Intricate Swordplay feat question

[Oly]

Multiple Attribute Dependency

Charisma is not an optimal stat for a combat build. If your character has a 16+ in Cha then he is either shortchanging his other combat stats, or else has a surplus of stats to begin with. Either way, the fact that he has to spread his character resources around to mantain multiple stats means that the law of diminishing returns will catch up with him eventually. A different character who focuses only on boosting his Str will gain a Parry bonus to DV but also a bonus to hit, AP and damage.

As I said, the player I had who took this feat was balanced against the other players. His DV was higher but his DR and damage output were both lower. Fine by me.

Ahhh........

Well given the stat generation rules PCs are going to have high stats, it's not like they're going to have to place a few low ones somewhere. Having a high Cha, Dex and Str really isn't an uncommon combination. So players are already going to have a reasonably high Parry bonus because of their Str and then they're going to up it even more with Intricate Swordplay and their high Charisma.

Rolling back to the central point we do have a feat that easily gives such players a +3 or +4 to their defence when most such feats in D20 seem to only give a +1. There is a balancing factor to the feat in that you definitely are limited in armour and what weapon you have in one of your hands. Is that enough of a balance? Is the wording of the feat meant to imply that you can't have anything in your other hand?

Oly

 

[Maximo]

Oly said

There is a balancing factor to the feat in that you definitely are limited in armour and what weapon you have in one of your hands. Is that enough of a balance?

Sure.
Like argo, I have one PC with this feat and I can assure you it is not an unbalanced monstrosity like Explosive Power or one feat from Pirate Isles which allowed you to sneak attack your foe unless he used the total defence option.
And like argo said, the lack of strong armour and two handed weapons are serious setbacks. And don't forget that a PC with a high Parry bonus can still fall to combat maneuvers and special actions like Sunder, Disarm or Trip.
Oly said

Is the wording of the feat meant to imply that you can't have anything in your other hand?

I don't think so.
First, this way you can build a really flashy swasbuckler.
Second, a one handed weapon in each hand is not such a big deal when engaging heavily armoured foes.
In fact, during one of my games, the player with Intricate Swordplay fought a looong duel against a Zingaran count who only got killed because the PC rolled a crit. This was about 20 rounds after the start of the battle -I lost the count on round 10 :wink:
BTW, the player got surrounded and captured as a consequence of this loss of time. So IMHO it is balanced even if you assume the player can use a shield or another weapon in his off hand.

Hope this helps.

 

[argo]

Well given the stat generation rules PCs are going to have high stats, it's not like they're going to have to place a few low ones somewhere. Having a high Cha, Dex and Str really isn't an uncommon combination. So players are already going to have a reasonably high Parry bonus because of their Str and then they're going to up it even more with Intricate Swordplay and their high Charisma.

Again though, back to my earlier point. IME PC's in Conan do not really have stats all that much higher than mid-level PC's in other d20 games, once you factor in the buff spells and magic items. The difference is that Conan gives you the stat bonuse up front instead of on the back end.

So we still come back to the same consideration: that the character is devoting resources to a stat which offers diminshed returns compared to one of the traditional "combat stats" and paying a feat for the privlege.

Rolling back to the central point we do have a feat that easily gives such players a +3 or +4 to their defence when most such feats in D20 seem to only give a +1. There is a balancing factor to the feat in that you definitely are limited in armour and what weapon you have in one of your hands. Is that enough of a balance?

Yes, even if you don't accept the MAD argument I believe that that is prety good balance.

Is the wording of the feat meant to imply that you can't have anything in your other hand?

No, if that was the intention the feat would have said "a boradsword in one hand and nothing in your other hand".

Later.

 

[argo]

Not to beat a dead horse or anything...

IIRC I think Conan's "high powered" stat rolling method works out to about 32 point buy. That is high but not really over-the-top. I've seen plenty of 32 pt characters with 8's or 10's in their dump stats, mostly those who wanted multiple 18's

Case in point (digs out old notes)

This character was from my last game (32 point buy). He was a combat monster, THF, heavy armor, I had to be careful that the enemies meant to challenge him didnt' kill the rest of the party by mistake. Any of you ever seen the anime Berserk? Think Guts (this player always makes a Guts clone when he plays ... and I love him for it).

Parcothas Barb 6
Str 20, Dex 11, Con 17, Int 13, Wis 11, Cha 9
Dodge 14; Parry 17; DR 10/-

In one adventure I had the party face off against a slightly tweaked Stone Golem. For three rounds Parcothas stood still, toe to toe with the monster while the two punched each other in the face! It was like watching the fight from Rocky IV :shock: Parcothas won....


Now this next character was the PC who took Intricate Swordplay in a different game. Stats were rolled (4d6, reroll 1's and drop lowest) but worked out prety close to 32 points as well (I like all my games to be about 32 points).
This character also had the TWDefense feat, he was very focused on defense. This was the group I ran through Tower of the Elephant way back when.

Zaros Pirate 8 (two levels higher than Parcothas)
Str 14, Dex 16, Con 16, Int 14, Wis 8, Cha 16
Dodge 19; Parry 23; DR 4/-

Now, while Zaros was incredibly hard to hurt, Parcothas gave me much bigger headaches when trying to design encounters.

Later.

 

[taylor]

Can you use Intricate Swordplay with a broadsword used in two hands as a finesse weapon?

 

[argo]

No, the feat says "whenever you have a boradsword or arming sword in one hand".

 

[Yogah of Yag]

I got to see a pretty rare thing on the history channel: two men extremely well versed in bastard swords sparring in the traditional styles of dark ages combat! It was great stuff as they were able to stay extremely agile using both hands to use every part of the sword as a weapon. yeah if you've ever seen two guys go at it with the sort of big clubbing swords in Conan, you'll notice that shields really limit what you can do in what's "flashy". Shields often demand you hide your face lol

intricate swordplay demands you be able to use your charisma. Zorro and the Three Musketeers and types like that use this feat... no way should you be able to use a shield bigger than a buckler. It just goes against the purpose of the feat.

If I am not mistaken bastard swords are called "war swords" in the Howard corpus. Historically these were "anderthalbhaender."
"Intricate", I feel, must be qualified by more descriptors.
When a sword is used, you do what it takes to survive. Style, and such things described as "intricate" are not an issue.
The theory and practice of the use of swords was based on necessity not display or show.
The traditional texts say that it is best that the blade (or tip) describe a straight line to the target. In other words, nothing fancy, elaborate, flowery, for these were the marks of the "Juggler" (Gaukler), who lived not very long.

Understanding fencing or the use of swords is good in describing combat to the players in RPG.

My own experience is with historical, Western, Mediaeval/Renaissance swordfighting (or more accurately today, fencing) in the tradition of Johannes Liechtenauer of Swabia.
Most of the literature is in older German ("Mittelhochdeutsch" and "Frühneuzeitsdeutsch" for the most part), but also some Latin (ars dimicatoria cum romphaea frameaque, &c., &c.) and a little Italian.

Howard would have loved it, had he ever learned of it.

Strength and Honour!


Cordially,

Yogah of Yag.

 

[Raven Blackwell]

True, the fancy stuff tends to be more eye-catching than useful. On the other hand the Feat gives a bonus to the Parry Defense, not a bonus to the attack roll/damage so I usually see the use of the Feat as being able to distract your opponent with the fancy stuff and thus make him/her a little confused about when or where to attack. Sort of a mini-feint. Of course with the regularity the Cimmerian Barbarian/Thief in my game can go through the fancy duelists it sort of proves Howard's point about civiliized versus barbaric combatants.....

 

[taylor]

If I am not mistaken bastard swords are called "war swords" in the Howard corpus. Historically these were "anderthalbhaender."

Maybe in some Germanic countries, though I thought the term was "langenswert" or something? The terms bastard sword and "grete swerd of war" are both used in period English sources.

"Intricate", I feel, must be qualified by more descriptors.
When a sword is used, you do what it takes to survive. Style, and such things described as "intricate" are not an issue.

This is true, a massive adrenaline dump is hell on fine motor control! However, general fencing principles, such as Silver's governors, are still relevent.

The theory and practice of the use of swords was based on necessity not display or show.
The traditional texts say that it is best that the blade (or tip) describe a straight line to the target. In other words, nothing fancy, elaborate, flowery, for these were the marks of the "Juggler" (Gaukler), who lived not very long.

Understanding fencing or the use of swords is good in describing combat to the players in RPG.

My own experience is with historical, Western, Mediaeval/Renaissance swordfighting (or more accurately today, fencing) in the tradition of Johannes Liechtenauer of Swabia.
Most of the literature is in older German ("Mittelhochdeutsch" and "Frühneuzeitsdeutsch" for the most part), but also some Latin (ars dimicatoria cum romphaea frameaque, &c., &c.) and a little Italian.

Howard would have loved it, had he ever learned of it.

Strength and Honour!


Cordially,

Yogah of Yag.

Good post mate, though I reckon Howard would have been a Silver man myself!

 

[Bregales]

The points raised about 'doing what it takes to survive' and since I haven't looked up this feat yet, I've been quiet. But one thing I'll put in about using Charisma, is that it's like making a Bluff check in a fight, or Intimidate. Basically you're doing a sort of staredown, putting the other guy off his guard, or making him uneasy, anything to make him make a mistake (make him think you're the better fencer), and while you're not bluffing him by saying "Oh look over there [pointing skywards], a flock of turtles", you're still using what tricks you possess to take advantage of the situation.

A point I often tell acting students taking a fencing class is that, "the characters you're usually playing lived by their charisma and their wits at court; they practised for hours a week if not daily, they got to know the inns and outs of how to handle the sword; but once the fight gets on lethal terms (and/or when your character first gets hurt in a fight), form often went out the window." My assumption (gotta find this feat description! ) is that the fighter is keeping level headed and trying to make the other guy lose his-.

So I guess that's what this feat is trying to establish? Maybe not good for Grumm the bone-eater, but good for the young Corinthian aristocrat Murilo ("Rogues in the House") or Cyrano de Bergerac or D'Artagnon.