Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Two Hands attribute makes shield and spear fighting style impractical.

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Two Hands attribute makes shield and spear fighting style impractical.

    Per page 63 attempting to use a weapon noted as "Two Hands" with only one hand incurs a -4 penalty. While this seems reasonable in the case of great axes and great swords, this doesn't seem reasonable when applied to spears considering the many examples from history where using a spear in one hand to fight while bearing a shield in the other hand was common. Maybe remove the note of 'two hands' and use this instead:

    Two-handed use: Parry +1, Reach 1
    One-handed use: Reach 1

  • #2
    This isn't anything new. Spears have always been written as such. If you want more historic verisimilitude, then look at actual historical settings. Weird Wars Rome, for example, has shield and spear fighting.

    Comment


    • #3
      Looks like an Edge-shaped hole.

      Comment


      • #4
        Read the actual Spears Notes on the table. Its noted that it can be used one-handed normally, but looses Parry. That's the intent behind it. The Notes portion was trying to get the same rules from WWR into the core but was cut off a little due to space issues.

        Comment


        • #5
          Yup, looks like the suggestion OP made is literally in the text already. Huzzah, victory! :P

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by magusrogue View Post
            Read the actual Spears Notes on the table. Its noted that it can be used one-handed normally, but looses Parry. That's the intent behind it. The Notes portion was trying to get the same rules from WWR into the core but was cut off a little due to space issues.
            Unfortunately, that's not what the notes say. Nothing there states the character doesn't take the -4 penalty. The language strongly implies that Reach remains. This is a case where the notes should be written with an additional benefit, Parry +1, if the character uses the weapon two-handed rather than tagging the weapon Two Hands by default.

            Comment


            • Mara
              Mara commented
              Editing a comment
              So Savage Worlds requires more common sense applied rather than legalese. The notes say it can be used one-handed but losses the parry bonus.

            • mattprice516
              mattprice516 commented
              Editing a comment
              I disagree. By default (per the 2 handed rules earlier in the section) all bonuses such as Parry are lost when wielding a 2 handed weapon as one handed AND you take a -4 penalty to Fighting rolls. The spear, however, specifically states that you can use it one handed but lose the Parry bonus. This implies that the lost Parry bonus is the only penalty - otherwise there would be no reason to have this note at all (and indeed, no other 2 handed weapon has such a note).

              It could certainly be clearer, but I think the implication is definitely there (and I think that's definitely intended, even if it isn't super obvious).

          • #7
            Originally posted by paladin2019 View Post

            Unfortunately, that's not what the notes say. Nothing there states the character doesn't take the -4 penalty. The language strongly implies that Reach remains. This is a case where the notes should be written with an additional benefit, Parry +1, if the character uses the weapon two-handed rather than tagging the weapon Two Hands by default.
            I think the intent of that note is that the spear can be used one handed with Reach 1 (and no penalty for one handed use) or two handed with Reach 1 and Parry +1. I agree the wording needs work.

            Comment


            • #8
              Originally posted by paladin2019 View Post
              Unfortunately, that's not what the notes say.
              1 - Literally no other weapon with two-handed mentions one-handed use. None. In fact, "one handed" isn't used anywhere else in the book.
              2 - "no Parry bonus if used one-handed" clearly implies that the weapon can be used one-handed at no Fighting penalty, without being insulting enough, or space wasting enough, to say that. Instead, it says what the effects of using it one-handed are. That "specific v. general" language D&D keeps going on about.

              Yes, it could be clearer.
              I hope you find the above post useful. And not insulting, because I was trying to be helpful, not insulting; being a pedantic jerk, that isn't always clear.

              Comment


              • wmarshal
                wmarshal commented
                Editing a comment
                A clearer wording is what I'm hoping for, assuming your point 2 is correct. I didn't think my original suggestion for how to word it was that much more "wordy" than the original. In regards to your second point if that is the correct interpretation intended by the authors then I don't believe it has shown itself to be the obvious interpretation given a couple of the prior responses indicating that an edge/setting rule could be created to negate the Fighting penalty.

              • ValhallaGH
                ValhallaGH commented
                Editing a comment
                wmarshal More than likely, most commenters overlooked the new note. I had read it and it still didn't fully register in my mind until I went for another look.

              • paladin2019
                paladin2019 commented
                Editing a comment
                I didn't say anything about one handed use as a stated rule. One handed is the default. I said that putting the two hands tag on this item muddies the waters. The default for two hands is -4 to hit and no special traits. The specific rules for spears allow Reach, but no mention is made of Parry or the -4 penalty, so there is no override for them. There is no other clear implication as written. Hence, the notes should say something like:

                "Reach 1; add Parry +1 if used two-handed"

                to indicate what we all think the rule should be and will probably use in our own games.
                Last edited by paladin2019; 01-17-2019, 08:41 AM.

            • #9
              As I actually helped with the spear updates back in WWR, and thus translated over to here, the intent is you can use the spear 1hd without the penalty. Thats what the notes meant.

              Comment


              • #10
                Yeah, paladin's suggestion would certainly be a clearer way to get that rule across.

                Comment


                • #11
                  I'm curious, now, as to how this would interact with Oversized Weapon Master from 50 Fathoms. My gut says to let them get the +1 bonus to Parry, but they can already wield it one-handed with no penalty.

                  Comment


                  • #12
                    How about: Reach 1. Parry +1 if used two-handed

                    That more clear?

                    Thanks!

                    Comment


                    • wmarshal
                      wmarshal commented
                      Editing a comment
                      That reads clearly to me.

                    • JamesG
                      JamesG commented
                      Editing a comment
                      Seconded, that is very clear.
                  Working...
                  X