Still not sure about shields

[Lance D. Allen]

Okay..

The larger shields aren't used particularly in duels. They are cumbersome, and when it's a matter of personal skill and finesse, they are probably not the best choice.

As a tool of war and melees, however, when you have friends and foes alike hacking madly for their lives it's imminently better than mid-sized shields. I don't have to move a kite or tower to block 3 different blows (2 of which I may not even see) as much as I would have to move a smaller shield. I can also hide behind it and bull into an opponent, knocking them down, and putting a gap in the enemy line.

So... Yeah. It's all about the size, but admittedly, it's not the best shield for every situation.

[Callan S.]

ok, this is from jaeger as well, now imagine there are a a hundred archers IN FRONT OF YOU (AAAAGH) want a buckler now?

Me, Ill take the kite or tower shield, bigger the better.... have we grasped the concept yet?
if you still havent grasped the concept we can do a play by email/post demo of the concept, have a character equiped with a round shield or buckler and one with a kite shield and then we will test out the theory using 20 archers and see what happens and what you think of more coverage after this little experiment. or if you prefer get some neighborhood kids to throw some rocks at you while using home made shields of various sizes and then let us know what you think of more coverage when missiles are zeroing in on your noggin and you will begin to see that shields were made for specialized purposes such as personal sword to sword (buckler or round shield) or big tower shield for formation or battlefield combat when you are being shot at. Thats how they worked dig?

Nope, me no understand...me hit head on piece of wood now. Perhaps if nice mista is a little more patronising, me graspy his every word.

Me, if faced with 100 or 20 archers...I'll take a freakin' wall or stout tree, not a shield. Oh, but what if I'm in a field with no cover and twenty archers pop up. Well how the hell was I so stupid as to A: leave myself that exposed and B: have twenty guys just pop up at no notice!?

Before I allow myself to carry this tone further, I'll just stop here, in regards to your post and its grasp.

[Callan S.]

Okay..

The larger shields aren't used particularly in duels. They are cumbersome, and when it's a matter of personal skill and finesse, they are probably not the best choice.

As a tool of war and melees, however, when you have friends and foes alike hacking madly for their lives it's imminently better than mid-sized shields. I don't have to move a kite or tower to block 3 different blows (2 of which I may not even see) as much as I would have to move a smaller shield. I can also hide behind it and bull into an opponent, knocking them down, and putting a gap in the enemy line.

So... Yeah. It's all about the size, but admittedly, it's not the best shield for every situation.

This is more what I'm looking for now (since its pretty clear now I havn't missed any differentiation rules for the larger shields). Thanks for being patient with me, as it seems for some I've been looking for an answer for too long here. And perhaps its true, who knows?

Okay, so it'd make a handy tool for danger managment during massed melee (I'm actually e-mailing Aaron about that at the moment). But how should that exactly/somewhat exactly be represented. Or more to the point, what options does the guy who is trying to get past your small wall of a shield, have? What parts of you can he attack? Is he at a penalty? Should the large shield user be rolling anything at all|?

Obviously, as I said before, I can make my own house rules. But I've sometimes found other people apart from myself can come up with brilliant ideas, so I'll be so impudent as to hope for that here instead of answering myself instantly. :)

[Lance D. Allen]

I'm not an expert, as I've said many times before, but the rules as they are seem to reflect the usage of shields quite handily. Are you having problems with it due to things you noticed in play, or are you just looking it over and noticing something that seems amiss? If it's the former, then go ahead with your house rules, and share 'em with us. If it's the latter, play with it. I've noticed several problems which I realized weren't problems after playing with them.

[Mokkurkalfe]

Me, if faced with 100 or 20 archers...I'll take a freakin' wall or stout tree, not a shield. Oh, but what if I'm in a field with no cover and twenty archers pop up. Well how the hell was I so stupid as to A: leave myself that exposed and B: have twenty guys just pop up at no notice!?

Before I allow myself to carry this tone further, I'll just stop here, in regards to your post and its grasp.

What if your'e a soldier who's going to charge across a field against said archers?
The general view here seems to be that it's in that situation you'll want a big shield, and that an average adventurer will usually be better of with a smaller one.

[Brian Leybourne]

It's certainly true that a larger shield should have a larger advantage against missile fire, this doesn't totally translate in TROS since an archer can choose where he shoots you, but of course with a larger shield his options are more limited and are likely to be the areas that he has to blow extra dice to target, so the benefit is there, just slightly hidden.

If it still bothers you, give the defender a +1 die bonus on his parry attempt (to parry the arrow with the shield) for a large shield and +2 dice for a tower, or something like that.

Brian.

[Lance D. Allen]

I'd say, actually, that he can fire at areas not covered by the shield, or at the shield, period. If it's a strong enough bow, it might manage to get through, then I'd let it be randomly determined where it hits (an arrow through your arm? tickling your ribs? Never know...) If the shield is a tower shield, it might be quite possible that there IS no uncovered area.

In war, however, most times archers didn't aim at all. They fired en masse, and if it hit, it hit. In that case, I'd simply randomly determine whether one or more arrows could possibly hit a given character, then let him react to those.

[Mokkurkalfe]

It's certainly true that a larger shield should have a larger advantage against missile fire, this doesn't totally translate in TROS since an archer can choose where he shoots you, but of course with a larger shield his options are more limited and are likely to be the areas that he has to blow extra dice to target, so the benefit is there, just slightly hidden.

If it still bothers you, give the defender a +1 die bonus on his parry attempt (to parry the arrow with the shield) for a large shield and +2 dice for a tower, or something like that.

Brian.

Hit location modifiers (more or less a must, in my opinion), make big shields pretty effective. Either shoot on a shielded part, or shoot at legs or head at - 2 or 3 dice.

Those two or three dice can make a really big difference at long ranges. At short ranges, a shieldman could just play hockey goalie with the shield, or, if it is a big enough shield, just hide behind it completely.

In a war situation where the arrows come raining down, I just snatch a hit location table from another game.

[Callan S.]

Brian, thanks, I was wondering if anyone else noticed large shields don't totally translate. But yup, covering everything but the areas that have penalties is a strong idea (I was sort of hoping there was something already in the book and something like this would come up, thanks!).

Wolfen, I suppose against massed, un-aimed volleys of arrows, more shield is better. But then again I'm more looking at the 'common' adventurer use for them.

Okay, I suppose I'm being a little specific myself, since I'm referring more to the adventurer use of it…maybe the larger shields were used primarily for military engagements, so kind of useless on the adventurer front. That's sort of what I'm (badly?) investigating here.

Mokkurkalfe, you could use the fall damage distribution chart from TROS to save yourself looking in another book, when it comes to random locations.


me: Well, it seems arrows are covered to a degree (though it'll be by GM determination)

As to melee, I thought a good idea would be to give bonus dice to terrain rolls, for when you have a large shield and are facing several foes and only wanting to fight one. For a heater shield I'd give +3 terrain dice, and with the kite I'd give +7 dice…yep, sounds a lot, but remember your characters are at a CP penalty for these shields already (terrain rolls come from your CP pool, after all). The extra dice need to make up for the shields inherent CP penalty when it comes to terrain rolls and when it comes to actually wacking people (Kite has -3 CP for example…that’s a sting, even though you don't have to split your pool between two foes since you get such a bonus on terrain rolls (but then again, you can still fail the terrain roll!)).

Thanks for everybody's responses! :) (including a certain post which could have been worded better, I'm sure there was good intention behind it, somewhere)

[Ashren Va'Hale]

whose post could tha have been?....... <shrugs and goes back to editing>

[contracycle]

Okay, I suppose I'm being a little specific myself, since I'm referring more to the adventurer use of it…maybe the larger shields were used primarily for military engagements, so kind of useless on the adventurer front. That's sort of what I'm (badly?) investigating here.

That, I think, is the key.

[Ashren Va'Hale]

on the archers being able to adjust their aim to uncovered parts... well, you have to assume that there is uncovered area! the charater can hide behind the shield or move it to cover the exposed areas and maneuver to limit exposure.