D&D 5E Translating fencing schools (Destreza, Scrimia, etc) to 5E?

[Manbearcat]

I'm fairly well learned on this subject so let me give you the best two pieces of advice off the top of my head:

1) Always duel your enemy left-handed. Otherwise, it will be over too quick. You will not be satisfied.

2) Bonetti's Defense is always fitting in rocky terrain. Expect the enemy to attack with Capoferro. But at that point you can safely assume he is a master...and you both know that Thibault cancels out Capoferro. This is all assuming, of course, that the enemy has studied his Agrippa.

So I guess the moral of the story is AS SOON AS HIS HEAD COMES INTO VIEW...HIT IT WITH THE ROCK!

 

[aramis erak]

DiGrassi, yes, but I would think that the English style is most influenced by George Silver who championed a uniquely English martial art over the more fashionable Italian one. And in general, the idea of the riposte is good, but at times Silver seems to be also arguing for something like a clinch maneuver - stepping inside the guard of a long weapon like the rapier to make an attack the rapierist can neither easily parry nor meet with an attack of his own. He's also the one that argues for natural motion in the attack rather than the elongated attack we associate with lunging in order to facilitate faster and longer recoveries. George in effect would have you attack with natural motion and then lunge backwards.

I've not studied Silver, and will note that, for the style I learned, Silver is pretty much forbidden - SCA Rapier disallows grapples and clinches. It can be said fairly that there are 3 english schools of note... the military cut & thrust, DiGrassi, and Silver. Many discount the military school, but it owes as much to de Fence as does Di Grassi, especially with the rise of Musketry.

When I fenced, however, I used a mix of Saviolo, Di Grassi and Destrezza. Heavy on the Spanish circle...

And Destrezza really doesn't shove. It steps aside whilst skewering and moving en passant. Let him run onto your blade and/or whack him sharply as he passes. It's very much a reaction style. It survives in the Corrida del Torro, and may have arisen from same.

It also encourages thinking in lines of action, but that's resolution beyond the capability of D&D level resolution.

For duels, Destrezza. For melee, Saviolo and Di Grassi, with a touch of C&T tossed in (courtesy of a weekend schola with John James) and a touch of Musashi; I like the inverted dagger for both blocking and en passant slash.

 

[Samloyal23]

Hmm... So are there any styles that are better on rough terrain, say over snow or mud or on a sand dune?

 

[Quickleaf]

That puts him ready to gain a feat. I really want to emphasize the Martial Adept feat that grants maneuvers to anyone who wants to take it. Fighters will still be better, well, fighters, but that seems reasonable. Also, if you're not using feats to gain these abilities, then how are you balancing them?

That's a bit complex. I have a system of Fortunes (other RPGs might call them traits?) adapted/expanded from Skull & Bones. Every PC starting out takes up to 4 Mixed or Good Fortunes, but for every Good Fortune they take they must also take one Ill Fortune. While some of the Fortunes do tweak numbers, mostly they are story elements that provide new things to do rather than MORE POWER at things you already do.

Hence why I said I was looking for powering out rather than powering up PCs with these fencing schools.

For example, belonging to a fencing school - in addition to whatever trick you learn from the school - implies something about your character's story and approach to fighting. They trained under a master for at least six months (who may or may not still be alive). They subscribe to a certain philosophy of the school (or perhaps rebelled from it). They can understand arming texts written in diverse languages even if they don't themselves speak the language the text is writing in. They can recognize others using their style in battle and hold "high-level" discourse about the merits of different fighting forms. Etc.

 

[aramis erak]

Hmm... So are there any styles that are better on rough terrain, say over snow or mud or on a sand dune?

On snow, yes, I've fenced on snow... I tend to use more di Grassi on the snow and ice... because the footwork of Destreza is too reliant upon keeping one's balance high and feet beneath. Di Grassi and the Italians tend to be fairly low and fairly linear... which makes it easier to keep one's feet... Di Grassi also discourages lunges, and especially flèches, as they're more easily parried due to longer reaction times.

A practitioner of Saviolo or similar Italian styles can reach 10' from en garde with a lunge, 15' with a flèche (which usually ends 5'-7' forward of start)... A simple rapier thrust with a 42" blade hits 70"-80" of reach - 5' 10" to 6' 6" - sans footwork.

A spanish circle duel on wet ice is a fun sight to see... but I never want to DO it again!

DiGrassi and the Italians would best be represented in that by taking proficiency in acrobatics, while Destreza tends not to...

 

[ren1999]

Great ideas all.

 

[Samloyal23]

So, in game terms, what modifiers apply on different types of terrain? If it is raining, muddy, you are sloshing through snow, or you are on a sand dune, how does it effect your footwork? Can it lose you attacks or initiative?

 

[evilives]

That's a bit complex. I have a system of Fortunes (other RPGs might call them traits?) adapted/expanded from Skull & Bones. Every PC starting out takes up to 4 Mixed or Good Fortunes, but for every Good Fortune they take they must also take one Ill Fortune. While some of the Fortunes do tweak numbers, mostly they are story elements that provide new things to do rather than MORE POWER at things you already do.

Hence why I said I was looking for powering out rather than powering up PCs with these fencing schools.

For example, belonging to a fencing school - in addition to whatever trick you learn from the school - implies something about your character's story and approach to fighting. They trained under a master for at least six months (who may or may not still be alive). They subscribe to a certain philosophy of the school (or perhaps rebelled from it). They can understand arming texts written in diverse languages even if they don't themselves speak the language the text is writing in. They can recognize others using their style in battle and hold "high-level" discourse about the merits of different fighting forms. Etc.

It sounds like you are already doing these schools as a kind of supplemental backgrounds. Why not extend what you are already doing a little further and flesh out each with flaws, bonds, contacts, and so on that relate to the school? The backgrounds option hits the role-playing and exploration side of the game very nicely, adding versatility there. "Hey we roll into port, and I know this guy, fled Venice after not paying his bills, but he is supposed to know the secret of Torricelli's Thrust."

I think the flaws could be a lot of fun at the table. English School (George Silver taken to extremes): 1) You have an extreme distaste for the rapier, regarding it as an imperfect weapon. You hold forth often and at length on this topic at the slightest provocation. 2) You prefer a straight up fight to a lot of fiddling and sneaking around. 3) You are horrified by other schools of fencing and believe that they are weakening the moral character of your homeland. 4) You will turn almost any conversation to a recounting of duels in which you invariably did not take part and know only from hearsay. 5) You believe that the masters of other fencing schools are charlatans and fools, and make little effort to hide this fact. 6) Fencing, in your opinion, is of far, far greater import than religion, and is certainly more useful.

 

[aramis erak]

So, in game terms, what modifiers apply on different types of terrain? If it is raining, muddy, you are sloshing through snow, or you are on a sand dune, how does it effect your footwork? Can it lose you attacks or initiative?

In real world...

on wet ice, you need to keep your center of mass over the center of the line between your feet. It's slick, and if you don't have hobnails or soft rubber, you have no traction. Tennis flats are actually better than cowboy boots, for example, even tho' the cowboy boots are better protection.

On sand, the issue is mostly just being slowed down by mild sinking, and the inability to flèche or lunge quite as far.

On wet grass, if in boots, it's not a major issue.

Dry grass and dry carpet are about equal.

Dry large tile, smooth linoleum, or polished stone: no problem unless you're in hard-soled smooth soled footwear (such as dress shoes or cowboy boots). Then only a problem when you're too far off-line.

Wet tile, wet linoleuym or wet polished stone: we don't fence... it's about the same as wet ice, but with less ability to dig in with hobnails or hard heeled boots/shoes. The slipping happens most if you take normal length steps, so you shorten the distance per advancing, retreating, or sideways step.

The worse the terrain, the more likely a flèche becomes a faceplant and/or an injury to your opponent.
Likewise, the worse the terrain, the more likely a lunge plants you on your face or arse... not as risky as a flèche, but still...

But, in game, we're not able to easily emulate the reach of a trained fencer with a longsword or rapier... 10' with a 4' blade, 15' with a flèche. Except by extending threat, but requiring the fencer to end within 5'...

In game....
The mechanics for difficult terrain are that it costs an extra foot per foot moved.
That phrasing is awkward, but is important because it stacks with crawling.

Very difficult terrain also requires a skill roll at a DC of the DM's choice.

I'd put wet ice at DC15 to DC 20, depending upon what kind of footwear one's in. Wet stone, depending upon algal and mineral deposition, I'd put at DC5 to DC 20.

Slick-but-dry, I'd put at just the movement penalty if in hard soles; non-dry soft soles tend to stick, so I'd not penalize them. For simplicity, call this the default terrain and don't worry until someone throws ball-bearings down.

Sand, just slows you down, most of the time.

Tall grass (more than 1') slows the footwork a bit; call it difficult.

Tall grass with gophers, moles, or prairie dogs, if you slow down, not much an issue, but if you try for full speed... save or reduce move by 5' until a long rest sounds about right. DC probably should be about 5 for light infestations, 10 for heavy.

 

[Mercule]

That's a bit complex. I have a system of Fortunes (other RPGs might call them traits?) adapted/expanded from Skull & Bones. Every PC starting out takes up to 4 Mixed or Good Fortunes, but for every Good Fortune they take they must also take one Ill Fortune. While some of the Fortunes do tweak numbers, mostly they are story elements that provide new things to do rather than MORE POWER at things you already do.

Hmm... Interesting perspective. I made my recommendation with simplicity in mind. Experience has taught me that tweaking an existing system is much more stable than creating a new system. Plus, I believe that D&D is sufficiently large-grained that trying to add too many fine mechanical distinctions (claymore vs. zweihander, for instance) is a poor fit and likely doomed to failure.

That said, I'm not knowledgeable enough about fencing to see where the large grain mechanics break flavor. I'm also not a professional game designer. My advice is to keep it simple and don't try to force D&D to do things it's not good at. If, however, you come up with a system you like, I very much encourage you to post it in the Fan Creations section of the downloads. 5E is designed to be modular. Just because I don't see it working well doesn't mean it won't.

Plus, I always loved the odd extra subsystems that were published in Dragon during the 1980s. Only rarely were they something that I fell in love with to the point of becoming a new standard rule, forever more (critical hits is one). They almost always deepened my understanding of how the core rules worked and were balanced, though.