
Heh. Reminds me of the perennial .45 vs. 9mm debate. Which of those do you think is better? (You DO NOT have to take this bait...)

Adept wrote: Parhaps the +2 is the damage on a mounted charge. What else could it be? The logic of a larger horse giving more damage is flawed. Worry about a large man on a small, quick horse rather than a small man on a large horse. What matters in the lance charge is the speed (and the size/strength of the rider). Physics, pure and simple.
Technically, you are correct. This from Wikipedia:andakitty wrote:Exactly so. And if the man thrusts with it, using his own strength, he has...a spear.
andakitty wrote:Although I understand Finns are notorious knife-fighters, I have to disagree. A gladius has a longer, wider blade. Also, 'simple physics' dictates that greater mass=greater momentum=greater damage. Whatever, I can agree to disagree. I certainly don't ever want to find out for sure.![]()
There is that, of course, but I'm sure the listed weapons are supposed to be from the same "tech level".Cobra wrote:
However, the site lists about 28 types of lance and over 100 spears, so I would venture that a lance is not just a lance and a spear not just a spear. A sharpened bamboo spear surely won't do the same damage as a finely honed bronze spear.
Thats not what I see when I think of ringmail at all, I see/remember it as a less dense chainmail with leather backing, much more substantial than this. And To be honest Wikipedia isn't the most reliable source in the world.Adept wrote:
As to the research and playtesting. Blech. I'm sure we are going to be seeing things like ringmail and bezainted armour again, even studded leather if we are really unlucky
[/quote]homerjsinnott wrote:Thats not what I see when I think of ringmail at all, I see/remember it as a less dense chainmail with leather backing, much more substantial than this. And To be honest Wikipedia isn't the most reliable source in the world.Adept wrote:
As to the research and playtesting. Blech. I'm sure we are going to be seeing things like ringmail and bezainted armour again, even studded leather if we are really unlucky
RQ never had studded leather.
What about bezainted?
Actually, what the point of a spear is made from, has far less consequences than you show there. There would be virtually no difference between a copper, bronze or iron tipped spear, and the only penalty for a firehardened tip would be against metal armour.Adept wrote:Now if the list would have stuff like
Bronze/Iron spear d8
Copper spear d6
firehardened wood spear d4+1
Or some such that would be fine.
That I am quite sure of.Adept wrote:Your friend sure has very different experiences than me or the history buffs I know here.
Then you are talking about durability, not ability to inflict injury.Adept wrote: Copper isn't good for edged weapons. It's way too soft and doesn't hold a good edge or point. The copper spear point would be fine for a few stabs against unarmoured humans (until you struck bone), but there is a reason bronze revolutionized warfare. Hammered bronze is hard and keeps a good edge/point.
Of course there is a difference, but the difference lies in how good they are to penetrate armour, not how good they are at penetrate human flesh, which in the end, is the real damage.Adept wrote: I can't imagine that your friend really thinks that there isn't much difference between a good viking spearhead of damast-steel, and a fire hardened "pointy stick" spear. That pointy stick spear would have a hard time penetrating an ordinary leather jacket, where the steel spearhead can rend good chainmail and even pierce plate on a determined thrust.
Yes, a human is harder, and has a bit more resistence. That is why you use a deeper measurement to represent lethal damage, 7 cm instead of the normal 4.5 cm.Adept wrote: Parhaps it's using a melon to represent human headthat stuff just won't fly. A human skull is hard, and even the skin&muscles of the face offer significant resistance.
I certainly hope not unless the list is confined to Bronze Age armour. Mail should have an AP of at least 7 points based on the damage of the broadsword; this would make it penetrable 12.5% of the time by a person of average size and strength (which is a little high I think). I'd be more comfortable seeing it around AP 10, given that there's a -40% 'precise strike' and that a character's damage bonus scales like RQ3.Adept wrote:Looking at the weapon list I'm guessing the armour values are going back to the RQ2 numbers where the highest was hoplite panoply at 6 points..
But you don't have to penetrate armour to hurt the wearer. A point or two of damage can represent bruising or crushing without piercing the armour. Plus, even with RQ locations, you have to consider the abstraction of incomplete armour coverage. A high damage roll could represent hitting bits NOT covered by armour.wartorn wrote:I certainly hope not unless the list is confined to Bronze Age armour. Mail should have an AP of at least 7 points based on the damage of the broadsword; this would make it penetrable 12.5% of the time by a person of average size and strength (which is a little high I think).
Fair points, but the Special (or Critical can't remember) Hit mechanic accomodates hitting vulnerable spots in the old edition and the Precise Strike accomodates that in the new version. I think HP damage is more substantive than light blunt trauma since it is taken away from the location (weakening it). To be fair, I realized I forgot to take into account the 2 point padding underneath which would bring traidional 7 AP Mail right up to par.Wulf Corbett wrote:But you don't have to penetrate armour to hurt the wearer. A point or two of damage can represent bruising or crushing without piercing the armour. Plus, even with RQ locations, you have to consider the abstraction of incomplete armour coverage. A high damage roll could represent hitting bits NOT covered by armour.wartorn wrote:I certainly hope not unless the list is confined to Bronze Age armour. Mail should have an AP of at least 7 points based on the damage of the broadsword; this would make it penetrable 12.5% of the time by a person of average size and strength (which is a little high I think).
Wulf
I've tried wearing mail with no padding... never again! Especially a coif. I do not want a wicker pattern skull...wartorn wrote:To be fair, I realized I forgot to take into account the 2 point padding underneath which would bring traidional 7 AP Mail right up to par.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 20 guests