Opinions wanted...

[Jaeger]

Tell me what you think of my new combat maneuver for the Longsword proficiency.

I've just started learning Italian Longsword out here (and even though I suck) I though I would try to make a maneuver out of one of the plays that can occur from the crossed swords position...

(Imagine a strike where before the blades completely disengage you quickly grab the tip of your opponent's blade for only a split second moving it off line then letting go, while striking or thrusting with the weapon in your other hand while he is open.)

Blade Grab & Strike/Thrust:

Available at proficiency level 8.

Can only be done following a successful parry in an exchange of blows - non refreshed CP pools (you've got to have dice left over.)

1 die activation cost

(Your left hand "grabs" for his blade tip)
Roll a contest of reflexes - TN for attacker as per hand / DTN for defender as per weapon. (Ties count as failures)

If you win...

•   Losers CP drops by ½ rounding up.     (You can only strike one-handed though.)

But, if you lose...

•   A tie or failure gives you a free level 1 cut to your hand and your opponent gains the initiative.

•   A fumble gives you a free level 3 puncture to your hand and your opponent gains the initiative.


Example of use:

  Gareth the Loud and Lord Montrovant have thrown one too many insults at each other across the negotiating table. Both men seek satisfaction, and step outside to settle their differences like civilized men, by hacking each other to pieces with their longswords.

 Lord Montrovant is in an aggressive stance, Gareth the Loud in a defensive one. They toss dice and it is a red white with Montrovant attacking. Both have a CP of 17. (Including offensive and defensive bonuses).
   Montrovant does a cut to Zone IV for 6 dice, Gareth parry's with 8 dice and is successful!!!  Gareth only has 9 dice left in his Combat Pool to Montrovants 11, so he decides to try and even the odds...
 He lets go of the pommel of his sword with his left hand and goes for a grab and strike! Paying the 1 CP activation cost he is now down to 8 dice vs. 11. They both have a reflex of 7 and so each rolls 7 dice in a contest of reflexes. Gareth's TN is 5 and Montrovant has a really good sword so his TN is also 5. And Gareth wins!
  Montrovants CP is reduced from 11 to 5 (- ½ rounding up) and Gareth now does a one handed strike with 8d vs. 5 at his Lordship. (You may want to note that Lord Montrovant cannot do a full-evade because he just attacked). His Lordship best have his affairs in order.

The reason you cannot execute this maneuver after pools refresh is because if it took everything you had to parry the blow, you just don't have the juice left over to try anything  so fancy.


Made to give a high payoff for success, and a sobering punishment for failure, this maneuver is created to be:

•   A deadly weapon against those with lesser reflexes or CP's  than your PC.

•   An even proposition against those who are your equals.

•   And a desperation maneuver, and possible last testament to your stupidity, against those who are faster and more skilled.


 Any thoughts??? Longsworders don't have the bind and strike or simul block & strike maneuvers, I was trying to come up with something that would give my future players some compensation.

[Draigh]

It sounds pretty cool, but the main question I have is...
What's the point? Wouldn't it just be easier and more effective to beat, then thrust?

Maybe I'm missing the point, but it just seems redundant to me.

[Richard_Strey]

Jaeger, at the very end of your post you already said what I'd have done: use the bind&strike maneuver. I don't have the book right here and I can't remember if it's in the proficiency or not. What you described is essentially that. Bind and strike plus some nice creative narration. Keep in mind that binding does not have to be executed with the blade only. You can do that with the crossguard, even your pommel or hands. The important part is to somehow keep your enemy from moving freely while you prepare to strike.

I can think of a few real-life b&s moves off the top of my head. Like, duplieren (von Danzig and Ringeck), mutieren or absetzen (bind&thrust, actually). After having studied the beautiful "Art of Maiming with a Long Piece of Sharp Steel the German Way" for two years now, I have to shake my head at that omittance. Jake probably wanted to keep the lists manageable or something. :)

[Jake Norwood]

The bind-and-strike is meant for exactly this kind of thing.

Jake

[Lance D. Allen]

Dangerous title for a thread there, Jaeger.

In my experience, no one *really* wants other people's opinions.. Opinions are frightening, dangerous things.

::grins slightly:: I'd have to go with the bind & strike on this maneuver too, though, from what little I know.

[Jaeger]

"In my experience, no one *really* wants other people's opinions.."

 Too true, but that's why I posted it up here, in case I was missing something...

 The bind and strike is not in the logsword/greatsword Prof, but I have a first printing, maybe it changed... - I was trying to find something to make up for the lack -  but, upon reflection, I'm afraid y'all are right, I could just have ported it over and saved myself some time.

 It should have occured to me earlier seeing as how I already play with all weapon Prof having the counter maneuver.

Such is life.

[Jake Norwood]

No, you're right, it's not in there. Just insert it for the "school" you're using.

Jake

[Mayhem1979]

Well your question has been answered... but I must say I like your example.  

Lord Montrevant dies AGAIN!  :D

[Mike Holmes]

I like the potential for getting wounded that Jaeger's method provides. Why not beef it up a little to make it a more attractive proposition, and use it as he's got it written. Make it tactically equivalent of Bind & Strike, but different in effect. To better emulate his school, and add a little variability. Seems viable to me.

In fact, given that Bind & Strike is not available for Longsword normally, if this maneuver were available for it would you use it? If so, then it's good as is. In my opinion. :-)

Mike