I'll agree that it is not the same thing, but the intent of the styles - sword and shield for example - is that you are equally proficient with all the weapons in your style. So your warrior practices with both sword and shield, sword alone, and shield alone, allowing him to have the same skill level in game with all those combinations.
Combat styles and weapon types / categories
- Thread starter Antalon
- Start date
Deleriad
Mongoose
Although I'm not entirely convinced about weapon styles it seems reasonable that someone who trains with sword and shield also practices what to do if their shield arm is broken or they lose a sword and practices just keeping a shield in the way. You can imagine the sequence as the gruff sergeant berates the novice mercenary...
I can also see that you might be good with sword and shield but picking up an axe could actually make you worse with a shield because you no longer know the best way to stand, feel off-balance due to the weight of the axe and so on.
Finally I can imagine cultural and personal reasons why someone might learn a pure one-handed style despite the fact that in pure game terms it's suboptimal. A shield might be seen as a peasant's weapon or a coward's weapon and such like.
If you take the premise that in RQ, weapons, armour and fighting styles aren't balanced against each other so that each has its unique pros and cons but that they are somewhat simulationist then you can take it from there. Would probably have been handy having that in a small call-out box because a lot of people reading the book will have grown up all sorts of games where in-game balance is a key determiner. In RQ balance is sometimes trumped by other consideration.
I can also see that you might be good with sword and shield but picking up an axe could actually make you worse with a shield because you no longer know the best way to stand, feel off-balance due to the weight of the axe and so on.
Finally I can imagine cultural and personal reasons why someone might learn a pure one-handed style despite the fact that in pure game terms it's suboptimal. A shield might be seen as a peasant's weapon or a coward's weapon and such like.
If you take the premise that in RQ, weapons, armour and fighting styles aren't balanced against each other so that each has its unique pros and cons but that they are somewhat simulationist then you can take it from there. Would probably have been handy having that in a small call-out box because a lot of people reading the book will have grown up all sorts of games where in-game balance is a key determiner. In RQ balance is sometimes trumped by other consideration.
Simulacrum
Mongoose
This all seems to come down to how finely you slice your combat styles for your style of play. I see no reason in my world not to simply penalise a character who has learned shield and spear or shield and sidearm (for example) when they find themselves shieldless - a -10 or -20 to the parry depending on how tough you want to be on them. This provides a reason to also learn a combat style for a weapon only. I might go a step further and specify that the bigger 1H cutting/smashing weapons (roughly those with a D8 base damage dice rather than D6 or less) can only be used to attack without penalty with a small or medium size shield.
After some discussion with my players we've decided to set aside some time prior to character generation to agree as a group what combat styles to use and whether to treat some styles as "near" styles which can be used but with a modifier.
So for instance if somebody knows Sword and Shield but opts to use 2 swords they can but with a modifier. Involving the players seemed to be the fairest way all around in the end.
Two side notes to this from experience.
Fighting with "my" sword is not the same as fighting with "your" sword. Unless you are using generic off the production line blades they all have a different feel and balance and take time to get used to.
Have any of ever tried to parry with some of these weapons. For several years I fought with a 2H Axe in a reenactment group and parrying was more an act of luck than by choice. Swords can parry, spears can parry if you don't mind getting them all chopped up, axes (don't believe what you see in the movies). EVen things like 2H swords (thinking claymore here) were designed to keep swinging not deft parrying.
Well be adding magic next...oops
So for instance if somebody knows Sword and Shield but opts to use 2 swords they can but with a modifier. Involving the players seemed to be the fairest way all around in the end.
Two side notes to this from experience.
Fighting with "my" sword is not the same as fighting with "your" sword. Unless you are using generic off the production line blades they all have a different feel and balance and take time to get used to.
Have any of ever tried to parry with some of these weapons. For several years I fought with a 2H Axe in a reenactment group and parrying was more an act of luck than by choice. Swords can parry, spears can parry if you don't mind getting them all chopped up, axes (don't believe what you see in the movies). EVen things like 2H swords (thinking claymore here) were designed to keep swinging not deft parrying.
Well be adding magic next...oops
