PDA

View Full Version : Articulate Weapons



eruditus
06-25-2003, 01:30 PM
I did add a house rule already.

If you use an articulated weapon and you miss a shot all together then you have to make an Agility test to not be hit with your own weapon - usually just a superficial wound.

Articulated training allows you to avoid that possibility and utilize a few interesting articulated attack options I have been brewing up.

One possibility - the ability to split up your attack dice into two attacks on the same target at -1 Power.

Training with flails and three-sectional staves has proven to me that in the hands of the untrained, articulated weaponry are just as dangerous to the user as they are to the target :shock:

Durgil
06-26-2003, 02:00 PM
I don't have the rule books yet, but I'm just curious. In the Burning Wheel system, do the rules make these types of weapons (i.e. morning stars, flails, etc.) more effective against an opponents using a shield for defense?

luke
06-26-2003, 02:22 PM
in the Burning Wheel system, do the rules make these types of weapons (i.e. morning stars, flails, etc.) more effective against an opponents using a shield for defense?

YES YES YES! Under Anti-Shield>Articulate Weapons on page 111 of the Burning Wheel: "No shield defense against such weapons."

eruditus
06-26-2003, 02:34 PM
right.

and so on a purely munchkin level you could basically attain an articulated anything (although footman's flails would be understandably most common) and I couldn't see why everyone wouldn't want to use them. This rules addition seemed to slow that routine down a little and makes perfect sence to the man who has nearly brained himself on more occassions than I can count. Its one more roll, which I try to avoid but for me the roll is worth it. Besides, it wouldn't slow the game down much because I can have the next person acting while the person with the flail that missed made their roll to see if they sustain an additional superficial to themselves...lol... sorry, that tickles me.

mike_ravenwood
06-26-2003, 02:43 PM
I think requiring a training skill in addition to the skill itself is not needed. The skill implies that you have trained to use the weapon properly. It would make no sense for someone who has trained up to B5 or B6 and still not no how avoid cracking himself in the skull if he misses.

luke
06-26-2003, 03:02 PM
It would make no sense for someone who has trained up to B5 or B6 and still not no how avoid cracking himself in the skull if he misses.

here, here! i agree.

eruditus
06-26-2003, 03:11 PM
heh. Your probably right. However, since there is no flail skill, instead of adding a flail skill i would have them use an appropriate weapon and articulated training. In this way, in my fantasy world, I could have articulated staves, swords, hammers, maces, axes, etc. Its not terribly accurate but had the thematic panache I was looking for.

luke
06-26-2003, 03:24 PM
whatever floats your boat!

I definitely understand your point, though. Articulate weapons are more clumsy to use. You could still include a fumble rule for the use of those skills. Or, if you don't like that so much, you could make opening a Flail skill cost 2pts instead of 1. That puts the training required to use the skill properly at the forefront (and makes it a premium! But it is cheaper than an additional training).

Weapons weapons weapons...

Flail, Type: Martial, Root: Agility
This skill covers the use of chain-ball-and-haft articulated weapons such as Morning Stars and Flails.

Weapon stats:
Horseman's Flail Power: 1, VA 1, 1-Handed, Fast, May Not Great Strike
Footman's Flail Power: 2, VA 2, 2-Handed, Slow, May Great Strike

Special Rule: Danger to yourself and your community Flails can get out of control when used improperly. When a character completely misses a Flail Strike, Feint, Great Strike or Counter Strike, there is a chance the weapon swings around and hits him. Roll the DOF, on the roll of a 1 the weapon hits the wielder. Damage is inverse IMS, successes missed by determine hit. Roll armor as applicable.

just a suggestion from little old me.

Durgil
02-02-2004, 01:11 PM
Sorry to rehash a seemingly old subject, but I've been thinking about these types of weapons lately. They are pretty deadly for something that is actually quite rare on the historical battle fields (at least in Europe), even with the possibility of braining yourself with it :lol: . I wonder if you have the above speeds correct. I would think that the footman's flail would be slow, while the horseman's flail or warflail should be unwieldy. I mean, don't they require at least a little bit of a windup before you swing them at someone?

eruditus
02-02-2004, 01:29 PM
I would agree, Durgil. Slow and unweildy respectively.As for their commonality, I think it really has to do with training. Its much easier to train someone to use the business end of a sword or spear. That ease of use means a lot when dealing with hundreds of soldiers.

Also, most infantry on the field used swords, axes and spears... not shileds, making the extra training seem useless for the average soldier.

Yagathai
02-02-2004, 05:26 PM
For a fun cinematic fight with a morningstar -- not a flail, but close -- I recommend the 1952 Ivanhoe. As far as flails being unwieldly, I disagree. I think that one of the advantages of using a flail or other short-chain weapon is that you can strike quickly and unpredictably with a fair amount of force. While it's true you do need to chamber your strikes a bit more, unlike a non-articulated weapon, there's very little need for follow-through with a flail (and if you do anyway it's a lot faster, because you're not actually applying any force to any object that might slow you down), and so you're able to pull back and strike again quicker.

I would, however, recommend that a 2-handed flail be given the ability to Great Strike, to simulate a wind-up-and-go.

Kublai
02-02-2004, 05:32 PM
The Great Strike ruling sounds perfectly fair to me.

eruditus
02-03-2004, 09:10 AM
Its not a matter of "get off a quick strike" rather recovering and striking in the next split second with the same force... its not happening unless you have some specialized training.

luke
02-03-2004, 11:50 AM
its not happening unless you have some specialized training.

Yes, in BW terms we refer to that as a "skill."

Fizban
02-03-2004, 11:04 PM
By the way, Shields, not like armours, if their block try was fail, the attacking weapon just not hit it, what means that the shield is not damaged. So, I think that rolling 1 should not hart the shield, but rolling 4, for example - same chance, but still blocking!
And if a wooden shield is successfully blocking a great strike or Articulated weapon strike - it crashes to little pieces, and a metallic one should be brake off the user's hand (for soft metal) or swing from it to far place (for hard metal, and still the user should get a little damage from the shock).

Any way, I do agree that regular flail should be slow and great one - unwieldy. In addition, the flail should have more power (2 for regular, 3 fore great), and should have the ability to strike many foes by hitting with it "in circle" - the attacker divides his dice between the target and then roles.

Thats all for now.

- Fiz

Trayer
02-04-2004, 11:24 AM
One cannot block a great strike. Great Strike just cancels the block. But I understand what you mean with a heafty blow shattering a wooden shield. It really depends on the quality of the shield itself. Some "wooden" shields were bound with leather, steel and studded with a heavy metal boss to take the brunt of many blows. These wooden shields were almost as good a solid metal ones. (and much lighter!)


-CMC