Weapons being damaged

[Rurik]

Upthread I threw out my ideas on the subject, which is that on a critical (attack or parry) a weapon does normal damage to an opposing weapon of equal or lower AP.

I think that is a good idea. I like it! How would it work with a critical attack though?

When I using criticals as max damage (as in the RAW) I just used the the max damage (= rolled db). I since have switched to criticals doing double rolled damage (I like the potential for massive damage) to the target but only normal damage to the weapon.

When I used critical damage as the RAW I used max damage for critical parries too. So a weapon always did max damage plus rolled damage ponus minus the other weapons AP.

The relatively fixed damage from using max damage didn't really seem to be a problem in practice so I may just keep weapons doing double rolled on crits, but always do max damage to other weapons. That would eliminate a seperate damage roll against the weapon.

I tweak a lot.

 

[Halfbat]

I suppose one could look at it as saying that those stats are for the default metal for the setting - i.e. a bronze sword is going to be about as effective versus bronze plate as an iron sword will be versus iron plate or a steel sword will be versus steel plate. They all should do a pretty similar amount of damage against an unarmored foe. [Emphasis Mine]

This is what I run with - it seems a reasonable justification for the differences in metal as well as coping with virtually no armour.

 

[juhanfg]

Why instead of worrying about additional damage to the weapons while in combat don't you use similar rules to the amour maintenance costs in the equipment book?. That you have to spend some money on maintaining the weapons. It's a simpler solution.

 

[Rasta]

Why instead of worrying about additional damage to the weapons while in combat don't you use similar rules to the amour maintenance costs in the equipment book?. That you have to spend some money on maintaining the weapons. It's a simpler solution.

Much simpler. Is that in arm & equipment book? I don't have that one. Is it worth getting?

When I using criticals as max damage (as in the RAW) I just used the the max damage (= rolled db). I since have switched to criticals doing double rolled damage (I like the potential for massive damage) to the target but only normal damage to the weapon.

But they would still have to declare a percise attack to the weapon?
I'll have to try this out with my group and see how they like it.

 

[soltakss]

I have a question about your house rules. How does it apply to weapons such as "Stormbringer" and it's brothers and sisters. (Remember there is an incidence in the Book Stormbringer when Elric summons thousands of swords all nearly equal to "Stormbringer" and "Mourneblade".) Of course this would apply to other magic weapons. The Elric series has plenty of them to draw upon.

Swords such as Stormbringer are Chaos-Forged Demon-Blades, so follow the Chaos-Forged Demon-Blades rules, I would assume.

Seriously, they don't follow normal rules because they are not normal blades. You couldn't give Stormbringer 10 AP/10Hp as it is virtually indestructible. It doesn't do 1D8/1D10 damage as it can kill gods.

 

[juhanfg]

Why instead of worrying about additional damage to the weapons while in combat don't you use similar rules to the amour maintenance costs in the equipment book?. That you have to spend some money on maintaining the weapons. It's a simpler solution.

Much simpler. Is that in arm & equipment book? I don't have that one. Is it worth getting?

Yes it is in there. As for the worth of the book I wound say it is worth the money. I provides quite a lot of information about additional equipment, possible modifications to arms and armour with the penalties and benefits, animals, companions, and a few other things.

The rules about maintaining armour are quite simple and deal with amount of money that you need to spend on repatching the armour depending on what quality and what type of use you give them. I think it shouldn't be to difficult to adapt to include the weapons.

 

[Rurik]

Why instead of worrying about additional damage to the weapons while in combat don't you use similar rules to the amour maintenance costs in the equipment book?. That you have to spend some money on maintaining the weapons. It's a simpler solution.

Though the point of coming up with rules for weapon breakage is so they break during combat - creating a memorable moment during the fray.

When I using criticals as max damage (as in the RAW) I just used the the max damage (= rolled db). I since have switched to criticals doing double rolled damage (I like the potential for massive damage) to the target but only normal damage to the weapon.

But they would still have to declare a percise attack to the weapon?
I'll have to try this out with my group and see how they like it.

Hopefully this will be clearer. What I am currently using is as follows:

A critical attack that is parried does normal rolled damage to the parrying weapon if the parrying weapons AP are not greater than the attacking weapons. The parrying weapon subtracts its' AP from this damage.

A critical parry does normal rolled damage to the attacking weapon if the attacking weapon's AP are not greater than the parrying weapons. The attacking weapons AP are subtracted from this damage.

If both the attack and parry are criticals then both weapons will take damage.

 

[Rasta]

A critical attack that is parried does normal rolled damage to the parrying weapon if the parrying weapons AP are not greater than the attacking weapons. The parrying weapon subtracts its' AP from this damage.

A critical parry does normal rolled damage to the attacking weapon if the attacking weapon's AP are not greater than the parrying weapons. The attacking weapons AP are subtracted from this damage.

Ahhh indeed. I understand now. So for a critical attack that is parried normally would do damage to the weapon, and not the weilder. Unless the damage exceeds the weapons AP+HP.

If both the attack and parry are criticals then both weapons will take damage.

I like this a lot. Now it is possible for two weapons to break at the same time. Now you're speaking my language. I officially renounce my house rule and am adopting Rurick's. Sweet.

 

[Aramanthus]

Sounds interesting. Although I have to agree with Soltakss. I knew what "Stormbringer" was in the story. I wanted to see how the gentleman who started the thread would deal with the problem. But if he's never read any "Elric" novels it might cause confusion for him. I have to read the last tow before I'm fully caught up on my "Elric". (The Skrayling Tree and The Son of the White Wolf.)

 

[Rasta]

Yeah I didn't start the thread. But I would give an unbreakable sword infinate AP.

 

[Rurik]

Yeah I didn't start the thread. But I would give an unbreakable sword infinate AP.

Infinate AP would make it too good for parrying.

I would give it a lot of AP, 8-12 for example, and give it a whole lot of HP, say 100. Then I would say it regenerates HP whenever it damages or Kills a foe. I kinda like it regenerating HP equal to the POW of slain foes.

Thats just the way I would do it.

 

[Aramanthus]

That is an interesting idea. I'll have to continue monitoring this thread just to see the interesting ideas that come because of it.

 

[Rasta]

You couldn't give Stormbringer 10 AP/10Hp as it is virtually indestructible. It doesn't do 1D8/1D10 damage as it can kill gods.

I would give it a lot of AP, 8-12 for example.

Cool

 

[Rurik]

We are of course probably going to see some official stats for Stormbringer in a month or so.

 

[Rurik]

Ahhh indeed. I understand now. So for a critical attack that is parried normally would do damage to the weapon, and not the weilder. Unless the damage exceeds the weapons AP+HP.

Actually I still have the attack do Critical Damage to the target - so it can damage the weapon and the target.

 

[Rasta]

So if I am understanding you right.

Bolag the troll attacks Sven the barbarian and rolls a critical for his attack with a Club AP2/HP5 6 plus his DM brings it up to 12.

Sven rolls a normal success and blocks with his warsword. Then Sven would take 8 damage and his sword none.

If Bolag had a mace, assuming he rolled the same damage, then Sven would take 8 damage to his sword and himself.

Is this how you would apply your rules?

 

[Mongoose Pete]

Actually I still have the attack do Critical Damage to the target - so it can damage the weapon and the target.

This is getting a little confusing now!

I think I see a flaw in your idea, but to illustrate it I'll change tack and come at it from a statistical direction...

Using your house rule Rurik, assuming we have an average attacker with 50% weapon skill... they have a 5% chance of a critical. Therefor 1 in 20 of their attacks will damage the parrying weapon. (The defender's skill does not matter in this circumstance since an attacking crit will always damage the parrying weapon)

If both warriors are using swords, and the attacker has a standard damage bonus of 1d2, the defending sword will suffer 1d8+1d2 damage... or around 6 points each crit. 4 are absorbed by the sword's AP's leaving 2 points which damage the blade. Since War Swords have 10 hit points, they can survive 5 such criticals before being broken, which on average is about 100 parries.

100 parries is about 33 rounds (assuming 3 comabt actions per round), which at 5 seconds per round comes to 165 seconds, or an average of two and three quarter minutes of parrying before a War Sword will break.

If we decide that the attacker is instead using a greatsword, then the war sword will only survive an average of two criticals. This translates to a survival time of 40 parries = 13 rounds = 65 seconds, or just over a minute of successful defending.

This was of course against a warrior of very mediocre skill. If facing a master swordsman with 100%, the life span of the defender's weapon would be halved. When you start adding damage enhancing magic into the equation, then weapons will be shattered even faster! Which means as characters become more experienced and start facing tougher foes, their weapon's lifespan will diminish proportionately.

Now it seems to me that no warrior would be very happy if their weapons consistently broke after only a minute or two of use! In fact it would lead to a revolution in fighting style, either switching to missile combat, or the adoption of golf-club bags with spare blades...

With this rule, you'd would never see any family heirlooms, or weapons with a history!

How about changing the occurrence of weapons becoming damaged to a roll of a fumble instead?

 

[Rasta]

Very interesting perspective.

How about changing the occurrence of weapons becoming damaged to a roll of a fumble instead?

So you're saying that weapons could only be damaged by a persice attack, or if the attacker fumbles, and the defender makes normal success?

 

[Rurik]

Actually I still have the attack do Critical Damage to the target - so it can damage the weapon and the target.

(A lot of interesting points)

How about changing the occurrence of weapons becoming damaged to a roll of a fumble instead?

I hadn't looked on it that way. Though honestly one of the biggest stumbling blocks I had to cross in my acceptance of MRQ over previous RQ editions was the fact that in MRQ you can get up to 5 attacks AND parries in in one 5 second round - a bit 'faster' than reality if you ask me. So I still kind of am in the mindset of the old 1 (or two if you are VERY good) attacks and parries per 12 second round mindset.

In your figures you don't take into account that some parries fail (or will not be made) - an attacking weapon will only damage a defending weapon on a successful parry.

And on your point about increasing breakage due to magical enhancements I would say that if we had damage boosting magic in real life it would likely have increased historical weapon breakage as well.

But I agree that looked at how long a weapon would last is a bit brief when looking at the average time to break something. Especially when Greatswords are involved (though in any system that takes a weapons AP, HP, and damage into account MRQ greatswords are going to be weapon smashing machines - they are even with the current precise attacks rule as is as well).

I will say in practice I have found that in the combats I have run a weapon gets broken only once in a while, which is the 'feel' I am looking for (also applying a strict interpretation of how long an average combat lasts in MRQ with 2-3 attacks per 5 second round they are usually over in well under 1 minute). Though honestly I have mostly run just combats - in a real game with multiple combats and no time to repair weapons between them breakage might become a problem.

Rather than a fumble damaging weapons I would say apply my 'critical' rules only on a natural 01 rather than a critical. I will certainly give it a try. I suspect though in actual play that may make breakage so rare that it will almost never happen.

Also keep in mind that with two 'normal' people fighting war sword to war sword, even on a crit, with 1d8 vs. 4 AP half the time no damage will occur to the weapon.

RQ has always had rules for breakage and big strong foes have always been more likely to break weapons. I am looking for a way to put incidental damage to weapons back in the game, as some of us miss it. I personally find it adds another level of drama to RQ combats that is worth the extra rules and complexity.

 

[andakitty]

I have not played or run MRQ, so I am not sure this will help. The way I have been handling weapon breakage in my BRP fantasy games is as follows; on a parry of a critical, and only a critical, if the damage exceeds the weapons' hit points it breaks, otherwise no effect. If it is a shield that takes the blow I use the rule from SB5 about shield degradation (it does not break but loses hit points equal to damage taken over its threshold every time it is hit by a critical). This allows a way to have weapon breakage as a factor without being bogged down with details, since it only occurs on a critical hit being parried/blocked. The heavier the weapon the more likely it is to break another weapon or shield. If I were running a game using MRQ I would try dropping the AP and just using the HP of the weapon to determine whether or not it broke under these circumstances. The hit points by themselves on the weapon charts are close to the values I have been using for my homebrew, but the critical used was weapon damage x2, so I am not sure how well it would work without further tweaking. It has worked quite well for me in my games, however.