Sword design thoughts...

TypewriterLove banged his head on the keyboard and produced:
> Okay, so if these swords can cut through (mostly) anything, but can be
> parried or blocked by weapons powered by the same level of faith,
> we've got fairly sword-heavy combat, particularly when two warriors
> using similarly-powered swords are attacking.
>
> I've been flipping through both my 3rd and 4th edition books, but I'm
> not finding too much in terms of duelling rules, or rules that might
> involve more complicated swordplay than thrust or swing. Anyone have
> either rules suggestions, or books to take a peek at, that might have
> better swordplay rules than the Basic Set?

Don't forget the other options/maneuvers for fighting:
Feint, p. B365
Extra Effort (Flurry of Blows/Mighty Blow), p. B357
Deceptive Attack, p. B369
Rapid Strike, p. B370

A good fighter will use some, if not all, of these durring an attack,
particularly if he's facing another good fighter.

Martial Arts for 4e will, I'm sure, expand greatly on most muscle powered
weapon combat rules. That book is not due out for a while yet (It's in
editing, they've done some previews on the Fnordcast3 and forums). Martial
Arts for 3e may be of some use for you yet.

--
Eric B. Smith http://www.geocities.com/ericbsmith
GURPS Data File Coordinator

"Man proposes, woman forecloses." - Minna Antrim
 >> Stay informed about: Sword design thoughts... 

TypewriterLove wrote:
> Okay, so if these swords can cut through (mostly) anything, but can be
> parried or blocked by weapons powered by the same level of faith, we've
> got fairly sword-heavy combat, particularly when two warriors using
> similarly-powered swords are attacking.

Don't forget the Indiana Jones Option. If these swords are well
known in the setting then anyone who doesn't have one is
likely to try and kill those who do from very far away.

> I've been flipping through both my 3rd and 4th edition books, but I'm
> not finding too much in terms of duelling rules, or rules that might
> involve more complicated swordplay than thrust or swing. Anyone have
> either rules suggestions, or books to take a peek at, that might have
> better swordplay rules than the Basic Set?

As someone else said, Martial Arts and Swashbucklers are
definitely worth a look.


> Peter Meilinger wrote:
>
> >
> > I'm more interested in how you're going to rule if the character's
> > faith is "perfect" enough to achieve the desired effect. Talk
> > about subjective rules.
>
> This is one of those GM-heavy kind of effects, I guess. So long as I am
> convinced that the character is behaving in accordance to his faith,
> then I won't question it. But if he/she seems to behave in opposite
> ways to that faith... poof! No more sharpness! I guess that could be
> something of a Disadvantage to design, as well. Edicts of Faith, or
> something.

Fair enough. Can different faiths achieve the same effect, or is it
only one specific faith that gets these swords? If it can be achieved
by someone of any faith, beware of allowing your players to design
their own faiths/religions/whatevers. Even if they don't blatantly
abuse the privilege, it's easy to create a faith that fits what you
already had in mind for the character, thus leaving it with no
real disadvantage.

Pete
 >> Stay informed about: Sword design thoughts... 

On 29 Sep 2006 10:14:27 -0700, "Peter Meilinger"
<p_meilinger.RemoveThis@hotmail.com> wrote:


>My other problem with the "No Defense" rule is, what about
>defenses that have a special effect that wouldn't be affected
>by a super-sharp edge?

Well, I'd address your question, but I'm busy using my omnipotence to
create a rock so heavy I can't lift it.
 >> Stay informed about: Sword design thoughts... 

In article <rshri211o18hir0ghrbc6vu188n577k0ar.TakeThisOut@4ax.com>,
David Johnston <rgorman.TakeThisOut@block.net> wrote:
>
>Well, I'd address your question, but I'm busy using my omnipotence to
>create a rock so heavy I can't lift it.

While this is going off on a tangent (and fast), I would like to point
out that if you were omnipotent, you would have no trouble creating a
rock that was too heavy for you to lift. At this point, you would no
longer be omnipotent, of course, but it is in the very nature of
omnipotence that it gives you the power to make yourself
non-omnipotent should you so wish.

Of course, you would still have the power to un-create the rock that
is too heavy to lift, so you haven't really burned any bridges yet in
the classical example.

Cheers
Bent D
--
Bent Dalager - bcd.TakeThisOut@pvv.org - http://www.pvv.org/~bcd
powered by emacs
 >> Stay informed about: Sword design thoughts... 

In article <1160589637.239020.297100.RemoveThis@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>, "TypewriterLove" <jmehmel.RemoveThis@gmail.com> wrote:
>Okay, so if these swords can cut through (mostly) anything, but can be
>parried or blocked by weapons powered by the same level of faith, we've
>got fairly sword-heavy combat, particularly when two warriors using
>similarly-powered swords are attacking.
>
>I've been flipping through both my 3rd and 4th edition books, but I'm
>not finding too much in terms of duelling rules, or rules that might
>involve more complicated swordplay than thrust or swing. Anyone have
>either rules suggestions, or books to take a peek at, that might have
>better swordplay rules than the Basic Set?
>
>(Heck, if it's in the Basic books, feel free to slap me upside the head
>and show me where...)
>
>
FEint-EyePokey....

Or in this case, feint, then torso cut.....
 >> Stay informed about: Sword design thoughts... 

Brian Bunin wrote:
> In article <1160589637.239020.297100.TakeThisOut@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>, "TypewriterLove" <jmehmel.TakeThisOut@gmail.com> wrote:
> >I've been flipping through both my 3rd and 4th edition books, but I'm
> >not finding too much in terms of duelling rules, or rules that might
> >involve more complicated swordplay than thrust or swing. Anyone have
> >either rules suggestions, or books to take a peek at, that might have
> >better swordplay rules than the Basic Set?
> >
> >(Heck, if it's in the Basic books, feel free to slap me upside the head
> >and show me where...)
> >
> >
> FEint-EyePokey....
>
> Or in this case, feint, then torso cut.....

Agreed. The basic GURPS combat system allows a lot of tactical play. On
the other hand, combats will tend to be short (6-7 seconds or so), and
if you're looking for longer, more complicated duels a la Luke
Skywalker vs. Darth Vader or Corwin of Amber vs. Eric the Usurper you
might want to use some "genre rules" to either increase parry scores
(to, say, 2/3 skill + 3) or allow more defensive maneuvers that let a
weaker combatant stand off a stronger opponent if he stays on the
defensive. (That is, there's more opportunity for stand-offs and
maneuvering unless one of the combatants is clearly superior to the
other.)

An example of the "defensive maneuvering" I'm talking about is the high
ground rules on p. 402 of /Campaigns/, although of course they're
canonical and so don't need to be genre rules. If Corwin feels
outmatched, he takes the high ground and now Eric can either charge up
there at a -1 penalty to his defense (and +1 to Corwin's) or try to
maneuver Corwin off by, say, throwing chairs at him. More colorful
combat than just "feint/eye-pokey."

-Max
 >> Stay informed about: Sword design thoughts...