Jake wrote: Therefore if the dagger guy got close in it would make more sense for the pikeman to pull a sword and have a more reasonable range advantage over the dagger guy. This is doubly true if the dagger guy has wisely grasped his opponent's pike. Then, instead of trying to recover the lost pike, the pikeman would just pull his sword and go at it.

svenlein wrote: Jake how would you simulate grabbing and opponents weapon in tros?

Grappling to Trap refers to grabbing someones arm that he is attacking with, im refering to grabing someones weapon.

Scott

It's not that much different.

Lyrax wrote: It's not that much different.

Jake Norwood wrote: Yeah, it's really not. Do you mean grabbing a sword? A spear? Different things, really...

For big weapons: They must be parried, blocked or dodged before they can be grabbed.

For small weapons: The hand of the aggressor can be held before he actually strikes.

there are quite a few diffrences across the board. ok, swords. tye are often sharp and smoth. It is much easier to hold by the hilt. Grabbing a sword blade and keeping it from cutting your hand severly are very different things.
In the case of a pike, or a short staff, you only have one hand on the weapon, the opponent has two. If your gripping near the head probably you'll lose that grip almost immeadiately. if you are several feet up the shaft (unlikely IMO, if the pike wielder is fairly competant) you have a much easier chance.

Metal gauntlets are not going to do very well in either case. You'll take less damage, but have considerably less grip on a smoth pole, or metal surface. Against a knife you might manage to grab the hand... it's quick though. and a good knife fighter is going to be on guard against this. Grabs are harder than Parries partial evasions IMO and should have a higher TN Perhaps a TN of about 8 or 9. Grabbing at the shoulder is much easier but this leaves the weapon rather free.

I'll think some more on this... but this is what comes to mind at first.

On a related note.. what do people think of Duck & Weave? With a TN of 9 I find that it just doesn't get used much, if an opponent swings a sword at you with 6 dice at TN6, you would need 15 dice on a D&W just to expect to equal his successes.

I have played around with dropping the TN to 8 to see how that pans out (it's even an option I slipped into V2 of the combat sim), makes it a lot more useful, but maybe it's too useful now? (and it's only +1TN over a partial evasion).

Thoughts?

Thirsty would you suggest the only people who grab opponents weapons are either significantly more skilled than the opponent or are dead? Because with your interpretations of grabs there would be almost no reason to do them.

Jake in sword fights do people (of similar skill) grab there opponents weapon successfully, or do only superior duelers do this maneuver to show off?

Thanks,

Scott

Jake do duelists of similar skill duck and weave against each other? If so does the person who tries to do his almost always get hit, b/c that is what the rules produce.

Scott

svenlein wrote: Thirsty would you suggest the only people who grab opponents weapons are either significantly more skilled than the opponent or are dead? Because with your interpretations of grabs there would be almost no reason to do them.

Scott

According to historical sources and manuals, steel blades were grabbed frequently, even with bare hands. I personally don't advocate the practice, but it was done. Spears weren't greased, I assume, because it was important to be able to grab your own spear all over, too.

Jake

If you know what you're doing (and anyone with a proficiency over 2 or 3 probably does) then the risks of grabbing a blade are slim to none, and the possible benefits are more than worth it.

Risks: If the blade slips, it'll cut your hand pretty nastily. If the blade slips.

Advantages: If the opponent can't use his weapon (it happens when they've grabbed it!), you can usually get a strike in with your own before he tackles you in an attempt to wrestle.

A lvl 1-2 wound vs. a lvl 3-5 wound? No contest.

Also, a pikeman/spearman cannot pull his weapon out of his oppenent's grip (once the haft is grabbed), unless he's lots faster than his opponent, or his opponent has very sweaty hands (bad grip). This has been backed by practice with a short staff (never seen anyone yank the staff out of someone's hand once it was grabbed).

Lyrax wrote: Also, a pikeman/spearman cannot pull his weapon out of his oppenent's grip (once the haft is grabbed), unless he's lots faster than his opponent, or his opponent has very sweaty hands (bad grip). This has been backed by practice with a short staff (never seen anyone yank the staff out of someone's hand once it was grabbed).

Frequently? hmmmm I can believe all trained it. I would also think that most of the times it happened successfully it was done by a very skilled individual. I'd think a Feat such as this would have a high incidence of being recorded when done successfully, and ignored when it failed. It's failing would hardly be noteworthy.

As an ARMY officer I trained with a boyonet on my M-16 too. I never said it was impossible... but a failed attempt brte handed would probably take a wound. Now if the weapon was bound first... Chances would improve.

With out training or experience, i'd still think it would be far safer block with a buckler in a fight than to rely on a chancy grab bare handed of a sword.

Of course if you don't have a bucker handy, and your outclassed weapon wise... it might be a better gamble than trying to parry a longsword endlessly with a dagger. I just don't see this being easy against competent foes.

But i could be wrong. If I am it is very counter-intuitive.

Jake in the manuals is grabbing an opponents weapon only done in response to attacks, or also preemptively too?

Lyrax and Bob in your experience with staves how would it happen that someone would grab his opponents staff, would he let go of his staff or was he fighting with another weapon?

Thirsty I agree that blocking with a buckler might be easier in some situations, that is why I think grab would have an activation cost.

Thirsty I may be wrong but I think ARMY bayonets are sharper than most period swords.

Jake how often where period swords sharp and how often not, I’ve seen conflicting evidence?

Scott

svenlein wrote: Lyrax and Bob in your experience with staves how would it happen that someone would grab his opponents staff, would he let go of his staff or was he fighting with another weapon?

svenlein wrote: Jake in the manuals is grabbing an opponents weapon only done in response to attacks, or also preemptively too?

Lyrax and Bob in your experience with staves how would it happen that someone would grab his opponents staff, would he let go of his staff or was he fighting with another weapon?

Thirsty I agree that blocking with a buckler might be easier in some situations, that is why I think grab would have an activation cost.

Thirsty I may be wrong but I think ARMY bayonets are sharper than most period swords.

Jake how often where period swords sharp and how often not, I’ve seen conflicting evidence?

Thirsty Viking wrote: Frequently?
With out training or experience, i'd still think it would be far safer block with a buckler in a fight than to rely on a chancy grab bare handed of a sword.

Of course if you don't have a bucker handy, and your outclassed weapon wise... it might be a better gamble than trying to parry a longsword endlessly with a dagger. I just don't see this being easy against competent foes.

But i could be wrong. If I am it is very counter-intuitive.

Jake do you think the current Grapple to Trap models grabbing an opponents weapon to the level that other combat actions are modeled?

Scott

Do you really need special rules for this stuff? Does this come up frequently enough in your games to be worth agonizing over what an appropriate CP cost should be...?

There are so many maneuvers in TROS already the last thing I want to see is more...there's a limit to how many variations I can keep in my head and I don't want to have to be looking things up in the middle of a fight that's SUPPOSED to be fast and furious.

When obscure stuff like this comes up why isn't "....umm, okay, we'll treat it like a trap and I'll give you a 2 die penalty" enough to cover it.

I mean sometimes close enough is better than perfect.

Valamir wrote: Do you really need special rules for this stuff? Does this come up frequently enough in your games to be worth agonizing over what an appropriate CP cost should be...?

There are so many maneuvers in TROS already the last thing I want to see is more...there's a limit to how many variations I can keep in my head and I don't want to have to be looking things up in the middle of a fight that's SUPPOSED to be fast and furious.

When obscure stuff like this comes up why isn't "....umm, okay, we'll treat it like a trap and I'll give you a 2 die penalty" enough to cover it.

I mean sometimes close enough is better than perfect.

Let me rephrase my question:

Lets say one of your players said, "I'd like to grab his sword when he trys to stab me", how would you handle this?

Scott

Me? I'd pick whatever maneuver I could remember that most resembles the action and use those rules. If I felt it should be particularly harder than then similar move I'd assign whatever CP cost sounded reasonable. Then I'd let the roll tell me who won and by how much and based on the degree of success assign some effect that seemed consistant, ranging anywhere from immobilizing and possibly disarming the weapon on the good side, to taking opponents's successes in damage to the hand/arm for a big failure.

In other words...exactly like I'd handle any situation where the player wanted to do something that I didn't know the rule for. Use the precedent set by other rules I do know, and come up with something that works...and move on.

yes, but specificly what would you do.

What would be the maneuver that most resembles the action? (probably Grapple to Trap)

What would be the CP cost?

Lets say the attacker won by 5 what would you do?
Lets say attacker won by 2?
Tie?
Defender by 2?
Defender by 5?

Just take a moment and pretend these situations happend, how would it turn out, specificly.

I just want to hear examples of what people might do (but specific examples).

svenlein wrote: yes, but specificly what would you do.

What would be the maneuver that most resembles the action? (probably Grapple to Trap)

What would be the CP cost?

Lets say the attacker won by 5 what would you do?
Lets say attacker won by 2?
Tie?
Defender by 2?
Defender by 5?

This thread has gotten active....

Many Bayonets weren't sharp at all, though they come to sort of a point. A dull bayonet does more damage because the body tears around the wound, as opposed to a neat insertion... thats what i was told... I never experienced it my self. While it was possible I might use bayonet training in combat as an officer.... it wasn't real likely. Not terribly likely for an enlisted man either. I was using this example of how complete training covers low probabilities. As for chess; it still teaches tactical think, and planning ahead. Today we have games that more accurately simulate the current tools of war though for this purpose.

I agree that publishing a house rule encourages more widespread use of something. Weapon grabbing is not something I want to inflict upon my players at this time, I feel it adds little to the game. I'll make them pay the closting costs and do a wrestling attack untill the need becomes apparent Or it is explicity defined in oBaM. Which reminds me.... Perhaps the signiture of Brian wouldn't be so costly if a BOX of books was shipped to him to sign and return, and offered as a Limmited set to the forum? But then again the shipping costs may be too high.


Jakes right though, when i think grabbing swords i think short sword... grabbing a rapier would be easier at the end of the thrust... not neccessarlily easy to do, but easier. and with less exposure.

I'd just do a counter, and maybe spend an extra die against a thrust to grab it. Easy.

Jake

So someone thrusts at me, i say to my GM I want to grab his weapon.
I roll a counter with 1 additional activation point.
Lets say I succeed.
Then what happens?

Scott

Then he suffers the same penalty as someone who's been "trapped," unless he opts ot drop his weapon. ALternatively, some kind of contest to regain control of the weapon may be appropriate. But as a fighter, I'd never give them the chance to regain it...I'd close or strike.

Jake

Ok here is a possible distillation:

If a player wished to grab a thrust at him he would execute a counter
with an additional +1 to activation cost, if successful the weapon would
be trapped and in the next exchange the person who grabbed would get 1
extra die per Margin of Success wether he attacks or chooses to wrestle.

Scott

soudns great

svenlein wrote: Ok here is a possible distillation:

If a player wished to grab a thrust at him he would execute a counter
with an additional +1 to activation cost, if successful the weapon would
be trapped and in the next exchange the person who grabbed would get 1
extra die per Margin of Success wether he attacks or chooses to wrestle.

Scott

I wouldn't play with the target number. It honestly really isn't that hard, though it is harder than a simple parry. I think the extra CP from the proposed rule--or maybe another if you think it's too easy--should be plenty. Remember, it only works against a thrust, and you still have to pull it off.

Jake

Jake Norwood wrote: I wouldn't play with the target number. It honestly really isn't that hard, though it is harder than a simple parry. I think the extra CP from the proposed rule--or maybe another if you think it's too easy--should be plenty. Remember, it only works against a thrust, and you still have to pull it off.

Jake

I've just been reading a book on the battle for Iwo Jima (IWO by Richard Wheeler, 1980) and it includes a relevant quote:

"One Marine, charged by a saber-swinging officer, caught the blade with his bare hands, wrung it free, and hacked the officer to death with it. This Marine left the island with two heavily bandaged hands, and with the sword clutched firmly to his breast." Page 149

Keep in mind that the Marine wasn't trained to disarm swordsmen, the Japanese officer had very little sword training, and we have no idea how nice of a katana it was. Also, both of them were battle weary, and the Japanese was probably dehydrated and hungry. But it can be done, even by amateurs (hopefully going up against other amateurs).

Gene Ha (first post here)

MrGeneHa wrote: I've just been reading a book on the battle for Iwo Jima (IWO by Richard Wheeler, 1980) and it includes a relevant quote:

"One Marine, charged by a saber-swinging officer, caught the blade with his bare hands, wrung it free, and hacked the officer to death with it. This Marine left the island with two heavily bandaged hands, and with the sword clutched firmly to his breast." Page 149

Keep in mind that the Marine wasn't trained to disarm swordsmen, the Japanese officer had very little sword training, and we have no idea how nice of a katana it was. Also, both of them were battle weary, and the Japanese was probably dehydrated and hungry. But it can be done, even by amateurs (hopefully going up against other amateurs).

Gene Ha (first post here)

Ha! I love your sig, Gene!