"may get stuck" weapons how?

Some weapons have the "may get stuck" in there profile?

How does this work?

And next i wanna ask, my players have found out that the pick+shield combo is the best (some may dis-agree, including me). BUT
It seems that a pick is much better then a sword, becouse of the armour penetation and better damage....how do i somehow get the characters to use different weapons, i was first thinking that maybe if they parryed with the weapon it could get broken somehow, but they always use the shield for that.

why are picks much better then swords? help me!

Picks were better than swords with regards to penetrating armor IIRC. I'm not sure if there are rules for weapons getting stuck, but off the top of my head I'd say that any damage over 5 after you factor in TO and Armor causes your weapon to get stuck if it has the "may get stuck" property.

The number that it exceeds 5 by is the TN that you must beat in a ST test next exchange to pull it out. It takes a full exchange and during this time you may only dodge, or block if you have a shield.

So for example lets say my ST 4 warrior hits someone with a pick and deals 10 damage. The opponent has leather armor and a TO of 2 (this guy shouldn't be fighting) so after all of this the fianl DR is 6, so the TN to get his pick unstuck is 1. Granted it's impossible not to get, but it does take 1 exchange.

Sound good?

I'm just thinking, if you want to encourage the players to try other weapons, remind them that certain manuevers are best performed with certain weapons. Also - and this will mean playing around with the "official printed" rules - remember weapon lengths. Although both the pick, mace, and the warhammer are listed as "medium" range weapons, they are also described as being in the 24-30' range in length. The shortsword, described as 20-33 inches, is considered a "short" weapon. Why this is, I'm not certain - perhaps an oversight, maybe something having to do with how the weapon is used, but in my (admittedly limited) experience in weapon sparring, even a 3-3 1/4 foot armingsword has the advantage over the 2-2 1/2 foot mass weapon in the case of length - handaxes being an exception (the one we use is a little over 3 feet long). Also, if you want to show them the advantage of other types of weapons, remember, the pick, hammer, and mace are rather poor thrusting weapons - yeah, you could smash them at someone's face, but that's a bit different than running someone through with a narrow point. Point out to your players that in a red-red situation, thrusting has an advantage in terms of speed, and that they would all be having a rather tough time in that fight with the aggressive cut-and-thrust duelist with the longer, pointier blade and buckler.
Kaelin

Kaelin wrote: Although both the pick, mace, and the warhammer are listed as "medium" range weapons, they are also described as being in the 24-30' range in length. The shortsword, described as 20-33 inches, is considered a "short" weapon. Why this is, I'm not certain - perhaps an oversight, maybe something having to do with how the weapon is used, but in my (admittedly limited) experience in weapon sparring, even a 3-3 1/4 foot armingsword has the advantage over the 2-2 1/2 foot mass weapon in the case of length - handaxes being an exception (the one we use is a little over 3 feet long). Kaelin

thanks for answer, i hope soon that jake or Brian will answer my question.

and i really don't know how to make my characters try other weapons, it seems that the warhammers, maces and picks are all the best.

why are a normal Arming sword so useless?

I know that all those weapons have a bad DTN, but they are always used with a shíeld anyway...

Hmmmm - interesting Slaamander - different experience than what I've had, but then again, I am pretty much the definition of amatuer at the moment, and fight WAY too linear-ly, so thrusting weapons tend to get me good. Still, in your experience, do the mass weapons match the range of the arming sword, for both cuts and thrusts? That was more what I was intending as the "standard" for medium-reach weapons. If so, then I need to start re-thinking some of my fighting style.

To help Bergh out, yes, arming swords are sort of a disatvantage in armored combat over the warhammer, mace, and pick, with lower damage and often poorer shock and pain values, but in most target areas, cutting weapons DO have a significantly higher blood-loss value - whether this comes into play in combat or not I don't know (havent actually had a chance to play a game of TROS yet) - but it COULD become a REAL hassle to PCs after a battle. Also, remember, there are certain social reasons for carrying a sword - largely because most any peasant could, concievable, get his hands on a sptudded club, an axe, or a cheap pick-axe or hammer, but a SWORD requires much larger amounts of metal and often skill to make, and certain noble-types may sneer at someone who walks into court with such a barbaric mass weapon at his/her hip, rather than the more noble and elegant blade (this would all depend on whether or not your characters are gentry, of course). Just trying to come up with some suggestions.
Kaelin

my problem is that a Footman's pick is just so much better then a arming shield when combined with a shield, i hope this "get stuck" rule balaces it, somehow in the middel ages, people did uses swords.....

Actually, I think the damage of the footman's pick and warhammer should be at +1p instead of 2. The penetrating qualities are already covered by the bonus against hard armours, right? I can understand that a flail or falchion gets a +2, or sabers against flesh, but the pick and warhammer seems a little too powerful, taking their anti-armour bonus into account.

Anyway, is you said, they can always use the shield for defence, instead of their (in this regard) lousy mass weapons. So, you just have to get around the shield.
One method, if you interpret the rules like I do, is the Beat maneuver. If your opponent starts with a powerful beat against the shield and succeeds, you will not be able to use it. So, your alternatives are evasion or to parry with the mass weapon. Some might say that you can just ignore the beat and attack back. But the way I do it, you will lose the dice from his successful beat before you attack. Most attacks will be blunted by that.
Another, more risky trick, is the Duck&Weave. Let's say you're at the second exchange of that round. You have 3 dice left. He attacks with 2. In that situation, you have a chance to succeed with a duck&weave. He won't lose that many dice (one, actually), but he can't use the shield next round. And since he attacked, he won't be able to do a Full Evade... Trouble!
In the situation above, bind-the-shield & strike might also work well.

And arming swords aren't useless. They may have lower damage, but it's cutting damage, resulting in more bloodloss, as Kaelin noted. And the better DTN can get you out of a lot of situations.
They ARE, however, useless against heavy armor.

I still hope that Jake or Brian will give me a official ruling on the "may get stuck" notes, i think this is what "balance" it or else i must just go down to ST+1p instead of 2.

Now that I think about it, a friend of mine was telling me about an episode of "Conquest" that featured the advantages and disadvantages of different midieval weapons, and they did talk about how the pick, warhammer, bec-de-corbin, and other such weapons were superior weapons, the chance of them getting stuck in an opponent made them hazzardous to use at times. Until Jake or Brian can post something, how's this - for every level of wound above 3 inflicted, the attacker loses one point of CP in the next exchange - so a level 4 wound will cost the attacker 1 CP point in the next exchange, and a level 5 would will cost the attacker 2 points - this is to simulate the extra effort needed to pull the weapon out. Perhaps it should be even bigger - one point CP loss for each level of damage inflicted - this seems a bit high to be "fair", but may be more realistic - just my 2 cents here.

i think a cp loss of 1 per level of wound sounds fair, a CP loss of one or two is not anything to worry about.

I hope that i soon will get an official answer.

But anyway, it sounds interesting about that Conquest program, myabe i should ask on a "real" ancient weapon forum about the sword vs. pick.

If you are using the to-hit modifiers, should you use the thrusting or swinging ones for picks and the warhammer spike? Granted, it is a swinging motion, but OTOH, you still have to hit that arm with a relatively small spike. Isn't it pretty easy to get the arm out of the way?

good question Mokkurkalfe, yet another question for Jake or Brian, but i woud say they used swing diagram, but i cal also see that that also not fit.

On the damage table's there are a number of entries that state weapon get stuck or weapon lodged in chest,perhaps that means for the type of weapons that can get stuck.

YEs you are right....thanks....!!!

Anyway do a Pick use the swing or Thrust motion? it has puncture damage, and puncture damage seems only to be compatiple with thrusting "attack". when look via the damage tabels.

Pick is a problem becouse its the only "mass" weapon who uses Puncture damage, and when looking at the Mass meapon and shield style, a thrust cost one CP to activate.......was it not more natural to use it as a swing when attacking?

Anyway do a Pick use the swing or Thrust motion? it has puncture damage, and puncture damage seems only to be compatiple with thrusting "attack". when look via the damage tabels.

Pick is a problem becouse its the only "mass" weapon who uses Puncture damage, and when looking at the Mass meapon and shield style, a thrust cost one CP to activate.......was it not more natural to use it as a swing when attacking?

"So you swing a pick and it does puncture damage."

yes this of of course what i imagine, but not the rules.

But the "Swing/cut attacking" only uses hit location that the "cutting damage" tabels cover.

and piercing damage tabels only cover the Thrust attack locations.

see my point? you got a "swing/cutting" weapon who uses Piercing damage table, and piercing damage table uses location you cannot hit with a swing/cut!

I see then just extrapolate, a level 1 woumd is a level one wound and level 5 a level 5 irrispective of the type of damage. Use simmilar levels of BL as a thrusting at the same level and the same shock value as thrusting. The rest is just description. A level 5 pick in the head will be a messy instant death.

yes, that is the way to do it, but troublesome and slow, then the mechanics is like this:

The player it targeting Location V (cut) with his pick. thenthe d6 for specific location is rolled. its a 5=shoulders.

then i have to find a relevent location on the puncture damage....looking...looking..there are no shoulder location in the piercing tabels, then a chest hit must be the right one....

this means that a person with a pick makes a big Vertical swing with his pick and hits him in the chest....this does not seem right.

Think its an error in the rule-system....

Again it depends on the wound level. I would say a level 1 wound on the shoulder, it swungs through taking a little skin slight blood loss, level three it swung through the shoulder ripping out muscle and possibly chipping the bone a definate 'day ruining' experience. Level 5 the spike of the pick enters the shoulder diagonally going through the the bone or the neck or chest, death imminent, weapon stuck.

In other words just guess withinin the level 1-5 structure what a swinging puncture would do to the same areas that a blunt or cutting swing can hit. It shouldn't slow you down to much.

In fact you could actually make your own swing/puncture damage table in advance then it wouldn't slow you down at all.

yes, what i need to do is a Swing location/puncture damage Location table, for this kind of weapon type.

think i will right though it! anyway as i can see puncture damage is alot worse on the same level then cuts.

Kaelin wrote: Hmmmm - interesting Slaamander - different experience than what I've had, but then again, I am pretty much the definition of amatuer at the moment, and fight WAY too linear-ly, so thrusting weapons tend to get me good. Still, in your experience, do the mass weapons match the range of the arming sword, for both cuts and thrusts? That was more what I was intending as the "standard" for medium-reach weapons. If so, then I need to start re-thinking some of my fighting style.

Another thought to the getting stuck idea - Would not the pick risk getting stuck with a sucessful block by a shield? Pehaps something if the sucesses are equal, of if the attacker ties or wins by 1 or less. The attacker loses the use of his pick, the defender loses proper use of the shield, so the defender has more of an advantage.

Salamander - "If you fight in a linear fashion using the longsword (at least the German Schüls) you will find yourself on the recieving end far too often."

Yeah, that's my problem exactly - I dunno, I hust can't seem to get used to the side-step - every now-and-then, I can time it right, and then it works REALLY well - I'm also REALLY out of practice at the moment (I used to live in Jersey, and practiced with several of my friends fairly regularly - moved down here to virginia in June, and havent quite gotten together a core swordfighting group yet). From what you've described, though, REQUIRING a shield to get within an armingsword's reach in order to attack with a mass weapon, it sounds like there is a decent disparity in reach - hence why I suggest using the "short" descriptor for mass-weapons. Perhaps using an additional range-descriptor, such as very close, would suffice for the shortsword, while hand continues for use with both daggers and kicks/punches.

I say it's a thrusting/puncturing attack. If you search through the forum, you'll find this has come up a couple of times before.

May get stuck? I dunno, get the character to make a ST roll against a TN of 8 or get stuck. Stuck weapons must be either relinquished or wrenched free on subsequent exchanges with the same roll. How's that?

Brian.

Kaelin wrote:
Yeah, that's my problem exactly - I dunno, I hust can't seem to get used to the side-step - every now-and-then, I can time it right, and then it works REALLY well - I'm also REALLY out of practice at the moment (I used to live in Jersey, and practiced with several of my friends fairly regularly - moved down here to virginia in June, and havent quite gotten together a core swordfighting group yet). From what you've described, though, REQUIRING a shield to get within an armingsword's reach in order to attack with a mass weapon, it sounds like there is a decent disparity in reach - hence why I suggest using the "short" descriptor for mass-weapons. Perhaps using an additional range-descriptor, such as very close, would suffice for the shortsword, while hand continues for use with both daggers and kicks/punches.

when are ARMA going to expand to Denmark....?

sorry total off topic post.

bergh wrote: when are ARMA going to expand to Denmark....?

sorry total off topic post.

bergh
one of my players just got back from Denmark...he was born here in australia but his family was from denmark

i know totally off topic but hey bergh started it :)