Henri Christophe
L'empereur
I don't know what is tabletop, but despite civilization main series I also like to play Pokémon, who is a RPG.
You favorite tabletop RPGs and why
- Thread starter Hygro
- Start date
Hygro
soundcloud.com/hygro/
It could be cool to have effects happen, but how much do we want to slow down a round of combat?
Runequest has hit locations and specific effects like limbs being disabled and I wouldn't say combat is any slower than D&D. Things like critical hits and much lower hit points mean it can be a lot quicker.
Some DMs take it all the way down to -10 HP. Each number you go down renders you much closer to death, as in unless you get medical help NOW, you will die (ie. tourniquet, poison antidote, etc.). Once you get to -10, you're definitely dead.
Tabletop means you play the game on a literal table. Kitchen, dining, coffee table, card table... wherever there's enough room. The DM sits at one end with the screen and notes, and the players sit around the table with their character sheets, pencils, and dice. There's a map that someone in the group is supposed to keep current.
Still in D&D you're either fighting at full ability or out of the fight.
Partly I think there are different approaches in the games. In Runequest fighting is meant to be dangerous, something you only do when it can't be avoided. Also a lot more emphasis on things like negotiation, surrender as an option, ransoms etc.
The thing about D&D is that the DM's word is law. If the DM says that your fighting ability is diminishing with each new injury and they do it in a consistent way that doesn't bias the game in favor of the PCs, NPCs, or enemies, it's valid as far as I'm concerned.
No game could use every single bit of information in the manuals, or games would take forever and get bogged down in mathematical minutiae.
In one of our games, the fighter messed up his ankle and the DM ruled that hit points were irrelevant - he still had a few, but he could no longer stand on his ankle - and was therefore out of the fight unless he could reach from where he fell on the floor. That made perfect sense to all of us except the guy who saw it as "roll" play rather than "role" play. I was playing the cleric, but was a wee bit preoccupied with trying to keep myself alive at the time (we were outnumbered), not to mention being out of healing spells anyway and would need to pray for some help from whatever deity I was worshiping in that game (don't recall).
Some DMs are of the view that if you're out of healing spells and the injury isn't life-threatening, apply regular first aid. Not every scratch needs a healing potion.
Thats true of every RPG. The referees option of house-ruling something applies to all games, it isn't an advantage that only D&D has.
Hygro
soundcloud.com/hygro/
I still haven't seen another game with a more fun construction of dice and progression, nor with as nice a theming combo balancing blank slates with defined edges.
Did I say it was? You referenced D&D and so did I. If I were ever to host a multi-player Fighting Fantasy game, I would tweak the rules for that as well, as there are aspects of the game that make no sense in the context of a story, though they're convenient for not getting killed too fast.
In the solo version of FF, you usually heal by eating Provisions. Or you could heal by using a potion that replenishes your Stamina points (or if you were hurt by a curse, provisions might be useless and you need a potion or some other magical item).
Ajidica
High Quality Person
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2006
- Messages
- 22,482
As someone who has done swordfighting (SCA Rapier and SCA Armored) I can safely say that that raw strength is nowhere near as important in swordfighting as your dexterity.
Even in armored combat, if you just try and power through your sword strikes with your arm muscles, you will have weaker strikes than someone with a better utilization of body mechanics and royally f*** up your elbow. I have weak little noodle arms, but provided I get the core muscles properly engaged on the sword strike, I can hit armor and leave a bruise you will feel the next morning.
It takes serious strength to work any sort of warbow, not just a classic English/Welsh longbow. For comparison, look at the longbow archer in this video (the guy in red), who is a seriously big dude:
Once you are past general physical fitness and endurance, skill, dexterity, and mental focus is far more helpful in any sort of swordfighting than strength. Strength can close off strategies an opponent might try, and allow you to get away with things, but everything can be countered. In armored combat, I will lose if I let some of the beefy guys get to within bear-hug range, which is why I need to make use of superior footwork stay out of their measure until I am ready to enter my measure to strike.
Now, medieval soldiers were often pretty big dudes - a diet consisting of meat, beer, and bread would do that too you - but it is certainly not strong = better fighter.
FWIW some of the best SCA armored fighters in my area tend to be in their late 30s/40s, with a couple people in their 50s. That's where skill and mental discipline come in. The experience to be able to move and strike in a consistent manner and knowing exactly what position you will be in during and after a movement and knowing what your options are at every point. (Even if your strike isn't great, you can do it wrong the exactly same way each time and work around it.) The moment you let your shield drift out because you are focused on the strike, or move your shield up because you aren't practiced enough to know whether a blow will hit the shield corner or you, you create an opening a skilled opponent can exploit (and probably made you do in the first place).
True, even FATAL could be fun with a good DM.
(warning, language https://www.rpg.net/reviews/archive/14/14567.phtml)
@AdamCrock Not really. Unfortunately Phrossack isn't around to post his favorite video, so I will:adamcrock said:
Plate armor is far less cumbersome than you might expect (any armor has some degree of cumbersome or fatigue tbf) because it is created and suspended in a way to hang off the body. Its the difference between putting a 40lb salt bag in your backpack and the same salt bag in a proper hiking pack that lets it sit on your hips. Plate also has an advantage in that it is rigid; meaning things don't flop around everywhere. Running and moving around in chainmail gets sucky fast (especially before gambesons and aketons were common) because it is a shirt made of metal. It bounces up and down on your shoulders, it is swinging around your torso and legs, etc. Even tailoring mail so it is form fitting only can do so much.
Last edited:
Hygro
soundcloud.com/hygro/
I appreciate this, and I read you claiming dexterity. But are you not just describing skill level (+hit from level or THAC0 in the old days) plus... strength? Remember, strength is the sauce on top of level, the main show and the is ability and finesse as you describe.
Ajidica
High Quality Person
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2006
- Messages
- 22,482
That's where we start getting gamey stuff, but I would still disagree. Once you reach a level of general physical fitness, say a 12 in D&D, extra strength isn't really needed for swordfighting. The body flexibility, the footwork, the quick responses, weight transfer between legs, etc. And that is all armored combat stuff, not fencing which is traditionally painted as the 'dexterity' swordfighting compared to knights in armor.
I don't have a 5e book handy and I'm too lazy to dig out my 3e book, but to quote from Roll20:
Strength: Strength measures bodily power, athletic Training, and the extent to which you can exert raw physical force. A Strength check can model any attempt to lift, push, pull, or break something, to force your body through a space, or to otherwise apply brute force to a situation.
Dexterity: Dexterity measures agility, reflexes, and balance. A Dexterity check can model any attempt to move nimbly, quickly, or quietly, or to keep from Falling on tricky footing.
The actions described by Dexterity match up with my experience of swordfighting and talking with good swordfighters than what is described in Strength. Again, I'm not saying strength is unimportant for combat. Having a good level of physical fitness and endurance is very important (which is something that is holding me back in armored combat), but in D&D terms that is what? I'd give that a 12 or so. (I messaged some of my D&D nerd friends, and they were feeling 14.) A far cry from the 16s expected for fighter classes or the 18s for barbarians.
EgonSpengler
Deity
- Joined
- Jun 26, 2014
- Messages
- 12,260
In D&D terms, each Character Class has an attribute that is primarily associated with it. D&D isn't trying to accurately model real combat, it's trying to create a game in which different character classes have different strengths. A relatively simple game, too, that you can teach someone to play in an afternoon.
That said, it's fun to talk about this stuff.
So let me ask, as I've never done SCA. Are you allowed to punch, knee, throw elbows, and tackle your opponent? Can you headbutt? Punch the other guy in the nuts or the throat? Throw him into a wall? Break his nose with an elbow? A "to hit" roll in D&D is not "I try to elegantly tag my opponent with the blade of my weapon", it's "I try to maul my enemy with every weapon at my disposal. Oh, yeah, I'm holding a sword while I do it." Do you remember the knife-fight in Saving Private Ryan?
---
I was skimming over the "Maneuvers" available to Fighters who choose the Battle Master archetype in 5th edition. Using some of those, it would be pretty easy to create a warrior who relies mainly on agility and technique over brute force, even if you're not using a Finesse weapon. Probably some Feats you could stack on that, too.
---
Another thing that D&D doesn't model: Using a shield should give you a little 'To Hit' bonus, for being able to conceal your weapon hand. Up close, you can literally shove your shield in your opponent's face so he can't see your weapon, or much else, at all. I would imagine that a lot of knight-vs-knight combat involved shields crashing together.
That said, it's fun to talk about this stuff.
So let me ask, as I've never done SCA. Are you allowed to punch, knee, throw elbows, and tackle your opponent? Can you headbutt? Punch the other guy in the nuts or the throat? Throw him into a wall? Break his nose with an elbow? A "to hit" roll in D&D is not "I try to elegantly tag my opponent with the blade of my weapon", it's "I try to maul my enemy with every weapon at my disposal. Oh, yeah, I'm holding a sword while I do it." Do you remember the knife-fight in Saving Private Ryan?---
I was skimming over the "Maneuvers" available to Fighters who choose the Battle Master archetype in 5th edition. Using some of those, it would be pretty easy to create a warrior who relies mainly on agility and technique over brute force, even if you're not using a Finesse weapon. Probably some Feats you could stack on that, too.
---
Another thing that D&D doesn't model: Using a shield should give you a little 'To Hit' bonus, for being able to conceal your weapon hand. Up close, you can literally shove your shield in your opponent's face so he can't see your weapon, or much else, at all. I would imagine that a lot of knight-vs-knight combat involved shields crashing together.
Last edited:
Ajidica
High Quality Person
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2006
- Messages
- 22,482
As I understand it there is a strict prohibition against grappling with your opponent - that's a good way to get broken or dislocated limbs. You are allowed to use your weapon or shield to push against their body or limbs (in general) and depending on region, if your opponent is part of a battle-line, because 'engagement' in line-to-line, you are allowed to plow into them from the side.That said, it's fun to talk about this stuff.
As far as 'grappling' goes, its prevalence in medieval combat is a bit unclear. It was definitely a key part of the combat mindset - late period texts basically have every knight from age 5 learn how to wrestle - but as far as used in actual combat, I'd say that's a bit unclear (I'm excluding halfswording because that is less swordfighting and more using your sword as a big crowbar). If you have a sword in hand, why do I want to get up close to you to punch you? Keeping you at range lets me use my skill to attack you while staying out of range. Getting into knife-fighting range is a good way to get shanked. Similarly with headbutting. Why do I wand to lower my head, opening up my neck, losing my shield coverage, lose my vision, and possibly bonk myself as badly as you? If I am getting within range of your sword, I better know exactly what I am going to do in that position; and if I am in range of your sword, what am I doing just faffing about with headbutts or punching? Just strike and be done with it.
I have been meaning to try a maneuver warrior, but haven't played in a while and I always played barbarians.
Last edited:
EgonSpengler
Deity
- Joined
- Jun 26, 2014
- Messages
- 12,260
Just skimming through a 5th-ed wiki I found to refresh my memory, it seems like there's a lot of options to build a warrior character who's skilled; her Strength bonus would only be a part, maybe a small part, even with a very high Strength.
Another thing I was thinking about is that main attributes apply to everything that uses them. There's no reason to think that a skilled warrior would also be a good dancer, or good at soccer/football, or be particularly stealthy. We see in modern sports that, at a high level, skills don't translate, even between sports that are similar. So if I were making a professional warrior in 5th ed. who I wanted to have agility, reflexes and balance in battle, just giving her a high Dexterity might not even be the best way to do it. Unless I wanted her to also be scoring goals, tearing up the dancefloor, and sneaking out of the prince's bedroom before the Queen comes downstairs for breakfast.
Another thing I was thinking about is that main attributes apply to everything that uses them. There's no reason to think that a skilled warrior would also be a good dancer, or good at soccer/football, or be particularly stealthy. We see in modern sports that, at a high level, skills don't translate, even between sports that are similar. So if I were making a professional warrior in 5th ed. who I wanted to have agility, reflexes and balance in battle, just giving her a high Dexterity might not even be the best way to do it. Unless I wanted her to also be scoring goals, tearing up the dancefloor, and sneaking out of the prince's bedroom before the Queen comes downstairs for breakfast.
Hygro
soundcloud.com/hygro/
I don't recall which kingdom Ajidica is in, but doing any of this in either An Tir or Avacal would get you removed and probably banned. One of the primary things about SCA, no matter which activities you're involved with, is safety first. That's not to say nobody ever gets hurt, but the idea is to not do stupid things that can get people killed. Nobody likes to suspend or cancel a tournament because someone ended up in the hospital.
Tagging elegantly?
Actually, you could say that if you're doing things a little differently, just to be completely ridiculous about it. One night after an Arts & Sciences meeting, a couple of friends and I had an idea. The lady whose house we were at had some old Girl Guide posters she didn't want anymore, so the guys decided to make paper airplanes from them.
Then they decided to have a paper airplane fight outside, using the An Tir Rules of War. The basics are that if you're hit in the arm and leg hard enough that it would severely or completely prevent you from using that limb, you can't use it. If it's a leg, you have to go down on one knee; if you lose both legs, you have to go down on both knees. If it's an arm, you cannot use that arm.
So these two continued, with me refereeing, until they'd both lost both arms and legs, and resorted to trying to throw paper airplanes at each other with their teeth. They asked me if I'd let them move closer to each other, since they obviously weren't getting anywhere with being over 6 feet apart. So I said sure, and they moved closer... I don't remember who won, but that was the funniest combat I've ever seen.
(normally one of the guys did archery and the other was into fencing)
Even in D&D there are proficiency bonuses in skills that go up with level as well as attribute bonuses. High dex and proficiency in a skill at 1st level probably isn't enough to be a star footballer, win Strictly, or be a master thief.
Oerdin
Deity
AC encompasses the idea of not being hit but also if you get hit you don't get damaged because the armor protects you. So, yes, it makes a lot of sense.
Angst
Rambling and inconsistent
even beyond str/dex, it's baffling that intelligence is a dump stat for combatants. smarts is crucial knowing where to move your weapon. reading your opponents. learning what to do, and when.
