Actual play questions

[juca]

Thanks, Loz, but, as you anwser my questions, I got still new ones (yes, we really like running combat scenarios over skype when bored and Legend is our new jewel).

When using a shield or another weapon we got an extra combat action, right? This combat action must be used with this weapon (or shield), right? But what about the other CA? Can I use a sword and a shield, and use all my CA (including the extra one) on the shield? If so then there is something that forbids one of using "unnarmed" on one hand and a sword in the off-hand to gain the extra CA "without" penalties and still having a hand free to cast spells? After all, by the rules, the player IS using two weapons...

Of course we wanted to kill the player for such powergaming (luckly for him we where over skype), but I think that it is still a valid question.

 

[Loz]

When using a shield or another weapon we got an extra combat action, right?

Right.

This combat action must be used with this weapon (or shield), right?

No, but many house-rule, quite sensibly, that the extra CA for the additional weapon or shield must be used only for defence.

But what about the other CA? Can I use a sword and a shield, and use all my CA (including the extra one) on the shield?

I don't understand this point. If you have 3CA and gain a 4th for a shield you can, theoretically, use all the CA however you like. But, as I said above, its a common house-rule that the extra CA is only used for defence.

If so then there is something that forbids one of using "unnarmed" on one hand and a sword in the off-hand to gain the extra CA "without" penalties and still having a hand free to cast spells? After all, by the rules, the player IS using two weapons...

Its an abuse of the rules and common sense. Such people should be taken out and shot.

Of course we wanted to kill the player for such powergaming (luckly for him we where over skype), but I think that it is still a valid question.

You have my sympathies, Juca.

The world, is, unfortunately, full of people who are fond of finding loop-holes in the rules and placing them way ahead of common sense and common decency. Actually, shooting is too good for such imbeciles. A barbed cat-o-nine-tails, applied slowly yet vigorously, is a more appropriate punishment.

 

[DrBargle]

I don't think that there's anything powergamey about asking for the extra CA for fighting unarmed with one hand. He'll still be at a disadvantage compared to a weapon and shield fighter. On top of that, we house rule that the extra CA has to be spent using the source of the extra CA (or on evade, we ruled, which we also gave to wielders of 2H weapons). So if someone wanted to attack or parry with a S sized 'weapon' that does 1D3 damage, and has a reach of T, fine. If they don't want a shield, fine.

If anything, powergaming is where every 19 year old character, no matter the background, has somehow learned how to fight with a sword/spear and shield, as that is a pretty powerful combo.

 

[Loz]

If anything, powergaming is where every 19 year old character, no matter the background, has somehow learned how to fight with a sword/spear and shield, as that is a pretty powerful combo.

Not really. MRQII, Legend and RQ6 are designed to model cultures where self defence and offence is a way of life. Think of ancient Sparta, where you had a sword put into your hand as soon as you could feasibly lift it. Look at 'Game of Thrones' with Dickon and Arya being taught combat skills whilst still very young.

And its also a misnomer to think that you'd do this purely for combat reasons: if you don't hunt then you don't eat. Hence, learning to use the weapons that help bring down a meal starts from an early age.

By the time you're 19, you should be very skilled.

 

[Simulacrum]

If so then there is something that forbids one of using "unnarmed" on one hand and a sword in the off-hand to gain the extra CA "without" penalties and still having a hand free to cast spells? After all, by the rules, the player IS using two weapons...

Its an abuse of the rules and common sense. Such people should be taken out and shot.

This one keeps coming up, and I seen people argue for it quite strongly...but it effectively says anyone fighting in close combat (as opposed to doing something else) has an extra combat action unless you cut one of their arms off.

Oh, hold on....

Anyway, I'm experimenting with Shield gets +1CA so long as you have trained to use it with a weapon - result of having it through military profession, or spending 10 FSPs - and only for use with the shield. Weapon in off-hand ONLY gets a bonus CA if you have put points into a specific and narrow style - such as Rapier and Main Gauche, hence at the expense of a broader combat syle such as 'spears' or 'swords'.

 

[strega]

As I see it a lot of issues people have with Legend combat are compounded by a poor understanding of how combat styles work. Now the article in S&P does help and I believe RQ6 will expand on that to make it much clearer. The concept of combat styles is so very different from standard RPG combat that players often have a problem seeing how it should work.

We have the clearly stated extra CA when using a shield or off-hand weapon (bullet points 2 and 3 p124). The unstated implication is that this extra CA is to be used to parry with the shield or parry or riposte with the off-hand weapon. Personally I just allow the PCs to use the extra CA however they wish.

Grabbing an opponent's arm to pull them off-balance or to try and disarm them are legitimate uses of the Unarmed skill with the off-hand (it's a commonly used tactic taught in re-enactment combats). Wearing an armoured or reinforced leather gauntlet to parry or grab a sword is also something that was taught in combat and by sword fighting (defence/fencing) schools.

We have a clearly stated rule about substituting a weapon (p124). How the campaign sets out the combat styles in use should make it clear when a weapon counts as a substitution. If a GM doesn't set out the combat styles and just relies on what is written in the rulebook then they are going to have all manner of issues with combat styles.

As an example here are the combat styles I laid down before starting my current Lankhmar campaign:
Lankhmarian Noble Combat Styles
Military Noble Style – Lance, Sword and Sword with Shield (Lance, War Sword, Long Sword, War or Long Sword & Heater Shield)
Courtier Style – Rapier, Rapier & Dagger/OHW.

Ilthmarian Noble Combat Styles
Military Noble Style – Lance, Sword and Sword with Shield (Lance, War Sword, Long Sword, War or Long Sword & Heater Shield)
Courtier style – Rapier, Rapier & Dagger/OHW, Light Crossbow.

Barbarian Combat Styles - Pick two styles
Cold Waste Warrior Style – 1/2H Axe/1/2H Club alone or with shield, Unarmed. (Battleaxe, 1 or 2H Club, Axe & Shield (any), Club & Shield (any), Unarmed)
Cold Waste Ranged Hunter Style – Sling or Bow, Javelin (thrown)
Kleshite Warrior Style– 1/2H Axe/Club alone or with shield, Unarmed. (Battleaxe, 1H Club, Club & Shield (any), Unarmed)
Kleshite Ranged Hunter Style – Blowgun, Bow or Sling, Javelin (thrown)
Beast Hunter Style – Short Spear & Shield (any)
Traveller Style – Staff, Unarmed

City Freeman
Poorly Trained Militia Style – 1H Club or Short Sword alone or with Shield (Club/Short Sword & Shield (any))
Part-time Militia style – Pole-arm or Heavy Crossbow, Short Sword
Well-trained Militia Style – Long spear or 2H Sword or Pole-arm or Heavy Crossbow or Longbow, Short Sword & Buckler/Target

Rural Freeman
Melee Brawler Style– 1H Club, Short Sword, Club & Shield (any)
Ranged Defender Style – Bow or Sling, Spear (thrown)

Mariner
Seaman Brawler Style – 1H Club, Short Sword, Light Crossbow, Unarmed

Mingol
Mingol Warrior Style – 1H Axe, Scimitar, Lance, Nomad Bow, Unarmed.

All Combat Styles are known at base (STR+DEX or DEXx2)
Non-military Armour is restricted to leather (soft/hard), ring and scale mail in the form of coats, hauberks and greaves. Padded linen hauberks are also available. Helmets are leather (soft/hard), linen or AP4 kettle hats or morions.

Everyone has Dagger as an individual skill at base STR+DEX+10% and can train it higher.
Everyone has Thrown Dagger as an individual skill at base DEXx2 and can train it higher.

 

[Loz]

This one keeps coming up, and I seen people argue for it quite strongly...but it effectively says anyone fighting in close combat (as opposed to doing something else) has an extra combat action unless you cut one of their arms off.

Yes, its been one of those rules where the intent has been twisted in an attempt to mini-max. I think in some cases - martial arts principally - there is a strong enough argument; but certainly not in all argued cases I've seen.

We thought the intent was clear: using two artificial weapons yield a bonus to your combative abilities when compared with someone who chooses a two-handed weapon or a single-handed weapon used on its own. Perhaps we didn't explain it clearly enough, but every time I re-read the rules I fail to find any wilful ambiguity that would naturally lead to arguments as you've described. There have been those who argue that, given the advantage the additional CA gives, you'd never train in any single-weapon style, completely missing or ignoring cultural variations and specialities.

The real loop-hole is in spell-casting and other actions that aren't dependent on combat style but are dependent on CA use (which we just failed to anticipate). You shouldn't, realistically, gain an additional CA from two weapon use that can be used for anything but your combat activities.

Anyhow, to be clear, the additional CA is there to reflect offensive and defensive advantage from having a secondary, artificial weapon.

That said, we've completely dropped the +1 CA from RQ6. Instead, there are additional combat style benefits depending on the nature of the style, and a new set of shield-based defensive options. Otherwise, there's no advantage in terms of CA for having both hands occupied with a weapon.

 

[DrBargle]

Think of ancient Sparta, where you had a sword put into your hand as soon as you could feasibly lift it. Look at 'Game of Thrones' with Dickon and Arya being taught combat skills whilst still very young. [...] By the time you're 19, you should be very skilled.

But Spartans and pseudo-medieval nobles are martial castes. There were plenty of other people in those societies who couldn't fight with sword/spear and shield. They might have been able to hunt (but not all would), but having been on a wild boar hunt with a spear (I watched) it didn't seem to resemble anything like what fighting a man with a spear would be like.

All that is by the by - I wasn't saying that sword and shield IS powergaming, I was simply saying that, in MRQII/Legend, it is patently more mechanically powerful than giving the guy with just a sword an extra CA for use with his offhand. Choosing a 1H sword style and asking for an extra (offhand) CA is hardly the action of a mini-maxer. I make the extra CA an 'offhand CA' in my game as I don't see why a fighter with a sword and a shield should be able to attack with the sword half as often again as a fighter with only a sword - a difference in skill should be measured in % in the style. And I give everyone the 'offhand' CA as an extra combat action is a killer, counting for tens of % in combat style, to encourage the adoption of a wider range of styles (as much as players might not want to be mini-maxers, learning that that extra CA will cut your Adventurer down is a pretty strong incentive...), and to produce an even more cinematic fight, with grabs, disarms, desperate size S parries...

It's not for everyone, and I'm looking forward to RQ6 combat.

 

[rust]

There were plenty of other people in those societies who couldn't fight with sword/spear and shield.

If you were aiming for historical verisimilitude in a pseudo-medie-
val setting, about 90 % of all the people of the setting would have
no idea at all how to fight with a sword, because in almost all of Eu-
rope only the nobility and the nobility's professional soldiers were
allowed to carry a sword, everyone else who carried a sword risked
the death penalty. Besides, a sword was more expensive than an
average farmstead, few people outside of the nobility would have
been able to afford one anyways.

 

[duncan_disorderly]

I don't see why a fighter with a sword and a shield should be able to attack with the sword half as often again as a fighter with only a sword

Because he doesn't have to worry (so much) about keeping his sword available to parry, freeing it up to make more attacks without leaving himself open.

Many years ago when LARPing was just starting out, I recall reading in a fanzine where someone who hadn't been playing was fighting against a friend who was a keen LARPer - he said he was surprised what a big difference having a second weapon made over fighting with just a sword, even without having had any training in "two weapon fighting" .

All else being equal, I'd expect a fighter with sword & shield to have a huge advantage over a fighter with just a sword.

 

[DrBargle]

All else being equal, I'd expect a fighter with sword & shield to have a huge advantage over a fighter with just a sword.

Can I just point out that under my system, this is still the case. The 'sword and shield' fighter has, probably, a size L parry (or a damaging bash) as his 'offhand' CA. The '1H sword' fighter has a size S parry as his 'offhand' CA. PLUS, the 'sword and shield' fighter only has to train in one style, the '1H sword' fighter has to train in two (unless we create a CS in which the use of the bare/gloved offhand is an integral part, but even in that case it is still just a size S parry!).

 

[DrBargle]

Because he doesn't have to worry (so much) about keeping his sword available to parry, freeing it up to make more attacks without leaving himself open.

And my system does that too, as if the S+S user can parry effectively with his offhand CA. If the 1H fighter wants to reserve the ability to parry effectively, he will be reduced to punching and grabbing with his bare hand, which are blocked by the shield, saving his sword to block the metre-plus of sharp metal coming at him. My system just takes the edge off the CA economy, which, to my mind, underplays the importance of % weapon skill.

But I know we've been round all this before (and we will again) - I just wanted to make clear that my houserule accommodates those concerns.