looking for a sharpness scale

"You must spread some Experience Points around before giving it to Meatboy again."

I didn't realize that I ever gave you experience before. I don't want to spread experience around. Those whom I feel deserve experience have received experience. Therefore instead I say thank you, Meatboy, thank you for posting that movie. I'd noticed it before, but I never watched it all the way through because it was a bit slow. But that movie is excellent once they really get going - particularly when they discuss shields.

I've always known from sparring with weapons that shields were very good and badly underrated by most systems, but because we always padded the weapons and left the shields bare, we didn't use them aggressively the way they use them there, and that's a shame. Seeing them manipulate one anothers' shields is fascinating, and totally contradicts the minor role shields play in almost every published roleplaying game. +1 AC, +1 Combat, or 1 in 6 parry? Maybe for a buckler. For a large shield like they use, multiply that by four, at least.

Seeing the aggressive way that shields are used also, to my way of thinking, provides further evidence that combat systems meshing attack and defense together are quite realistic. Zenobia just uses one Combat statistic, and shields give +1 to this rating (relative to weapons which give anywhere from +1 to +3 alone). Although I never liked the way this prevented you from making a character who was strong vs. quick, or aggressive vs. defensive, it did jive with my experiences as a fighter to simply have one Combat vs. Combat roll.

I also really liked the way they dealt with leg attacks. I always used them, and found them hard to cope with if I didn't have a large shield, but if you're willing to pivot from a left lead to a right lead your extension will be superior. In my experience I would double-hit against an opponent who tried a chop against my low lunge, which is a poor trade for the lunger, but perhaps practicing this technique would always allow a chop or thrust to defeat a lunge at the legs.

Thank you again. And if, in weeks to come, other people have earned experience from me, I will return to this post and give it to you.
 

log in or register to remove this ad


Sorry it took me so long to respond.
@ Dethkok Actually I have a Katana and it is extremely sharp. I have had several other swords. My friend had two Katanas that were used in combat. One was used in WW2 and the other was used earlier. They are not that thick and they were all sharper then any european blade I've seen.
I think that the reason we are seeing this differently is that we are talking about two different time periods. I was thinking in terms of the Early and High Middle Ages and I think that you are thinking about the Late Middle Ages. In the Late Middle Ages there was a shift due to the introduction of gunpowder. Armor became ceremonial mostly and longswords became sharp because there was a dueling tradition. This is when you get variations on the long sword such as the back sword. Eventually this evolved to a rapier dueling tradition but a lot of the early swords during what I call the Age of Gunpowder were just better metal and sharper blades.
However during the Early Middle Ages metallurgy sucked. The only really good swords around used imported cast ingots from the Arabs. All the others would break like dry wood if they hit anything too hard. They had too much impurities and the smelting at the time couldn't fix it. Adding an edge to that was pointless because it would wear away too quickly.
 

About the sharpness scale. I decided to not connect it will metals after all after a blacksmith pointed out that people used bronze razors for thousands of years, even after the age of iron weapons.
What I think that I will do is if a higher grade metal weapon does a smash attack and is parried by a lower grade weapon and the attacker gets a crit then it will break the lesser blade.
 


Remove ads

Top