Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Two Hands attribute makes shield and spear fighting style impractical.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
    paladin2019
    Registered Member

  • paladin2019
    commented on 's reply
    Point of order. Quarterstaff is a fighting style that closely mirrors greatsword. Pugil stick is a different style.
  • Deskepticon
    Registered Member

  • Deskepticon
    replied
    One of my personal peeves about Savage Worlds is that it doesn't put quite enough attention on balancing weapons and "handedness," both with the basic mechanics and Edges. That's not to say that certain weapons, historically and in actuality, are better than others. They are, but a tabletop game (IMO) needs to set some reasonable expectations of balance. Spears are awesone weapons, and the game reflects that, but if verasimilitude was the goal, then a knife would not reasonably be able to deflect a strike from a two-handed sword.

    Sangrel
    Registered Member
    Sangrel Staves are definitely one of the weaker weapons available, despite the fact that they are actually fairly versatile in real life. Rather than mirroring the spear, I would allow staves to function as if the character were wielding two melee weapons (see Two Weapons under Situation Rules). That would both capture the "feel" of a quarterstaff's fighting style while giving it a small mechanical boost.

    Leave a comment:

  • ValhallaGH
    Registered Member

  • ValhallaGH
    replied
    Welcome to the forum!

    We'll overlook the necromancy, but generally any discussion over a year old is quietly dead for a reason.
    Originally posted by Sangrel View Post
    If this is true, then the spear has become an Over power weapon and weapons like swords, axes, clubs for d6 damage will be needed only for show, since they are worse in mechanics.
    Only if you ignore all the other game mechanics and circumstances. This includes shields, conditions too cramped to turn with a spear extended, and the fact that swords and axes have Str+d8 versions.

    If all your combats take place in open fields then spears will dominate. Which aligns with history, where forces that fought in open fields favored spears until firearms got reload times under one minute; even then, spears (and variants, like the halberd) were still in use as anti-cavalry weapons until machine guns became prevalent, since a formation of horsemen is an excellent counter for a formation of arquebus users.

    Leave a comment:

  • Sangrel
    Registered Member

  • Sangrel
    replied
    The point is that spears can be used effectively in either one or two hands. If it's used one-handed, it's a Reach 1 weapon. If you a second hand with the spear, it also gains Parry +1.
    If this is true, then the spear has become an Over power weapon and weapons like swords, axes, clubs for d6 damage will be needed only for show, since they are worse in mechanics.

    Therefore, I strongly disagree with this and I like the old spears in SWADE and SWEXE (Explore Edition) more. Since they were directly indicated as two-handed.

    Leave a comment:

  • SteelDraco
    Registered Member

  • SteelDraco
    replied
    The point is that spears can be used effectively in either one or two hands. If it's used one-handed, it's a Reach 1 weapon. If you a second hand with the spear, it also gains Parry +1.

    Staves, as far as I'm aware, don't really have a significant one-handed fighting style, which is why they don't have the same mechanic - you can use it with only one hand, but you'll take the penalty to Fighting rolls for using a two-handed weapon in one hand.

    Leave a comment:

  • Sangrel
    Registered Member

  • Sangrel
    replied
    So a spear is a one-handed weapon?
    Then why can't the staff have the same rule?

    Leave a comment:

  • JamesG
    Registered Member

  • JamesG
    commented on 's reply
    Seconded, that is very clear.
  • wmarshal
    Registered Member

  • wmarshal
    commented on 's reply
    That reads clearly to me.
  • PEGShane
    The Shanester

  • PEGShane
    replied
    How about: Reach 1. Parry +1 if used two-handed

    That more clear?

    Thanks!

    Leave a comment:

  • Jounichi
    Registered Member

  • Jounichi
    replied
    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.

    Leave a comment:

  • mattprice516
    Registered Member

  • mattprice516
    replied
    Yeah, paladin's suggestion would certainly be a clearer way to get that rule across.

    Leave a comment:

  • paladin2019
    Registered Member

  • paladin2019
    commented on 's reply
    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.
    paladin2019
    Registered Member
    Last edited by paladin2019; 01-17-2019, 09:41 AM.
  • magusrogue
    Registered Member

  • magusrogue
    replied
    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.

    Leave a comment:

  • mattprice516
    Registered Member

  • mattprice516
    commented on 's reply
    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).
  • ValhallaGH
    Registered Member

  • ValhallaGH
    commented on 's reply
    wmarshal
    Registered Member
    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.
Working...
X