Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Dogbrain" data-source="post: 1329789" data-attributes="member: 14980">Well, there are some problems with this.  I suggest people read this through before responding, or you may end up "correcting" something I address later.The greatest one is that remarkable rarity of people who have formal schooling in the use of archaic weapons from a classical standpoint and pedagogy (which means THEORY AND HISTORY as well as practice), in the living tradition of the early modern swordmasters AND roleplay AND don't think of D20 as beneath their notice.Second, people who make an attempt at the task simply have no concept of how the far-too-typical introductions they make into the game will alter how it plays.Third, the general gaming public has certain "expectations", borne of ignorance and misinformation as to the "best" way to represent this sort of combat.Every attempt I've ever seen begins with the premise that D20 archaic combat is 100% totally and absolutely nothing but Flintstone boxing--brutes who stand and bash each other until one or the other falls over.  Hit points are 100% invariably treated (even if hypocrite mouth noises are made to the contrary) as "bits-o-body" that get chipped off in combat and represent nothing else.Okay, so then a "parry" thingie always gets added.  Contrary to popular delusion, "swashbucklers" didn't invent the "parry".  They didn't invent "footwork" or "defense".  Indeed, one English gentleman of the 16th century went so far as to claim that the Italianate boogers who were invading his island to teach Gentlemen their foining tricks with the rapier had abandoned defense altogether!Thus, if the greatsword-wielding man in plate gets no special "parry" thingie, then it likewise would not apply to somebody with a rapier or transitional rapier.Likewise, counterattacks were not invented by "swashbucklers" (although a case that the riposte was might be reasonably made--but a riposte requires a very light weapon--one that was never seriously used against armor).  Indeed, the heart and soul of the old schools of swordsmanship were to control timing, distance, and measure sufficiently that you would be able to launch a counterattack at the time and angle that would take full advantage of the attack launched against you.Defense was taught a LOT in the old school--the method was simply somewhat different.Unfortunately, there is a great deal of inertia and opposition against anything that violates the dogmatic response (make up a  "parry" thingie, pile on boatloads of defensive bonuses, etc).Finally, there is one fundamental fact that is either ignored or simply unknown to the masses:  When "swashbucklers" went to war, they used the heaviest weapons and armor they darn well could find!  The fancy tricks of the duel were left behind when the serious business of a real fight was underway.  Unfortunately, people instead try to "balance" a "swashbuckler" in combat against a Fighter in full plate.  In our own world, the way a swordmaster would "balance" himself in combat would be to PUT ON SOME FULL PLATE, HIMSELF, AND PULL OUT THE GREAT HONKING CAN-OPENER WEAPON.  The right tool for the right job isn't just for installing a new light switch.And before anybody thinks to pull out the old "Well, it's fiction." cop-out (and it is a cop-out of the lowest order), the archetypal swashbuckling fiction from which we get the "swashbuckler" (I will leave off truly forgettable "fantasy" attempts that always fall quite flat) never depicts its heroes going up against walking tanks, against mighty dragons, or in any of the situations that far too many designers try to "balance" them for.  They may humiliate brutes, but these brutes invariably use the same equipment used by the "swashbuckler", simply with far less skill (aka, they are lower level characters).So, in a nutshell, there you have it.</blockquote>

Verification