Pointless battle? Knight vs Rapier.

[Ben Lehman]

So for a quick update, I'm using the combat simulator (of course) and I've tried every strategy I can think of.  Basically every button there is, repeatedly,  in all combinations.  As long as the rapier-wielder keeps a minimum of 5-6 pool for the second exchange, the knight (in platemail with a shield) simply can't touch him.  At least I realized he can *attack back* without having initiative, so that's a big step in the learning process, but I still can't get the fully armored knight to eliminate the duelist.  Even with the duelist throwing red repeatedly.

BL>  Could you post the text from this?  I'm really puzzled how an attack on an undefended, unarmored opponent doesn't result in injury, unless he has a Toughness through the roof, which I don't believe C&T Kid has...

yrs--
--Ben

[Tash]

If the knight has a CP of 5 or 6 its conceivable that he'd repeatedly roll 0 successes in a fight, especially if he was using something like a Doplehander or a War Flail.

[Irmo]

Dunno...I just had Max Steele fight the Cut and Thrust Kid. Though I changed Max into using his Bastard Sword Two-handed and eliminated the shield. Red-Red, both in aggressive stance. Cut and Thrust kid thrust at Max with seven dice and hits, but for damage rate zero....Max hits with an all-dice-on-offense in the first exchange with a cut to the Kid's hands....which end up flopping on the floor, making the second exchange moot....

In a second bout, using the bastard sword one-handed and using the shield, the result is similar, except that Max achieves only a damage rate of 3, so the hands aren't off rightaway. The rest of the fight was bugged due to the simulator saying that the range didn't change since both attacks were successful, but handing the advantage over to the Kid anyway.

[Salamander]

However, you must take into account that if the Rapier-wielder puts enough dice behind that attack (bearing in mind he goes first) he can punch through even the plate.  You're looking at 60% successes with a rapier, so 10 cp (easy if unarmoured stating char) will get approx 6 success - enough to punch straight through that plate.  Admittedly this will not leave enough surplus for a solid wound, but I assume the Rapier-wielder has more cp (around 14) and is thrusting for a weaker part (av 4/5).

I do agree on the tactics, I'm just pointing out that it could all go horribly wrong :P

Personally, if I was the rapier-guy, I'd drop it and run away, find a bow and shoot the knight.  Getting close now?  Fine, run a bit further :D

Yeah, um....
Whle the mechancs of the game do allow this sort of thing, it almost never happened in real life. First off, the fellow with the rapier would turn tail and run away at the first hint of a guy in harness. Why? Because in real life the rapier will not penetrate harness. Also, what idiot is going to a war with a freeking rapier? Also, a bow and even up to a medium arbelest would fail to breech harness. Muskets into the 17th Century were unable to penetrate harness for crying out loud. So while you may allow it because the rules do, I would simply shake my head sadly as the poor fool scratched up the paint job on buddy's harness before he died.

You want to kill a guy in harness, you have two options. Get your own suit of harness and go toe to toe, or you wait until he quits his proofness and you stab him in the back.

[nsruf]

I would simply shake my head sadly as the poor fool scratched up the paint job on buddy's harness before he died.

That may work for your group, but if my Seneschal told me what in effect amounts to

"his armor value vs. your attack is infinity because I said so"

I'd quietly pack up my stuff and go home. Really;)


So how to solve this problem consistently within the rules?

1. Flavor text: No harness provides all-around protection. So instead of saying "the rapier punched through plate armor" (which is silly), assume that 6 successes (which is a flawless success) allows you to target any weak spot you like - e.g. the armpit.

2. Rules mod: The rapier may indeed be slightly to good vs. metal armor. The common fix suggested on this board is to apply the same damage penalties as for the sabre (-1 vs. leather, -2 vs. metal).

3. Tactics: The knight knows that his opponent is hard pressed to hurt him, while he needs only a tiny margin of success for a serious injury. So he attacks every time, regardless of who has initiative. And if the rapier guy overcommits to a nasty attack, the knight can buy initiative. This may leave him with only a 3 dice swing to the arm, but that can cause enough shock to make his opponents attack completely harmless.

[Salamander]

I would simply shake my head sadly as the poor fool scratched up the paint job on buddy's harness before he died.

That may work for your group, but if my Seneschal told me what in effect amounts to

"his armor value vs. your attack is infinity because I said so"

I'd quietly pack up my stuff and go home. Really;)


So how to solve this problem consistently within the rules?

1. Flavor text: No harness provides all-around protection. So instead of saying "the rapier punched through plate armor" (which is silly), assume that 6 successes (which is a flawless success) allows you to target any weak spot you like - e.g. the armpit.

2. Rules mod: The rapier may indeed be slightly to good vs. metal armor. The common fix suggested on this board is to apply the same damage penalties as for the sabre (-1 vs. leather, -2 vs. metal).

3. Tactics: The knight knows that his opponent is hard pressed to hurt him, while he needs only a tiny margin of success for a serious injury. So he attacks every time, regardless of who has initiative. And if the rapier guy overcommits to a nasty attack, the knight can buy initiative. This may leave him with only a 3 dice swing to the arm, but that can cause enough shock to make his opponents attack completely harmless.

Ah, yes. I have never had this problem, nor will I as my group is laced with students of midieval, renaissance & oriental fence. We have all taken a look at the way things really were and accept that that particular battle is not one you want to fight, unless you are the guy in the harness!

1). This is always a viable thing to try, however while you are trying this, I would throw a hefty activation cost the way of the rapier wielder. I mean, you are trying to hit the armpits of a suit of harness. What are his limitations in smacking you but good?

2). I have also employed this one.  It's called the skittering rapier rules mod.

3). Nah. I would use the Full Evade rule and force him into it again. Or ignore his blow knowing I am more than likely coming out of it with enough CP to tune the poor fool. A knight is not an idiot. His job is fighting and killing, so I am guessing he would be better prepared for the tricks than most people... By the way, a guy in Harness does not always have to be a knight...

Remember this game is about picking your fights. The ones that matter and the ones you can win are the only two you should engage in according to the preamble. So if you are facing off against a guy in Harness and all you have is a rapier your best bet is to RUN AWAY.

[nsruf]

Ah, yes. I have never had this problem, nor will I as my group is laced with students of midieval, renaissance & oriental fence. We have all taken a look at the way things really were and accept that that particular battle is not one you want to fight, unless you are the guy in the harness!

It really depends what you want from the game. If you and your group can agree that a rapier wielder never fights a knight, that's fine. But my group (me included) would be inclined to ask "what if?", and demand that the rules (supposedly close to how real melee works) provide a satisfactory answer.

1). This is always a viable thing to try, however while you are trying this, I would throw a hefty activation cost the way of the rapier wielder. I mean, you are trying to hit the armpits of a suit of harness. ...

According to Jake, AV represents how hard it is to find a weak spot in armor (because you just can't punch through plate). So I don't see how an activation cost would be necessary. The possibility - even the necessity - of going for the armpit (or any other weak spot) is already implied in the rules.

2). I have also employed this one.  It's called the skittering rapier rules mod.

I would use it too, if there were rapiers in my Conan campaign. And I think it is the answer to the original problem.

3). Nah. I would use the Full Evade rule and force him into it again. Or ignore his blow knowing I am more than likely coming out of it with enough CP to tune the poor fool.

Agreed, there may be better tactics. My point should have been that buying initiative is only worth it if the rapier wielder goes for a lightly protected location. Otherwise, you can ignore him completely.

A knight is not an idiot. His job is fighting and killing, so I am guessing he would be better prepared for the tricks than most people...

So what is his optimal response in terms of the rules?

By the way, a guy in Harness does not always have to be a knight...

Sure, but calling the opponents "knight" and "rapier guy" was convenient;)

Remember this game is about picking your fights. The ones that matter and the ones you can win are the only two you should engage in according to the preamble. So if you are facing off against a guy in Harness and all you have is a rapier your best bet is to RUN AWAY.

Yes, but the rules should hint at that in some manner. And the original question was whether they do.

[Turin]

First thing max steel ought to do is drop the large shield - use the bastard sword with 2 hands.  The 2cp will make a big difference, as well as better TN's for the sword.

[contracycle]

It really depends what you want from the game. If you and your group can agree that a rapier wielder never fights a knight, that's fine. But my group (me included) would be inclined to ask "what if?", and demand that the rules (supposedly close to how real melee works) provide a satisfactory answer.

You asked, you got an answer: stalemate.  I find that satisfactory, as it is roughly what I would expect.  If I were either fighter, I would try to use Terrain rolls to force my opponent into a corner.  I can't see what it is about the result you find unsatisfactory - is there any evidence for the efficacy of rapiers against full plate?

[nsruf]

You asked, you got an answer: stalemate.

So far, there is no consensus on the outcome in this thread. I don't believe in a stalemate, neither from a rules POV  (even without mod) nor from a "realistic" POV. But Emiricol got a stalemate with the combat simulator, so that's what we are discussing.

I find that satisfactory, as it is roughly what I would expect.

Well, I would expect the rapier wielder to flee or be cut too ribbons, unless he has a distinct CP advantage (above and beyond the knight's CP loss from armor).

If I were either fighter, I would try to use Terrain rolls to force my opponent into a corner.

How's that work? It's not in the rules, so everyone here would handle it a little differently. We can't really discuss the merits of the rules for a situation requiring Seneschal's fiat.

I can't see what it is about the result you find unsatisfactory - is there any evidence for the efficacy of rapiers against full plate?

AFAIK the rapier was not a weapon of war and thus hardly ever used against plate armor. That indicates to me that it wouldn't be effective on a battlefield, though I leave this discussion to the scholars.

[Uber_Munchkin]

If I were either fighter, I would try to use Terrain rolls to force my opponent into a corner.

How's that work? It's not in the rules, so everyone here would handle it a little differently. We can't really discuss the merits of the rules for a situation requiring Seneschal's fiat.

I can't speak for the first printing because I've only got the revised one, but I'm fairly sure there's a big section in the codex of battle explaining terrain roles to represent people having the higher ground etc.

Perhaps in this situation my response, as the faster guy using the rapier, duck and weave to get behind the knight, unarmed grapple to twist his helmet round then smang him on the side of the helmet with the pommel of my sword (loud noise, v.disorienting), knock him to the floor, take his sword, drive it though a chink in his armour.

Pray he doesn't have mates. ;)

[nsruf]

I have the revised printing, too, and AFAIK terrain rolls are only explained with regards to bad footing and fighting mutliple opponents. Everything else is left up to the Seneschal. Not that I mind this in play, but discussing the implications of the rules based on such ad hoc maneuvers is pretty pointless.

[Dain]

I keep hearing people talking about thrusting through a chink in the armor, pit shots, etc,..... While that MIGHT be possible, chances are the Rapier would bend into worthless trash or break LONG before that was possible (fragile blade folks, intended to thrust into soft yielding flesh...not substantial enough to take even a single parry from a real sword without being destroyed....DESTROYED! Thrusting it at an unyielding armor likely would have similar results), the reality of the situation is that even if that situation DID miraculously happen, you'd STILL be holding a broken haft or a bent and worthless piece of trash afterwards as his falling body weight would be sufficient to destroy the blade unless you managed to get that sucker out of him as quickly as you got it into him. Taking a Rapier into combat against armored opponents carrying real swords is too ridiculous to even be labeled laughable.

[Emiricol]

BL>  Could you post the text from this?  I'm really puzzled how an attack on an undefended, unarmored opponent doesn't result in injury, unless he has a Toughness through the roof, which I don't believe C&T Kid has...

That is a lot to post :) After I got serious about testing this out I simply ran through, for about three hours, using every combination there is of maneuvers, with different strategies for allocation of combat pool.  The result was always the same.  Cut n Thrust Kid would hit regularly but never damage, and could never be hit by Max Steele.

Dunno...I just had Max Steele fight the Cut and Thrust Kid. Though I changed Max into using his Bastard Sword Two-handed and eliminated the shield. Red-Red, both in aggressive stance. Cut and Thrust kid thrust at Max with seven dice and hits, but for damage rate zero....Max hits with an all-dice-on-offense in the first exchange with a cut to the Kid's hands....which end up flopping on the floor, making the second exchange moot....

In a second bout, using the bastard sword one-handed and using the shield, the result is similar, except that Max achieves only a damage rate of 3, so the hands aren't off rightaway. The rest of the fight was bugged due to the simulator saying that the range didn't change since both attacks were successful, but handing the advantage over to the Kid anyway.

I never got that result, actually. The only way for that to happen (that I can see) would be for Cut n Thrust Kid to allocate most or all of his dice to a first exchange attack on one round.  If he maintains even 4 or 5 pool he remains unhit, with initiative, indefinitely.  Can you reproduce the result you got and post the relevant exchange(s) so I can see what happened?


My focus is to  see if I am doing something wrong.  As others have mentioned above, the rules, if they reflect what I understand to be the historically likely outcome, would result in the unarmored light weapon wielder getting slain quickly if he doesn't simply run away and the simulator isn't doing this.

As it stands, only head to toe plate armor saves the armored man from simply being casually skewered by his foe.  Or at least that is what I am seeing, which made little sense to me - which in turn resulted in me posting for clarification.

It may be that the mechanics of the game simply don't handle this as I would expect and I'll have to decide house rules to adjust it, but then I'm dictating the result rather than the rules doing so, which is tolerable but not ideal.

[Lance D. Allen]

Assuming a relatively equal level of skill, if the rapier fighter was highly defensive, he could probably outlast an armored opponent, and could possibly kill him once he became too fatigued to fight effectively. Which means that time would be against the armored fighter, and he would have to take more risks, but he'd also be better able to survive those risks, due to the protection of his armor... So the chances are that, eventually, one of his risks would pay off, and the fight would be over. If it did not, then rapier fighter might actually win the day.