strikerank

Discover the Legend RPG, Mongoose's fantasy game.
AnubisCK
Weasel
Posts: 36
Joined: Sat Jun 11, 2011 2:47 pm

strikerank

Postby AnubisCK » Sun Jul 03, 2011 7:01 pm

ok i find this easy to understand but this came up while a player wanted to create a knight who plans to wear heavy plate Armour. while hes mounted and hes not having to move him self in the heavy plate should is strike rank be penalized
RosenMcStern
Lesser Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 708
Joined: Thu Jun 15, 2006 12:06 pm
Location: Somewhere in the EU
Contact:

Postby RosenMcStern » Sun Jul 03, 2011 7:14 pm

Not for movement. But he would still be penalized for initiative: he cannot swing his weapon as fast as an unencumbered fighter.
Dan True
Greater Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 891
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2010 4:22 pm
Location: Denmark

Postby Dan True » Sun Jul 03, 2011 7:28 pm

And his vision is impaired, his hearing is slightly off, he cannot turn his head as quickly and his arms are more cumbersome and the armour can get in the way. There are plenty of reasons to the SR penalty :)

- Dan
Check out my RuneQuest 6 blog!. It now has an adventure idea generator :)

Author of the Eberron for Legend/MRQ2 conversion:
http://runequill.com/files/Eberron_Legend.pdf
Jujitsudave
Banded Mongoose
Posts: 313
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2010 1:31 am
Location: South Florida

Postby Jujitsudave » Sun Jul 03, 2011 10:51 pm

True, but if he is engaged in a mounted charge with a lance, none of those factors matter. Provided that he is only doing this action, I wouldn't penalize his strike rank.
PhilHibbs
Greater Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 1453
Joined: Sun Sep 24, 2006 9:45 pm

Postby PhilHibbs » Mon Jul 04, 2011 6:32 am

Jujitsudave wrote:True, but if he is engaged in a mounted charge with a lance, none of those factors matter. Provided that he is only doing this action, I wouldn't penalize his strike rank.
Weapon reach is handled differently from strike rank. He will hit first against opponents with shorter weapons. Against another, un-armoured rider with a lance? Well, I think jousting isn't normal combat, both strikes are always going to be simultaneous unless someone has a really, really long lance, and that would probably be harder to use.
Dan True
Greater Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 891
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2010 4:22 pm
Location: Denmark

Postby Dan True » Mon Jul 04, 2011 6:42 am

Jujitsudave wrote:True, but if he is engaged in a mounted charge with a lance, none of those factors matter. Provided that he is only doing this action, I wouldn't penalize his strike rank.
I don't agree. I have very limited experience with mounted combat, but the little riding experience I have combined with the "Weapons that made Britain great series" for the Lance, lead me to think otherwise. Even when charging headlong into battle, you still need to be aware of your surroundings, the situation can still call for you to quickl having to lower/heighten your lance, aim it more to one of the sides, drop it and draw a sword instead, move your shield to protect the neck of the horse from a specific blow etc.
All those actions are impaired by the armour, especially those handling when you act - because you are a wee bit slower, and have impaired vision.

The only times a cavalry charge is going to be just riding in a straight line and making kebab out of the enemy, is when heavy cavalry is engaging light troops that really can't fight back once close combat is joined, such as archers...

But of course, you're free to rule as you like. In some situations it might be appropriate to not give SR penalties.

- Dan
Check out my RuneQuest 6 blog!. It now has an adventure idea generator :)

Author of the Eberron for Legend/MRQ2 conversion:
http://runequill.com/files/Eberron_Legend.pdf
Cuediin
Shrew
Posts: 20
Joined: Sat Jun 25, 2011 7:40 am
Location: Humberside

Postby Cuediin » Mon Jul 04, 2011 8:23 am

I can see both sides of the arguement, but, iirc there is a bonus modifier if you are mounted.
Perhaps you could give a bonus modifier to SR based on either a fixed value or a die roll, perhaps a D4 but only if engaging non mounted troops?
RosenMcStern
Lesser Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 708
Joined: Thu Jun 15, 2006 12:06 pm
Location: Somewhere in the EU
Contact:

Postby RosenMcStern » Mon Jul 04, 2011 8:43 am

Dan True wrote: The only times a cavalry charge is going to be just riding in a straight line and making kebab out of the enemy, is when heavy cavalry is engaging light troops that really can't fight back once close combat is joined, such as archers...
That would be a charge. Which means you attack one entire CA earlier, not some Strike Ranks earlier. So the advantage is already factored in.
Dan True
Greater Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 891
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2010 4:22 pm
Location: Denmark

Postby Dan True » Mon Jul 04, 2011 9:04 am

RosenMcStern wrote:
Dan True wrote: The only times a cavalry charge is going to be just riding in a straight line and making kebab out of the enemy, is when heavy cavalry is engaging light troops that really can't fight back once close combat is joined, such as archers...
That would be a charge. Which means you attack one entire CA earlier, not some Strike Ranks earlier. So the advantage is already factored in.
But therefore all the factors lovering ones SR are still viable. The SR still affect when you will begin the charge - so in my view the SR penalty should still be there, even when mounted.

If an unarmoured light cavalryman come across a skirmisher in the forest, he will perhaps get a higher SR and therefore limit the number of actions the skirmisher can do before he hits him.

If a fully armoured knight comes across the same skirmisher, he will almost certainly have a lower SR - which means the light-on-his-feet skirmisher can perhaps get an action more in (to run away propably) before the charge hits.

In my view, this makes perfect sense. The fully armoured man still has an annoying helmet which limits view, turns his head slower etc.

- Dan
Check out my RuneQuest 6 blog!. It now has an adventure idea generator :)

Author of the Eberron for Legend/MRQ2 conversion:
http://runequill.com/files/Eberron_Legend.pdf
riordan
Cub
Posts: 6
Joined: Sat Jul 02, 2011 9:39 am

Postby riordan » Mon Jul 04, 2011 11:55 am

Dan True wrote:Even when charging headlong into battle, you still need to be aware of your surroundings
- Dan
Example in case: A mountain-that-rides in full plate armor might overlook his stallion's pronounced reaction to his opponent's mare in heat...
:wink:
Loz
Duck-Billed Mongoose
Posts: 2087
Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2006 12:34 pm

Postby Loz » Mon Jul 04, 2011 1:39 pm

A mounted warrior has certain advatanges and disadvantages.

1. He's higher up, so commands a good view of his surroundings, assuming his vision is unimpaired.

2. He gains combat style bonuses for being higher, and any foot troops attacking him won't be able to reach his upper body and head unless they have suitable weapons.

3. However, he also has to maintain control of his mount which will require concentration, even for a skilled rider.

4. Depending on the circumstances he might be considerably slowed as he controls both mount and his own combat options.

So in all, I would keep the strike rank penalty as is. An armoured, mounted warrior has a great deal to concentrate on, and this will keep him at a slower reaction pace.

Above all, adjusting strike rank for mounted warriors layers-in complexity that you just don't need.
What am I supposed to say?
Where are the words to answer you,
When you talk that way?


Rush - Spindrift
Dan True
Greater Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 891
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2010 4:22 pm
Location: Denmark

Postby Dan True » Mon Jul 04, 2011 1:47 pm

Loz wrote: Above all, adjusting strike rank for mounted warriors layers-in complexity that you just don't need.
Plus, if you simply remove SR penalty from armour for mounted troops, you risk not making a difference on armoured and unarmoured cavalry. Why then should there ever be light cavalry?

- Dan
Check out my RuneQuest 6 blog!. It now has an adventure idea generator :)

Author of the Eberron for Legend/MRQ2 conversion:
http://runequill.com/files/Eberron_Legend.pdf
Jujitsudave
Banded Mongoose
Posts: 313
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2010 1:31 am
Location: South Florida

Postby Jujitsudave » Mon Jul 04, 2011 11:29 pm

I think it mainly depends on the situation, but you all have good points and I'm corrected. Those explanations make sense.
Mixster
Lesser Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 467
Joined: Tue Dec 07, 2010 7:12 pm
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark

Postby Mixster » Tue Jul 05, 2011 9:54 am

Dan True wrote:
Loz wrote: Above all, adjusting strike rank for mounted warriors layers-in complexity that you just don't need.
Plus, if you simply remove SR penalty from armour for mounted troops, you risk not making a difference on armoured and unarmoured cavalry. Why then should there ever be light cavalry?

- Dan
To get around encumbrance problems on the horse so you can ride faster than heavy cavalry and pepper them with arrows?

I guess that's what light cavalry was used for IRL.

Anyway, I see no real reason why you should not be worn down by armour when you are sitting on a horse.

Also, I already find plenty of good things about sitting on a horse that should more than outweigh the bad stuff that your combat skills can't go over your ride skill.
Meep Meep
Cowboy
Mongoose
Posts: 118
Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 8:51 pm

Postby Cowboy » Sat Jul 16, 2011 11:26 am

Dan True wrote:
Loz wrote: Above all, adjusting strike rank for mounted warriors layers-in complexity that you just don't need.
Plus, if you simply remove SR penalty from armour for mounted troops, you risk not making a difference on armoured and unarmoured cavalry. Why then should there ever be light cavalry?

- Dan
For budgetary reasons, surely?

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests