[CONAN] Interesting Weapon & Combat Model

[galloglaich]

I've got it!

Put the figure in the square adjacent its foe if at melee range. Put the figure on the line, not in a square, if at Onset range. For all other measurements (charge, spell radius, whatever), the figure is considered in the 5' square. We only put the figure on the line to denote Onset range.

Yeah that is what i kind of thought you were talking about doing before, I must have missed the stuff about the list.

To me with this kind of thing, you have to emphasize simplicity to a ruthless degree, hack away all the b.s. or it will choke you to death with any kind of combat rules. Real fighting is pretty simple at a certain level, the simulation of it should be as well.

G.

 

[galloglaich]

Think about the mess of two Greek Hoplite phalanxes, or Saxon Shield Walls or Baroque Pikemen regiments or Roman Cohorts AFTER the first clash and AFTER their spears are all broken and they are all mixed one with the other and everybody is so near, with not so much space, that Onset & Melee in relation to different enemies are so difficult to ascertain....

To me, this sounds more like a war game. I don't know how Conan RPG is but most of the fights in the original Robert E Howard Conan stories were actually pretty small, with a few relatively dangerous opponents.

The Codex does emphasize small group combat, though I can understand if you mean to have very large combats maybe that's why you need the 2.5' grid. I think maybe y'all are just trying to play two slightly different games here.

G.

 

[Supplement Four]

@galloglaich

Got any ideas on how to give weapons with a reach advantage a special type of attack, like a finesse attack?

One idea I had was to make an Advantage modifier to defense.

Thus, if a spearman (+6 reach) landed a blow on a combatant using a hand and a half sword (+4 reach), then, if successful, the spearman got +2 (his Advantage) on his defense until his next turn.

I'm not sure what the Onset attack should be, though. It has to be harder than the normal melee throw. (Or, does it? It just has to be different from the normal melee throw.)

 

[LucaCherstich]

Think about the mess of two Greek Hoplite phalanxes, or Saxon Shield Walls or Baroque Pikemen regiments or Roman Cohorts AFTER the first clash and AFTER their spears are all broken and they are all mixed one with the other and everybody is so near, with not so much space, that Onset & Melee in relation to different enemies are so difficult to ascertain....

To me, this sounds more like a war game. I don't know how Conan RPG is but most of the fights in the original Robert E Howard Conan stories were actually pretty small, with a few relatively dangerous opponents.

The Codex does emphasize small group combat, though I can understand if you mean to have very large combats maybe that's why you need the 2.5' grid. I think maybe y'all are just trying to play two slightly different games here.

G.

Galloglaich, our Cimmerian is in the midst of very large battles if you read the key moments in classic Conan stories by REH like Black Colossus, Scarlet Citadel or Hour of the Dragon.
I do not like playing war games (and I tend to solve battles with the quick narrative system in the "Free Companies" sourcebook) but I like to play a sledge of that battle.
A micro-battle where the PCs are included inside the large battle.
Conan rpg should be also about epic fighting if we want to keep the REH feeling!
Furthermore, If you read classic Marvel Conan comics by Roy Thomas, the Cimmerian is often entangled by overwhelming enemy forces and combat is often complicated!

Furthermore, regarding my proposal of Playtest (see above) I would not classify that as a large battle.
10 vs 12 is a skirmish to me!
And any decent RPG should be able to mimic that.
PC groups tend to be formed by 4 or 5 people armed in different ways, usually with different feats and approaches to battle.
Sometimes with a few allies or followers, bringing the party number to 7 or 8 people.
And the same often happen to their enemies, so my playtest proposal above does not sound very unapropriate in the typical Conan game.
Always making 4 equally armed PCs vs 6 equally armed Zamorian guards sound always very boring to me!

In any case the problem remains.
Let's playtest anything we propose.
And then we could speak and fill this thread with this neverending discussion on Onset & Melee.
S4: please speak of something you have tried!
My 2.5 ft solution works for me (I've seen it with my eyes in my game!)
I suggest S4 to try any of the solutions he proposes and see wether they work.
I really got bored by all of this pure theorizing on Onset & Melee.
I would like to discuss other interesting ideas from the Codex (as I tried to do discussing Arrows).

Again on arrows:
Galloglaich, what do you think about what I said above on pulling arrows?
How much time a Heal Check for removing arrows should take?

 

[galloglaich]

'Quick' removal of the arrow seems fine to me, cinematic and who knows? Maybe realistic too. You would have to cut or break the head of the arrow off, and cut the feathers off, and then you could remove the shaft too. It would definitely cause more damage, I don't know another 1-6 or 1-8? Depending on the size of the projectile, a dart like a plumbata or a swiss-arrow would be more problematic than a flight arrow.

Regardless of the projectile it woudl be much more damage if you screwed it up (failed the heal roll). So a risky (manly!) move.

For a more regular removal, probably ten minutes is necessary (and jibes with the SRD 'take ten' action) if you want to try to prevent infection etc. Historically they used to pack wounds like that with bear fat or beaver fat mixed with salt. This is described in period accounts from Germany, Spain, Poland and also by the early Conquistadors (in Bernal Diaz). People actually seem to have lived through pretty serious injuries with nothing more than this expedient.

And it's pretty conan-esque.

Sometimes they also cover it over with spider webs or the stereotypical 'poultice' of various medicinal leaves. But salt and fat seemed to be the most common cure. And they also used strong vinegar as an anticeptic, this goes back to accounts from the first Crusade by both by Arab and European chroniclers. Usamah Ibn Munquidh mentions it.

So far I've never read about anyone actually burning it with gunpowder or anything that such as you always see in the movies.

G.

 

[LucaCherstich]

Let's speak about some weapons.
Reading your volume on weapons I'm getting excited about converting Weapons.
But, since the introduction of "triple stats" and Grapple Bonus (which I call "maneuver bonus"), I can use more granulation to make Conan Weapons.
So I'm also starting thinking in terms of "what cool weapons is my game lacking?"
It is relatively easy to convert many of your historical weapons.
But I'm also thinking about something more "fantasy".
My first issue is on Bipennis Axes (double-bladed axes).
I know you did not put any information for that.
I know also that the archeological evidence for their real use in any ancient civilization is pretty scarce.
Minoans possibly used them for religious ritual, and its remains have been found in Thracian sites of the Roman period, but nothing give us the certainty that it was really ever used in battle.
But "Conan" is not so much about exact Historical truth, but pseudo-historical.
Bipennises are not included in Conan Core rules but they do appear in a lot of Conan stuff (comics, movies, etc.).
Bipennis has been put in an unofficial Conan product (Barbaric Treasures by Misfit Studios) but their stas are un-satisfying to me, and there is no explanation why they perform poorer than battleaxes there.
A lot of Conan stuff in Conan books & comics is there simply because it looked to be cool to somebody.
I'm therefore trying to assess the possible Conan stats for Bipennis axes (including the Codex triple stats).

Conan Weapon in Conan Core Rules have slightly different stats from core D&D 3.5 rules.
So I give here the stats of some basic Conan Axeswhich we will use as Bases for constructing the Bipennis.
The triple stats are from the Codex.

THE BASE: AXES ALREADY EXISTING IN CONAN

Hatchet:
Finesse, Simple, Light Weapon
Cost 2 sp/ dmg 1d6/ critx3/AP1/range Incr. 10ft/hd 5/ hp 2/ weight 2 lb/ type S.
Codex Triple Stats: 1/3/1. Man (Grap) +1

Axe:
Finesse, martial, Light Weapon
Cost 3 sp/ dmg 1d8/ critx3/AP1/range Incr. 10ft/hd 5/ hp 3/ weight 2 lb/ type S.
Codex Triple Stats: 1/4/1. Man (Grap) +2

BattleAxe:
Martial, One-handed Weapon
Cost 5 sp/ dmg 1d10/ critx3/AP4/range Incr. - /hd 7/ hp 5/ weight 3 lb/ type S.
Codex Triple Stats: 3/1/2. Man (Grap) +2

Nordheimir Double-Handed Axe
Martial, Two-handed Weapon
Cost 8 sp/ dmg 1d10+1d8/ critx3/AP5/range Incr. - /hd 7/ hp 10/ weight 7 lb/ type S.
Codex Triple Stats: 4/0/2. Man (Grap) +2

SOMETHING NEW: PROPOSAL FOR BIPENNIS AXES

The main advantage of having a second blade should be that you can make a quick follow-up attack even without the need of reversing the blade (as per normal single-bladed axes).
To mimick that, before I used the Codex & triple stats, I simply ruled that Bipennis Axes should received an additional AoO (even without Combat Reflexes).
Now, with the Codex, I can make a better solution than that!
I realize that the added blade can be simply mimicked by augmenting the Melee Bonus in the triple stats.
Is this reasonable?

My proposal is:
1) to take base Conan Axes
2) add +1 to Melee bonus
3) triple the Cost
4) hp x 1.25
5) weight x 1.25
Is it all reasonable?

If so, here I make three new versions of the Bipennis:

Light Bipennis (MODIFIED "Axe"):
Finesse, martial, Light Weapon
Cost 9 sp/ dmg 1d8/ critx3/AP1/range Incr. 10ft/hd 5/ hp 4/ weight 2.5 lb/ type S.
Codex Triple Stats: 1/5/1. Man (Grap) +2

Bipennis (MODIFIED "Battle Axe"):
Martial, One-handed Weapon
Cost 15 sp/ dmg 1d10/ critx3/AP4/range Incr. - /hd 7/ hp 6/ weight 3.5 lb/ type S.
Codex Triple Stats: 3/2/2. Man (Grap) +2

Great Bipennis (MODIFIED "Double-Handed Axe"):
Martial, Two-handed Weapon
Cost 24 sp/ dmg 1d10+1d8/ critx3/AP5/range Incr. - /hd 7/ hp 12/ weight 8.5 lb/ type S.
Codex Triple Stats: 4/1/2. Man (Grap) +2

 

[galloglaich]

The only functional difference I can see for a double-bladed axe is that you would have something like a false edge, allowing you to reverse cuts more quickly if you have the proper technique. So I would just confer a +1 or +2 speed bonus if the player has the equivalent of a false-edge cutting feat or a twitch-cut feat, which should confer the same speed bonus to all double-edged swords.

G.

 

[LucaCherstich]

I think I'll leave that +1 to Melee/Speed.
When I'll convert you alse edge cutting feat I will give another +2 or +1 (+2 with bipennises, I think, SInce it should be a second real blade, not a false edge).

 

[galloglaich]

I don't really follow why the Bipenis would be faster, barring special training.

G.

 

[LucaCherstich]

A lot of other things should be done by people with feats, but still I think in terms of old PCS without proper feats to exploit stuff.
I think that a 8th level Barbarian should be able to exploit the second blade of a bipennis, at least at a very minimal level, even without another feat.
The Martial Proficiency should be enough to give just a +1 to Melee...but we give another +2 only to people with that new "False edge" feat.

 

[galloglaich]

I guess to me it is a specialist weapon; if a guy wants to specialize in it and learn the specific techniques for it, then maybe he gets the bonus, otherwise I don't think so. If anything I suspect it would a bit slower. It might cut a bit better though due to the physics of having in effect a double-wide blade.

Do they still have the simple / martial / exotic weapon paradigm in Conan?

G.

 

[LucaCherstich]

Yes we still have it.
And bipennises are definitively martial.
So, do you suggest to just add a +1 to AP, or maybe augment the dmg a bit, without thinking about Melee bonuses?
Maybe we could also add a rule that, if somebody takes Weapon Focus in bipennises, he will get +1 Melee bonus with all bipennises.
If he has also "False edge cut" feat, he will get another +2 to melee.

 

[galloglaich]

Yeah that makes sense, except for the AP. Just give it more damage instead, it would not be a good armor piercing weapon.

G.

 

[LucaCherstich]

Maybe dmg as follows:
Light Bipennis (Modified Axe): 1d8+1
Bipennis (Modified Battleaxe): 1d10+1
Great Bipennis (Modified Double-handed Axe): 1d10+1d8+1

I do not want to make the dmg of a higher dice if we want to keep the "hand type" (one-handed, two-handed, etc..)
For example 1d12 for a one-handed axe is too much, the one-handed Zhaibari Knife deals 1d12 but lower critical and AP than a Axe.
This is why I said just +1 to dmg.
But I'm not so sure I like it (dmg code for Great Bipennis is a bit complicated).

The alternative (maybe easier) is of increasing the AP based on the assumption that a heavier head will mean more crashing power.
Conan's axes already have good AP values, so an alternative to the "higher damage" should be "higher AP" in this way:
Light Bipennis (Modified Axe): AP 2 instead of AP 1
Bipennis (Modified Battleaxe): AP 5 instead of AP 4
Great Bipennis (Modified Double-handed Axe): AP 6 instead of AP 5.

 

[galloglaich]

Well, I can't speak to how the Conan rules are designed, all I can tell you is that in real life, axes (unless they have back-spikes) are bad at damaging metal armor, a dagger is actually a much more effective armor-piercing weapon. But then daggers are almost always made much weaker in RPGs than they actually are in real life. Gary Gygax made the dagger into sort of a nuisance weapon in DnD because he only had one way to rate weapons (i.e. damage) and he wanted swords and axes and maces to be more important. All other RPGs seem to have followed suit.

I would just bump the damage up a notch, and LOWER the speed, since these axes will be more top-heavy. So instead of 1-8, 1-10 and etc. But unless you know special techniques (which, to me experience, nobody ever figures out spontaneously without Martial Arts training; the SCA didn't do false edge cutting in 20 years of heavy combat, nobody did it until it was rediscovered in 15th Century fencing manuals) it's not actually going to be faster.

G.

 

[LucaCherstich]

REGARDING AP:
I feel "AP" should mean a lot of things.
A Dagger is very good for switching through mail junctions or for piercing leather....but it will be wuite useless is thrusted in the middle of a bronze cuirass.
On teh otehr hand I feel that a heavy Axe, just like a Mace, will do damage to a cuirass-wearer by bending the plates with its sheer weight and momentum.
IN ANY CASE, you should be happy that Conan deals with AP in two different ways (Normal & Finesse).
There's not so much space to discuss the rules, but I'll tell you their effects.
But if the AP of rough Axes and Swords beats Armour, the armour is halved.
While if the AP of FINESSE weapons (like daggers) used for finesse beats the armour completely bypass the armour!

REGARDING BIPENNISES:
Another problem is that, archaeologically speaking, as far as I know, we do not have so much evidence for fully functional (not ceremonial) examples of Bipennises/Labrys from the Ancient World...
And even the possibly cerimonial examples are very few and badly preserved...so who knows!
Maybe a one-handed bipennis gots 2 blades, but lighter than a single blade of the corresponding one-handed Axe, so maybe less damage but quicker weapon!
Or maybe 2 light blades = 1 single heavy blade, who knows?
Have a look to the link below and the (possibly) ceremonial small Bipennis.
It does not look that heavy!
http://www.novinite.com/view_news.php?id=129942
Looking for possible 2-handed examples we can check the one figured in this Late 4th-century-BC mosaic from Pella (Macedonia), see the left hunter.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fileeer_hunt_mosaic_from_Pella.jpg
Even this two-handed bipennis does not seem to have very big blades.
I feel that one thing was the real Bipennis used in antiquity (lighter weapon), the other is the fake Bipennis with large blades from Conan movies and comics.
Maybe, even if I want to keep bipennises for all the three types (Light, one-handed, two-handed), I could make double stats for lighter, realistic (?) versions (less dmg, quick) and heavier fantastic versions (more dmg, slower) = 6 different bipennises!!
The Heavy versions should deal more damage...but with a -1 penalty on Melee!
Maybe the light versions deal as much damage as the equivalent heavier single-blade axe (physique of the blades) and be used for counter-attack at a very minimal level for those with the Martial Proficiency: +1 to Melee.
It remains that real experts will get the most from such weapons: people with the False-Edge Cut feat gets +2 to Melee, and Weapon Focus gives +1 to melee.
So we could have:

LIGHT BIPENNISES:
Small Bipennis (Modified Axe):
1) Light version: dmg 1d8, triple stats: 1/5/1.
2) Heavy version: dmg 1d8 +1, triple stats 1/3/1

ONE-HANDED BIPENNISES
Bipennis (Modified Battleaxe):
3) Light version: dmg 1d10, triple stats: 3/2/2.
4) Heavy version: dmg 1d10 +1, triple stats 3/0/2

TWO-HANDED BIPENNISES
Great Bipennis (Modified Double-handed Axe)
5) Light version: dmg 1d10+1d8, triple stats: 4/1/2.
6) Heavy version: dmg 1d10+1d8 +1, triple stats 4/-1/2

 

[LucaCherstich]

I'm still trying to get inspiration from the Codex to Conan.

Critical Hits in the Codex Rules have 2 nice qualities:
QUALITY 1: they are more varied as effects (different damages according to damage type: Slash, Pierce, etc...)
QUALITY 2: they are more linked to the ability of the Fighter (the more the dice from Martial Pool you spend, the most the probabilities of getting criticals so very basic warrior with a MP of 1 have less possibilities of making critical than experienced warriors with a MP of 4).

I want these qualities for my Criticals but I do not want to completely change the Conan system, but just to be inspired from the Codex.
How can you do that with Conan?
I've been making some attempts in other threads.

QUALITY 1 (varied critical effects), mimicked with my "Alternative Critical effects"
http://forum.mongoosepublishing.com/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=49223

QUALITY 2 (critical linked to the Ability of the Fighter), mimicked with my "Mastery Critical Threat"
http://forum.mongoosepublishing.com/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=49288

 

[LucaCherstich]

I'm still in the process of adapting bits of the Codex into Conan.
I'm again thinking about the TRIPLE STATS and Onset & Melee bonuses.
I'm amazed by seeing how much playtesting can change my ideas.
I came to see problems I did not seen before, and reject the 2.5 ft scale (but not for the reasons discussed by S4).
I came to reject the 2.5 ft scale since I need Onset not to be a very "fixed" range.

During my last few games I've always used my "PROPOSAL 3 "Closing Ranges & Free 2.5 steps" (PAGE 13 of this thread).
In theory it's a great system.
In practice I've seen a fatal flaw: PCs with good BAB will use weapons with high Onset Bonuses (Bardiches, Spears, Polearms) to make too many succesfull attacks in the same round and never going into Melee range.
Which means that full attacks with many attacks all made at Onset become too frequent (which is not-realistic).
The Codex has not teh same problem since it is a much more dynamic system, but I want to keep on playing Conan.

I've read and re-read the Codex and tried to get some sense to everything.
It is clear that good Onset weapons (bardiches, spears, Polearms) have Onset bonuses which goes up to +7,+8 or +9
On the other hand, weapons which are good at Melee/Speed (Scimitars, daggers) does not have Melee bonuses higher than +5 or +6.
So the best Onset Weapons give Onset bonuses which are BETTER than the Melee bonuses of the best Melee Weapons.
HOWEVER, if I well understood, "Good Onset Weapons" (bardiches, polearms) in real life are not meant to do as many quick attacks as "Good Melee Weapons" (Scimitars, daggers)..
In other words: a Pike is very good to make a good but SINGLE attack at Onset range, a scimitar is good to make many more numerous attacks but a Melee range.
And, using the Codex rules (if I well understood), you never make more than 1-2 attacks at Onset, but you can coem to make up to 4 attacks at Melee!
SO, how can we do that with Conan?

So here is my PROPOSAL 4: "Onset FULL ACTIONS"
- Use 5ft scale (or not grid&minis at all)
- Onset bonuses to Atk are used only for the first attack vs an enemy which is not in your range at the beginning of the round (in practice the most frequent use for Onset is in charges or in simple Move&Attack rounds)
- If you are adjacent to an enemy you are considered at Melee Range.
ONSET VS ADJACENT ENEMIES:
- If you want to use the Onset Bonus vs an adjacent enemy you can make only 1 attack which is considered a FULL ACTION and triggers AoO before you make it (Mobility & Improved Mobility still count).
- If you are a skilled fighter (BAB 6+) you do not trigger AoO doing the action above.

 

[Supplement Four]

I'm amazed by seeing how much playtesting can change my ideas.

Amen.

After playtesting the Dynamic Defense Optional Rule (roll for AC), I'm ditching it, going back to RAW.





[quote[I came to see problems I did not seen before, and reject the 2.5 ft scale (but not for the reasons discussed by S4).[/quote]

What problems did you find?

I came to reject the 2.5 ft scale since I need Onset not to be a very "fixed" range.

Didn't I argue above that Onset should not be a fixed range but in the same five foot box?

SO, how can we do that with Conan?

How about apply Onset Bonus to the first attack only when two combatants meet. Don't allow Onset Full Actions (that would be an Onset attack and a standard Melee attack).

If a character desires another Onset attack, then he must break away from his opponent using movement, then re-engage the opponent. Breaking away risks an Attack of Opportunity, of course, so the combatant will look for moments where his attacker has already taken one AoO (a fighter can only assume that his enemy can't make more than one AoO a round, unless he's seen his enemy make more than one AoO in a round).





NOTE: It's a big job merging two combat systems the way you are doing. There's lots of playtest, tweak, playtest again. It could take you a long time, with your players suffering from an ever changing rule system, for you to get it "right". That's why I think it's best to go either with the Conan combat system or to switch completely to the Codex. Embrace one or the other. The merging is too much work.

 

[LucaCherstich]

I think playtesting got me partly going to your side.
I like the 2.5 scale but the main problem is that the whole Onset thing could be exploited by powerplayers.
So I had to go back to a purer vision of the Onset as a pure Single Attack...but that did not required me to do 2.5 ft scale grid.
I can do it even with 5ft scale (or with no mins at all).

And regarding the difficulties in merging 2 systems ... I must admit I find the whole thing too intriguing.
The codex approach to weapons (triple stats) is too intriguing, but accepting the whole Codex as a whole entity to Conan will change my things A LOT.

NOW; BACK TO MY NEW PROPOSAL:
If you analyse my system above I'm doing exactly what are you saying.
A "Full ACTION which triggers AoO" is just like making move action (to disengage and re-engage) + a standard onset attack.
This disengagement/re-engagement is a kind of exiting and re-entering your square (as you have suggested many times above), but I do not think you really need to move twice the mini.
Let's say the whole process is a "full action" and it's OK.
In effects I'm forbidding Onset multi-attack.
You just re-adjust your position to make a single Onset atk.
If you make an Onset atk, you end up in Melee range.
I added the "no AoO" for BAB 6+ to let more skillfull fighters to be at an advatnage...but still making no more than 1 attack.

An interesting note is the consequence that this new rule has on Reach Weapons (e.g. warspears).
With these weapons, if you are in Melee range of a machete-man, you need only to make a 5ft step back (and not suffer AoO) to make your Onset attack.
But even in that case I would keep the limitation "Only the first Atk is Onset".