Author Topic: A More Detailed Medieval Weapons List  (Read 8372 times)

Offline Orladdin

  • Conversationalist
  • **
  • Posts: 514
  • The Undauntable
    • View Profile
Re: A More Detailed Medieval Weapons List
« Reply #15 on: July 17, 2012, 02:31:19 PM »
Disclaimer: I didn't read more than the OP, so I don't know if this has been covered, but even if it has, it bears mentioning again:

If you are inflating weapon values, even if armor values inflate to match, you should realize you are making armor abosultely required to survive in your setting.  You can mitigate this a little by increasing base stress track length, but it just increases the survivability of your tanks even more.
If you allow such a great increase in weapon/armor values, understand that the unarmored monk or lesser-armored rogue archetypes will not be able to survive against your iron-skinned dreadnaughts unless you add additional rules to provide them survivability.  And not at the cost of refresh-- armor is (presumably) refresh-free.


[Edit:] Ok, now I've caught up.  What I said above is still completely relevant.  Additionally, characters that rely on unarmed or low-weapon-rating attacks will be simply unable to effect those in heavy armor without large FP expenditure or maneuvering; meanwhile those with armor/weapons can hack away at the unarmed/armored.  Huge disparity.
Sure, if you're going for a world where everyone wears platemail all the time and carries the largest possible weapon to survive, this is the way to make that setting-- but it's not at all the classic D&D/Tolkien high fantasy setting.

« Last Edit: July 17, 2012, 04:42:41 PM by Orladdin »
There is never a blanket answer to an ethical question.  This includes the Laws of Magic.

Perpetrator of The Cold Days Release FAQ

"I never make stupid mistakes. Only very, very clever ones."
-- The Doctor, Timewyrm: Genesys

Offline InFerrumVeritas

  • Conversationalist
  • **
  • Posts: 813
    • View Profile
Re: A More Detailed Medieval Weapons List
« Reply #16 on: July 17, 2012, 06:51:56 PM »
To be fair, it does take quite a lot of maneuvering for an unarmed combatant to damage someone carrying a shield and wearing full armor.

I'm working in a way for characters with less armor to have higher defense rolls.  Getting hit once will hurt a lot, but getting hit does hurt a lot of you're not wearing protection.  The idea for the unarmored rogue is, simply, to not get hit.

Base stress track will probably be 4.  Increase by 1 at Endurance 1/3/5 with additional minor consequences at 3/5.

Toughness powers will be priced as -1/-3/-5, not require a catch (although Catches will exist).  The lowering of cost is due to the less utility of Armor.

EDIT:  I know that costing refresh to be on par with a free option is problematic.  That's why I have armor restricting Athletics defense rolls.  I'm pretty sure I'll have it restrict Melee Weapons defense rolls, but not Melee Weapons attack rolls.  This means that effective armor use will be an investment of either skill points or refresh (on stunts to mitigate the restriction).
« Last Edit: July 17, 2012, 07:11:26 PM by InFerrumVeritas »

Offline Silverblaze

  • Posty McPostington
  • ***
  • Posts: 1150
    • View Profile
Re: A More Detailed Medieval Weapons List
« Reply #17 on: July 18, 2012, 02:59:06 AM »
Yes and no.

 If an unarmed guy grabs the shield with both hands other people have lots of free shots on the shield bearer unless he lets go of the shield.

Heavy armor?  Knock the dude in plate over.  He might not be hurt but...getting up will take precious seconds whilst others could cut him down or the unarmed individual could wrest his weapon away from him etc.


Problem is with this system...any system really.  knock someone down, they get right back up no problems.  Grapple a shield the opposing roll to pull away might be easier than it would be IRL. 

Can't get this stuff perfect and i think the rules will get overly complex trying to model it fairly.  Best of luck to those who wish to do so though.

Offline Sanctaphrax

  • White Council
  • Seriously?
  • ****
  • Posts: 12405
    • View Profile
Re: A More Detailed Medieval Weapons List
« Reply #18 on: July 18, 2012, 03:23:24 AM »
Base stress track will probably be 4.  Increase by 1 at Endurance 1/3/5 with additional minor consequences at 3/5.

Toughness powers will be priced as -1/-3/-5, not require a catch (although Catches will exist).  The lowering of cost is due to the less utility of Armor.

Extra consequences at 2/4 would probably be better. Throw people with even Endurance a bone.

I'm not so sure about that Toughness scaling. You've decreased the cost of Inhuman Toughness by 50%, but you've only decreased the cost of Mythic Toughness by 16 2/3. Since Mythic Toughness suffers most from this change (Inhuman Toughness was already competing with armour), that seems inappropriate.

Offline Becq

  • Posty McPostington
  • ***
  • Posts: 1253
    • View Profile
Re: A More Detailed Medieval Weapons List
« Reply #19 on: July 18, 2012, 03:41:02 AM »
Instead of dropping the cost, it might be worth considering scaling up the benefits of Toughness for your setting.  For example, you might give each level an additional stress box (3/6/9 instead of 2/4/6) and update the armor ratings (1/3/5 or 2/3/4 instead of 1/2/3).

Offline crusher_bob

  • Conversationalist
  • **
  • Posts: 538
    • View Profile
Re: A More Detailed Medieval Weapons List
« Reply #20 on: July 18, 2012, 09:25:01 AM »
I really dislike the bigger==better weapon idea, especially because of the implication that all attacks you make with the weapon will be 'full force' style attacks.  But most actual attacks aren't full force style attacks, because they leave you too open to a counter.

So, for example, two guys facing off in full (plate) harness and wielding pole axes does not look like them 'swinging for the fences' at each other.  Instead, it looks like a very conservative staff fight, with for tripping.  The whole point is to maneuver your opponent into a position where you can make a full force attack and they will not be able to counter it, because the counters put you into a very bad position.

So, one way of modeling this is that the stress meter represents how open you are to full force attacks, and when you run out of stress, you become out of position enough open to fight ending full force attacks.

Another possible way to model it is to use maneuvers instead.  For example, if, on average, you'd expect to produce o stress from at attack, you are better off maneuvering and then attacking next round with the aspect in place.

Offline InFerrumVeritas

  • Conversationalist
  • **
  • Posts: 813
    • View Profile
Re: A More Detailed Medieval Weapons List
« Reply #21 on: July 18, 2012, 12:47:45 PM »
I really dislike the bigger==better weapon idea, especially because of the implication that all attacks you make with the weapon will be 'full force' style attacks.  But most actual attacks aren't full force style attacks, because they leave you too open to a counter.

So, for example, two guys facing off in full (plate) harness and wielding pole axes does not look like them 'swinging for the fences' at each other.  Instead, it looks like a very conservative staff fight, with for tripping.  The whole point is to maneuver your opponent into a position where you can make a full force attack and they will not be able to counter it, because the counters put you into a very bad position.

So, one way of modeling this is that the stress meter represents how open you are to full force attacks, and when you run out of stress, you become out of position enough open to fight ending full force attacks.

Another possible way to model it is to use maneuvers instead.  For example, if, on average, you'd expect to produce o stress from at attack, you are better off maneuvering and then attacking next round with the aspect in place.

Interesting.  I'll have to give this some thought.  I did realize the folly of trying to model actual combat blow by blow some time ago (I fence and have done escrima, so I do have experience with tactical personal combat), but I get what you're saying.

I tried to penalize this by having large weapons be restricted by might and require two hands (meaning that you couldn't get a shield or a second weapon). 

Yes and no.

 If an unarmed guy grabs the shield with both hands other people have lots of free shots on the shield bearer unless he lets go of the shield.

Heavy armor?  Knock the dude in plate over.  He might not be hurt but...getting up will take precious seconds whilst others could cut him down or the unarmed individual could wrest his weapon away from him etc.


Problem is with this system...any system really.  knock someone down, they get right back up no problems.  Grapple a shield the opposing roll to pull away might be easier than it would be IRL. 

Can't get this stuff perfect and i think the rules will get overly complex trying to model it fairly.  Best of luck to those who wish to do so though.

This sounds like a lot of maneuvering.  A maneuver to negate a shield bonus for a short period of time, or a maneuver to knock someone down (and a subsequent ally placing a block preventing him from getting back up) would be great tactics.  But they aren't really hindered by my weapon or armor rules.  Heck, having Might/Endurance restrict the attempt at getting up actually aids these actions.

Offline Mr. Death

  • Posty McPostington
  • ***
  • Posts: 7965
  • Not all those who wander are lost
    • View Profile
    • The C-Team Podcast
Re: A More Detailed Medieval Weapons List
« Reply #22 on: July 18, 2012, 03:03:33 PM »
I really dislike the bigger==better weapon idea, especially because of the implication that all attacks you make with the weapon will be 'full force' style attacks.  But most actual attacks aren't full force style attacks, because they leave you too open to a counter.
I think you're misinterpreting the link between narrative and mechanics. Because an Axe has Weapon:3 doesn't mean that every time it's swung the person is "swinging for the fences." It just means that that's how much potential stress it can cause--but a low roll means it wasn't a very good swing, and a high roll means it was an attempted deathblow.

You'd use declarations and maneuvers to mechanically enforce what you're saying, and that's right in the RAW.
Compels solve everything!

http://blur.by/1KgqJg6 My first book: "Brothers of the Curled Isles"

Quote from: Cozarkian
Not every word JB rights is a conspiracy. Sometimes, he's just telling a story.

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC_T_mld7Acnm-0FVUiaKDPA The C-Team Podcast

Offline DFJunkie

  • Conversationalist
  • **
  • Posts: 624
    • View Profile
Re: A More Detailed Medieval Weapons List
« Reply #23 on: July 18, 2012, 04:32:24 PM »
Also bear in mind that each exchange is 30 seconds.  It's not a single exchange of blows, but the total outcome of half a minute of back and forth.
90% of what I say is hyperbole intended for humorous effect.  Don't take me seriously. I don't.

Offline Becq

  • Posty McPostington
  • ***
  • Posts: 1253
    • View Profile
Re: A More Detailed Medieval Weapons List
« Reply #24 on: July 18, 2012, 07:44:16 PM »
Also bear in mind that each exchange is 30 seconds.  It's not a single exchange of blows, but the total outcome of half a minute of back and forth.
Where did you get this?  The closest thing I can find to a definition is this:
Quote from: YS314
Exchange (conflict only): The amount of time it takes in a conflict for everyone to take one action and defend against any actions that are directed against them—usually not longer than a few minutes.
Which implies to me, at least, that exchange durations vary widely, but at the core reflect a single "exchange" of attacks (though I agree that an "attack" might well consist of a combination of feints, thrusts, etc).  In a firefight, for example, I imagine an exchange would only be a few seconds long -- long enough to duck out of cover, make a reasonable aimed shot or several poorly aimed shots with a semi-auto, then duck back.  (In a car chase scene, exchanges might be somewhat longer.)

Offline UmbraLux

  • Posty McPostington
  • ***
  • Posts: 1685
    • View Profile
Re: A More Detailed Medieval Weapons List
« Reply #25 on: July 18, 2012, 08:25:31 PM »
Exchange times are variable - pretty much have to be since FATE uses the exchange terminology for wildly different conflict situations.  It can be seconds in combat, minutes in a debate, hours in a complex multi-day negotiation, or even years or decades to set up a darkhallow ritual.
--
“As our circle of knowledge expands, so does the circumference of darkness surrounding it.”  - Albert Einstein

"Rudeness is a weak imitation of strength."  - Eric Hoffer

Offline crusher_bob

  • Conversationalist
  • **
  • Posts: 538
    • View Profile
Re: A More Detailed Medieval Weapons List
« Reply #26 on: July 19, 2012, 09:25:42 AM »
Here's my brainstorming for a more detailed melee combat system:

People have 3 stats, that I'll call Breath, Balance, and Blood for the amusing alliteration.

--------------------

Breath represents how physically tired, out of breath, physically capable you are of doing fighting related actions. 

Like swimming as fast as you can, melee fighting is something that uses many muscles in the body at once and can make you tired/ out of breath very, very quickly.

A disadvantage of armor is that it tends to increase the breath cost of actions.  Well fitted armor generally doesn’t stop you from doing stuff, but it certainly makes you tired faster.

Being out of breath restricts the ‘size’ of maneuvers you can do.  It’s much harder to make a powerful attack when you are gasping for breath, but you may be able to manage poking someone in the eyeball.

Starting breath would be based on your physical fitness/endurance stat, possibly with a modifier for how tired you are, in general.

----------------

Balance represents how well positioned you are to make and defend against attacks.   

You generally have to use up balance to make attacks and to defend against them.

In general, the stronger the attack, the more balance you have to give up to make it. 

Defense works the same way, the stronger your defense, the more balance you have to give up to make it.  This is the advantage of armor, it allows you to make a weaker defense (which costs less balance) to mitigate the attack down to something you armor can take.

Being out of balance means that you are probably doomed, people can make powerful attacks against you, and you don’t really have any ability to defend against them.  Also, you can’t really make attacks in return.  So things like getting knocked down, or having your weapon pinned can really ruin your whole day.

People who don’t’ know how to fight generally have low balance scores, they have no idea how to attack or defend.  Once you get to a modicum of competency, your balance score mostly stops going up, after all both you and the ultimate master stand in almost the exact same fighting stance.  But as you get much better at combat, actions with a balance cost become cheaper to do

So, despite armor making your actions take more breath, it’s generally easier to defend yourself if you are wearing armor, because you don’t have to put as much effort into your defense.

----------------

Blood, this represents how wounded you are. 
Small wounds generally reduce your breath, while large wounds can reduce both your breath and your balance.  Some wounds bleed, which increases the amount of the penalty you take from them over time.

Being out of blood pretty much means you are lying around, waiting for someone to put you out of your misery.  But maybe your friends will come along before that unhappy event happens, or your opponent will decide to take you captive instead.

Note that blood doesn’t necessarily show how close you are to death, for example a broken leg would give you grave penalties to balance, but you aren’t going to die from it in the next few minutes.


--------------

Damage
An attack can damage any of your three stats, or it can kill you outright.

Examples:
In general, fighting people with your fists and feet does mostly breath and balance damage.  It’s hard to kill someone outright with your fists, normally you have to do something like beat them down and strangle them.  Of course, some attacks, like say, gouging someones eyes out can do blood damage, but they tend to be rarer.

Certain attacks, like tripping someone or knocking their weapon out of line do almost all balance damage, the attack is designed to make following attacks easier, not to damage the target outright.

Same attacks, like getting trampled by a horse, are so massive that they do damage to all three stats.

---------------

Timing

There are four important times
1. when you decide to do something
2. when the other person can notice you doing that thing
3. when the thing actually happens
4. how soon you are able to do something else afterwards

So, a feint would be a move that looks like another move, but there is also time that it becomes obvious your move is a feint. 

Interesting side effect: it also becomes possible for two opponents to kill each other by both committing to offensive moves that leave them no defensive options and land close together.

four things matter for timing
1 how fast you are able to get your body to move
2 how well you can notice something is happening
3 how fast your mind can process what it sees, and act on it
4 how light or maneuverable your weapon is.

-----------------

So, powerful attacks are generally a bad idea, for the following reasons:
1 They cost a relatively high amount of breath and and balance to make
2 They are well telegraphed, your opponent can see them coming, and has a lot of time to do something about them.

But, they are the attacks that do massive blood damage, or end the fight all together, so it’s the powerful attacks that we actually want to land. 

How do we get our powerful attacks to land? 
run the other guy out of breath and/or balance, so that even though he can see the attack coming, there’s nothing he can do about it.
Or use small attacks that do blood damage to bring him down that way. 
Or exploit you opponents timing such that you can land an attack and there is nothing they can do about it.

-----------

So, sample fight:

--------------

Unarmored guy with huge axe vs unarmored guy with rapier:

Guy with axe: I wind up for a huge, powerful attack.

Guy with rapier: I see it coming, and have all the time in the world to put my sword into your eye before you axe can land.

Guy with axe: alas, I am dead! But you are no so fast with the rapier that you can act fast enough to prevent my axe from cleaving you in twain, even though I am dead.

Guy with rapier: whoops.  Maybe I should have been a bit more conservative in my life choices.

-------------------

Of course, the really hard part ti figuring out timing, costs, and damage so that there are no simple paths to victory...

« Last Edit: July 19, 2012, 09:58:03 AM by crusher_bob »

Offline DFJunkie

  • Conversationalist
  • **
  • Posts: 624
    • View Profile
Re: A More Detailed Medieval Weapons List
« Reply #27 on: July 19, 2012, 02:01:49 PM »
That's certainly a more granular and tactical approach to Fate combat.  If that's what floats your boat have at it, but personally I like the fact that the system is fairly abstract and the player/GM can narrate outcomes to suit their particular taste in fiction.

Now, is it true to historical fact when the guy playing a barbarian describes how his massive axe?  Of course not.  Is it fun?  Yep.  The great thing about an abstract combat system is that it allows people to focus on the character concept and interesting description rather than picking the optimal mechanical course of action and sticking to it to the bitter end.

Now, if you want to provide some balance to top tier weapons (the way that D&D 3.X had simple, marital, and exotic weapons, with each weapon being roughly equivalent within it's class) you could maybe apply a defense and/or initiative penalty to big, unwieldy, but devastating weapons while applying a bonus to one or both for smaller, less damaging weapons.  If you want to avoid "modifiers" you could say that "unwieldy" weapons take a supplemental action to ready, so if you want to attack continually with them you'll take a -1 to your actions going forward.
90% of what I say is hyperbole intended for humorous effect.  Don't take me seriously. I don't.

Offline ways and means

  • Posty McPostington
  • ***
  • Posts: 1783
  • What Lies in the Truth, what truth in the Lies.
    • View Profile
Re: A More Detailed Medieval Weapons List
« Reply #28 on: July 19, 2012, 02:14:27 PM »
Funnily Big Weapons don't seem to be better here, I would much rather go with my weapons 3 longsword and a shield than a weapons 5 great sword.
Every night has its day.
Even forever must come to an end....
I think.

Offline DFJunkie

  • Conversationalist
  • **
  • Posts: 624
    • View Profile
Re: A More Detailed Medieval Weapons List
« Reply #29 on: July 19, 2012, 03:55:11 PM »
True.  Somewhat unusually for an RPG his system makes shields almost too good to pass up.
90% of what I say is hyperbole intended for humorous effect.  Don't take me seriously. I don't.