Accurate weapon skills

[Kaucukovnik]

For some time I have wondered what a list of medieval/fantasy weapon skills should look like. I feel that the standard skills like sword/dagger/axe/blunt are too simplified and based more on visual similarity of weapons rather than the way of their use.

I have a little experience of my own (a week with a longsword and a few months with a rapier - and it's definitely no longsword nor dagger), but I have read that for example two handed swords required a special training (and that was in RoA series, hooray!)

What about this:

Unramed
Shortblade
Rapier
Longblade
Two-handed sword
Axe
Mace/hammer
Flail
Polearm
Archery (with a bit different rules with crossbows)

Would a game benefit from such a skill set, or would it become too unintuitive for a player used to the old ways? Would you add/remove/divide/merge anything? And are any specific weapon skills needed?

Discuss!

 

[zenbitz]

two weapons
weapon and shield
knife == shortblade?

Not sure ax and mace/hammer are really distinct. Hammer and axe particularly similar, since you have to maintain the correct angle of striking surface (with a mace or club... not so much)

You forgot spear. 1-handed and 2-handed.

Sling? Quarterstaff?

 

[Mystary!]

One handed axes, warhammers and maces work pretty much the same way, your not going to hit someone with the back of the mace.
I would probably put one-handed swords in the same category because the swings are basically the same. Allthough it could have added attack moves like thrusts that could be trained seperately?
Two-handed axes would have to be it's own category. It was used to overwhelm opponents by hitting hard and quick enough to throw a shield bearer (either on horse or foto) off balance, never allowing a counter attack.

 

[zenbitz]

One handed axes, warhammers and maces work pretty much the same way, your not going to hit someone with the back of the mace.
I would probably put one-handed swords in the same category because the swings are basically the same. Allthough it could have added attack moves like thrusts that could be trained seperately?

Swords and maces are different. The balance (not to mention length) is completely different. And yes, you can hit someone with the back or side of the mace. Many swords have two edges as well. With a sword you can "hack" or "slash" (as well as thrust if it has a point). With an axe or mace you can only really 'hack' ("bash" with a mace)

Two-handed axes would have to be it's own category. It was used to overwhelm opponents by hitting hard and quick enough to throw a shield bearer (either on horse or foto) off balance, never allowing a counter attack.

Not sure there is a huge difference between a pole arm and a two-handed axe/mace/hammer.... but I agree there is a big difference between a two handed axe and a one handed axe.

 

[J1M]

One handed axes, warhammers and maces work pretty much the same way, your not going to hit someone with the back of the mace.
I would probably put one-handed swords in the same category because the swings are basically the same. Allthough it could have added attack moves like thrusts that could be trained seperately?
Two-handed axes would have to be it's own category. It was used to overwhelm opponents by hitting hard and quick enough to throw a shield bearer (either on horse or foto) off balance, never allowing a counter attack.

1h swords are stabbing weapons. Stop playing Diablo so much.

 

[Emotional Vampire]

"1h sword"(And even "1h weapon") is mostly a bullshit term. Stop playing Diablo so much.

Not sure there is a huge difference between a pole arm and a two-handed axe/mace/hammer

There is a huge difference between greatswords AND two-handed axes/maces/hammers AND polearms AND polearms themselves. You wield pike differently from a halberd, that's for sure.

If I were making a system, I would probably throw away all "battlefield" weapons, that is weapons which were designed to use in a formation with a hundred buddies, as well as more exotic/fantasy weapons like two-handed hammers/axes and whatnot. Hell, I'm not sure if two-handed hammers/axes even exist. No one will run around the world adventuring with a bill or something equally impractical.

 

[GarfunkeL]

Create a specific skill for each and every weapon. Problem solved.

If you want to be grognard, make them specializations and create over-arching, category skills.

 

[Emotional Vampire]

Actually there should be a skill for each weapon "group", a generic combat skill(Like Combat Sense in CP2020), a "Familiarity" mini-skill for every weapon in the game world(Especially since heroes will be holding magic weapons most of the time), AND synergies(i.e. if you're good with a longsword, you will not be a complete ass with a two-handed sword, and so on).

As usual, a bit too much for a pnp.

 

[Heirophant]

I have been thinking for some time about a system that included skills for each individual weapon, with somewhat overarching categories for different weapon classes. For instance, a single skill for short blades, with individual skills for daggers, knives, gladius, spatha and the like. I think this could work best if it was based in a learn-by-use skill system, ideally one which allowed incremental levelling. For instance:

Short Blades- 2.014
Dagger- 3.112
Gladius- 1.003
Spatha- 0.219

Let's say that all of these skills were keyed off of a character's Strength and Dexterity, so a character with Strength 4 and Dexterity 5 would have an calculation (X) of (4/5*2.014*3.112) when using a dagger.

You could then modify these calculations further using stats based on the weapon itself. A well made dagger could have an accuracy of 1.782 and damage of 1.366, in which case the same character would have an accuracy of (X*1.782) and damage of (X*1.366).

Just to head off the inevitable groaning at the idea of a use-based system, I firmly believe that most, if not all, of the shortcomings of such a system can be overcome by smart campaign design that neither encourages nor tolerates grinding.

 

[GarfunkeL]

And in the end of the day, if someone wants to grind, let them. It's not like you can possibly remove each and every exploit from a CRPG. If nothing else, something writes a trainer or savegame editor and there we go.

Grind is bad if it's absolutely required and b00000ring.

 

[DaveO]

Wizard's Crown had the following skill sets for weapons:
Axe, sword, mace, flail, spear, close combat, bow, crossbow and thrown weapons in Eternal Dagger.
So I'd say you can split the skills a bit, and it would be familiar to old school players like myself.

 

[Talby]

Too complicated. Every game should have just two weapon skills, "sword" and "other."

 

[Mystary!]

Swords and maces are different. The balance (not to mention length) is completely different. And yes, you can hit someone with the back or side of the mace. Many swords have two edges as well. With a sword you can "hack" or "slash" (as well as thrust if it has a point). With an axe or mace you can only really 'hack' ("bash" with a mace)

The balance only makes the sword easier to wield, but you still hit the same way. Swords weren't razord sharp, you needed force and wieght to hit properly. It's a common mistake to think that swords didn't have any wieght at tip. You needed weight to carry the swing through, otherwise the force of the blow could easily be diverted.

Same thing with maces and axes. But you wouldn't hit someone with the back of the maces because you wouldnt get any power behind the swing, simple as that. The optionmight be there, but that wouldn't require a seperate skill.

Hell, I'm not sure if two-handed hammers/axes even exist. No one will run around the world adventuring with a bill or something equally impractical.

Two-handed axes did exist, but they where the size of a fireaxe. Some had longer handles but those where primarily used in formation and against horsemen

 

[zenbitz]

Swords and maces are different. The balance (not to mention length) is completely different. And yes, you can hit someone with the back or side of the mace. Many swords have two edges as well. With a sword you can "hack" or "slash" (as well as thrust if it has a point). With an axe or mace you can only really 'hack' ("bash" with a mace)

The balance only makes the sword easier to wield, but you still hit the same way. Swords weren't razord sharp, you needed force and wieght to hit properly. It's a common mistake to think that swords didn't have any wieght at tip. You needed weight to carry the swing through, otherwise the force of the blow could easily be diverted.

I have handled a few swords and they varied quite a bit in their tip heavy-ness and overall balance. But never felt one that handled like an axe. You would hack with a heavy sword, but slash with a scimitar or saber.

Same thing with maces and axes. But you wouldn't hit someone with the back of the maces because you wouldnt get any power behind the swing, simple as that.

Nonsense. As long as it's not too long you can just turn your wrist over and hit with the other side - for example to go around a block.

The optionmight be there, but that wouldn't require a seperate skill.

Hell, I'm not sure if two-handed hammers/axes even exist. No one will run around the world adventuring with a bill or something equally impractical.

Two-handed axes did exist, but they where the size of a fireaxe. Some had longer handles but those where primarily used in formation and against horsemen

Look up "Dane Axe", for example (for EV). I don't know why you are so down on polearms - either - they are essentially just spears you can chop with, and a spear is one of the most basic tool/weapons there is. Polearms (basically converted farm implements) and spears are also far cheaper than a well made sword.

 

[Mystary!]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Szn6AHiQqto
Around 2:30. The whole thing is interesting. It's about pommels but deal with the balance of a sword aswell.

 

[Phelot]

I was thinking about a system based solely on fighting styles rather then individual weapons.

So, fast thrusting weapons like a gladius or dagger would have it's own skill.

pole-arms would be another.

Heavy, two-handed axes.

etc.

Some of these skills could even be broken down into different skills so you could have a very fast thrusting skill for those that want to be aggresive and you could have a slower, more cautious, careful to keep distance skill.

One other thing I'd like to see is an emphasis on making the player learn more then one weapon skill. So, perhaps a critical failure with a spear means that the player would have to resort to a shorter weapon since the enemy would be inside the reach of the spear. Thus a player would want to be competent with some sort of backup weapon. Most real life warriors that I know of, used to carry a dagger into battle as well.

 

[Emotional Vampire]

I don't know why you are so down on polearms - either - they are essentially just spears you can chop with

Yeah, and the fact that you can make an entirely new type of attack with them is completely irrelevant.

That's like saying longswords are just like rapiers - except you can chop with them.

[Edit]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Szn6AHiQqto
Around 2:30. The whole thing is interesting. It's about pommels but deal with the balance of a sword aswell.

This guy(lindybeige) is pretty awesome. I would totally subscribe if I was gay enough to have an account on YouTube.

 

[Mystary!]

Nonsense. As long as it's not too long you can just turn your wrist over and hit with the other side - for example to go around a block.

If you have an ordinary hammer, turn it around in your hand so the blunt end is towards you and try to bang in a nail, or better yet, bash in someones head. It's possible but very awkward. You can't turn your wrist in that way and get power behind the blow.
The mace is basically a hammer for dummies (or more accurately a pimped up club), if you drop it or you can easily pick it up without having to adjust your grip. Doesn't make it less effective at killing thou.

This guy(lindybeige) is pretty awesome. I would totally subscribe if I was gay enough to have an account on YouTube.

Agreed.

 

[zenbitz]

I don't think a mace is like a carpentry hammer at all. more like a short sledge hammer. Also unless you are using a mace to kill insects (normal sized) then you don't really need to be that accurate.

You CAN get power from a "reverse face shot" - although I do have some concerns about wrist stress. It's like a "false edge" blow with a broad sword - swing your arm in an arc, but 'pull back' when you turn your hand over. Making a smaller radius of rotation accellerates the head of the weapon. It's a full body motion though (like any powerful strike), you can just flop your hand over.

 

[zenbitz]

I don't know why you are so down on polearms - either - they are essentially just spears you can chop with

Yeah, and the fact that you can make an entirely new type of attack with them is completely irrelevant.

I didn't mean that they weren't DIFFERENT I was just questioning the statement that "no one would walk around with one". People would walk around with spears, right?

I do like that dudes analogy of sword = pistol or side arm, spear/2H weapon = rifle.

 

[Emotional Vampire]

People would walk around with spears, right?

No.

Unless they're niggers.

Sorry, but carrying two meter(or more) long stick around just ain't practical in any way. And you can't sheathe sheathe it, so you need to hold it at all times. And it's a bitch to ride a horse with it.

So unless you do something crazy like, have it in two parts so you can fold it or something, forget about carrying a polearm around.

 

[DraQ]

People would walk around with spears, right?

No.

Unless they're niggers.

Sorry, but carrying two meter(or more) long stick around just ain't practical in any way. And you can't sheathe sheathe it, so you need to hold it at all times. And it's a bitch to ride a horse with it.

So unless you do something crazy like, have it in two parts so you can fold it or something, forget about carrying a polearm around.

In a logically constructed fantasy world I would expect much more people to carry spears and polearms, actually. Of course individual adventurers would probably carry lighter and more manoeuvrable variants (certainly not anything resembling pikes), but given the frequency with which an adventurer can expect to fight various beasts and monsters it would be outright fucking retarded of him to discard any extra bit of reach and leverage he could possibly carry around.

Therefore: