shields and maybe tridents if they are added to the game) also benefit it terms of lower DTN.

4) Damage Rating:  This represents the level of trauma that will be inflicted upon a body when the weapon strikes effectively.  Weapons with more mass to their heads or width to their blades will do more damage in general; however, blades with thin and flexible cross-sections may do less on the thrust but more on the cut, compared to a stiffer, narrower blade (EX: Arming Sword vs. Cut & Thrust Sword).

On an older thread I have posted on Weapon Statistics, primarily questioning the high damage rating of the Rapier, though also touching upon the damage rating of the shortsword.  Rather than rehashing previous material, my question here is on the real-life qualities of weapons in relation to their ratings, primarily the damage rating.

More specifically, what feature of the rapier leads to its high damage?  The rapier has good length combined with balance, and quickness on the thrust derived from these same qualities (though they are not light for one-handed weapons).  I would judge these qualities represented in the low ATN and in longer reach (assuming the longer variety of rapiers can be rated as "long" instead of medium).  My question is what real-world quality of the rapier translates into its (thrusting) damage rating of +3?

By comparison, a spear is also a weapon of good reach (long).  It does not strike as swiftly as the thrust rapier (spear ATN 6 on the thrust), nor is it as quickly maneuvered on the parry (DTN 7).  Most spears I have seen have broader heads than blade the rapier (often less than 1" wide), yet do less damage (DMG rating +2 for spear vs. +3 for rapier); my thought is that the spear should do more damage than the rapier, as with is broad head combined with a good point, it will make larger wounds.  With the spear left at +2, I would say the rapier should be +0 or +1, unless there is some quality I am missing.  The rapier will do extra damage due to its low ATN, which I agree with.

A second comparison is the Cut & Thrust swords.  IRL, these are similar to arming swords but usually with narrower blades but thicker cross-sections (and in some cases a raised "ridge" down the cross-section for improved stiffness on the thrust).  The rapier's length combined with balance allows for a quicker strike (ATN 5 for rapier, ATN 6 for Cut & Thrust).  The C&T sword has a good point and stiff blade, broader than the rapier's (about 1.5" for a C&T, to 1" or less for the rapier) so I would think it should have a greater damage rating than the rapier (or at least equal to it), but C&T is rated at +1 damage vs. +3 for the rapier.  Also, the C&T swords has twin sharpened edges, which should lead to more severing of arteries & such when combined with its (relatively) broad blade.  If the rapier was rated +0 its low ATN would make its damage about equal to the C&T, a +1 would still lead to rapier's doing more damage than C&T... and the +3 makes them do way more damage than C&T.

The final comparison I make here is rapier to short sword (again, using the Roman gladius as the model, as opposed to a medieval archer's shortsword).  The short sword is quick (ATN 5), but has a broad blade (2"+) along most of it's length (nearly all of its length for the Pompeii variety), and has a very good point and a cross-section supporting the thrust.  I would think that the shortsword should do very good damage on the thrust, a broad blade should find more arteries on the thrust than a narrow one.  The ancient Greeks (or at least Greek historian..) were horrified at the wounds the roman sword inflicted, they being more accustomed to spear-thrusts (and probably being trampled underfoot by opposing phalanx formations).  I would think maybe +1 or +2 damage for the shortsword, on the thrust?  

Anyway in short, my question is what real-world quality(s) of the rapier lead it to have such a high damage rating, relative to other weapons that are good thrusters but should leave larger wounds.  I have discussed most qualities of the rapier that I understand (except for lack of armor-piercing capability, but that is already addressed on another thread by Jake).

I'll post thoughts on other weapons as I find the time, but am interested in any follow-up on these weapons (and my definition assumptions) people have to offer.  Thanks,

Shadow

p.s.- Thanks Jake for the updates on shields on another thread, I'll be making use of those changes in my game)


Here's my take on it: Damage from a Thrust is based more on the ability to penetrate flesh and rupture internal organs, thus a broader head is actually not such an advantage.

For example: While a Spear has to mangle the ribcage to get at the heart, the Rapier can slide between the ribs for a truly lethal thrust with a minimum of work.


Title: Qualities of Real Weapons
Post by: Jake Norwood on June 04, 2002, 08:31:56 AM
Hey! Me and Bob agree! ;-)

The rapier had a tendency to go all the way through any part of the body, including the head (and, as we all know, that's got a GURPS DR of 2!). The wider head makes an uglier wound, but not a worse one, as the strength of the thrust is distributed over a wider surface area. Rapiers and other very thin thrusters have incredible penetration potential, much more so than any other sword.

And, for the record, the rapier damage was dropped to ST+2p for the revised printing, becaues +3 really was too much.

Jake


Title: Qualities of Real Weapons
Post by: Bob Richter on June 04, 2002, 10:15:52 AM
Quote from: Jake Norwood
Hey! Me and Bob agree! ;-)

The rapier had a tendency to go all the way through any part of the body, including the head (and, as we all know, that's got a GURPS DR of 2!). The wider head makes an uglier wound, but not a worse one, as the strength of the thrust is distributed over a wider surface area. Rapiers and other very thin thrusters have incredible penetration potential, much more so than any other sword.

And, for the record, the rapier damage was dropped to ST+2p for the revised printing, becaues +3 really was too much.

Jake


:) You'll find that happens any time we're both right. :)

Hm. Revised Printing. Yep. Gonna need one of those.


Title: Qualities of Real Weapons
Post by: Jake Norwood on June 04, 2002, 10:23:14 AM
Quote
The rapier had a tendency to go all the way through any part of the body, including the head


Okay, so I'm quoting myself, but I wanted to add a little tidbit. For those of you that didn't know, all of the illustrations in the Weapon proficiencies section of the book (except for 3) come from actual fencing/fighting manuals from the 1400 and 1500s. The rapier shots, greatsword, polearms, wrestling, dagger fighting, etc, are all authentic. Just thought you'd like to know.

Jake


Title: Qualities of Real Weapons
Post by: Ron Edwards on June 04, 2002, 10:28:50 AM
Hey,

ST+2p? Bah. "Too much" is exactly what I want from the rapiers in my game. This is one of my Seneschal Says moments. ST+3p, forever!

Sir Hairy Ostrogoth: "I shall cleave you with my mighty broadsword!"
Carcolo the Mosto: "Yipe!" [lunge]
S.H.O.: "Gurk ..."

Best,
Ron