I've had a burning, low-level irratation ever since I found out just how innacurate That Big-Name Game's weapon and combat stats are and one thing my game is doing is allowing me to deal with that.

Granted, that's starting to verge on fantasy heartbreaker, but I think my game has it's own identity.

Anyway, I looked at The Arma, but their forum intro says they don't like role-playing questions. I looked at the SCA, but their stuff seems subscription-based. And wikipedia is scanty; even weight information isn't generally there.

I'm trying to get to 'accurate within the realms of the RPG'. Suggestions on sites?

And hey, if you happen to be a medieval expert and don't think a medieval sword weighs 10+ pounds...

Thanks.

The game is 'alternate history-magical'.

You could peruse the "Anonymous Fechtbuch: Manuscript  I.33", 13th century German Sword & Buckler Manual for some ideas.

http://www.regia.org/warfare/sword.htm

Has material on the Anglo Saxon Sword. (the site covers a whole lot of good information for recreation that's very accurate)




http://www.oakeshott.org/home.html

I'd suggest looking up Oakeshotts actual books for better information. (I love the books I have.)

Another forum

As for not asking RPG questions, it still helps to just lurk and poke around some of the older threads.

Quote from: StormBringer;249766You could peruse the "Anonymous Fechtbuch: Manuscript  I.33", 13th century German Sword & Buckler Manual for some ideas.

This is the kiddy.

http://www.thortrains.com/getright/Medieval%20Combat.htm

Thank you for your answers; they are appreciated. Unfortunately, I've got a cold, so I'm not able to coherently look through any more of those at this time.

Just to note, I can type quite coherently tired, or sick. I do, however, have a greater difficulty with 'Original/Creative thought' and learning. Since this is mostly just typing out an idea I already have and expounding upon it, I sound more coherent than I actually am.

Interestingly enough, were you to talk to me, my response would be a *Lot* less coherent.

To explain - First, statistics. Strength, Grace, Willpower, Comprehension, Charisma, Insight. Yep, Power and Control/Efficiency.

Besides Ye Olde Traditional Grace and Strength + Stuff rolls for attack and damage, I was thinking of secondary contested Willpower or Comprehension rolls, which would contribute to a pool called 'Tempo'. The winner adds to their tempo; the loser looses any tempo they had.

The amount of Tempo you have contributes to your Attack roll via a 'Dimishing returns' row on the chart.

This would:
A) Provide a back-and-forth flow of combat, even without any combat techniques being known by either party.
B) Provide a short-term 'Semi-wound' mechanic without too much 'Death Spiral effect' - Which I do not regard as very fun, although I've not anywhere near the experience of long-term roleplayers.
C) Seems to simulate real combat better, as having the will to fight and understanding the flow of the fight both can contribute to victory - IMU (In My Understanding).
D) Do what Initiative is sort of meant to simulate; that is, who has the advantage right now, without either becoming irrevelent once the first round is over or require the order characters act in to be resorted every round.

The downsides:
A) Extends the 'load time' of a combat round.
B) Has obvious difficulty in extending beyond two combatants.

Solutions:
A) May or may not be more of a problem than the gains are worth. I don't think it is. However, it does not need to be a complicated roll - A simple contested roll on the Willpower/Comprehension shift will do.
B) One solution is that in every 'Melee group' - That is, all the character who can be said to be involved in the same fight at the moment - Only one character has Tempo. This may or may not be more of a problem than the gains are worth. I'm thinking it might be difficult to explain well - And it would need to be. Also, figuring out who's in the same melee group in large-group combat...Could be difficult.

Opinions? Ideas?

Ok, I've looked through them, including some videos, and come to some conclusions. Conclusions and commentry as follows.

First - Primary defense against a weapon is both your weapon and your shield. I was headed this way with v0.1, but was reluctant to include it with v0.2 because in the playtest, it got forgotten.

Second - Binding a weapon, which was in v0.1, should be included in v0.2, along with blocks, parries and counters. They need to flow smoothly with the rest of the system.

Third - Timing is very important - Victory or defeat is decided in literally seconds. The tick-based timing I discussed in the main thread for my game fits this well.

Forth - Tempo is a good idea. The one in charge of the fight - Who actually knows what happens or has the greater will to fight - Seems to have an immense advantage.

Fifth - With tick-based timing, it removes the need for defined attack and defense phases. Instead, attacking, parrying, countering and blocking could all be done offensively and defensively, which is where I was headed in v0.1.

Would that be an accurate summation? Is there anything big I missed?

When going to a recreationist site or a weapons sport site, I have found that you can pose as a fiction author looking for "realism" and "authentic feel" to your writing.  You give them a basic RPG plot with characters that has a big sword scene in it if they ask for what the story is going to be about. They will be happier to answer your questions.

Having fielded questions by Roleplayers on a fencing site, I understand their pain. Most gamers looking for "answers" assume that "their game is a correct model of reality". They really do not like it when you contridict that idea, because "of course Gary...err the author... did their homework correctly.  They are looking for evidence that they are right, or just a tiny bit off.

(You could imagine the issue when you are using a dexterity/ speed based fighting art that actively uses parries and dodge, trying to shoehorn that into a DnD penetration system.)

They are usually so far off base that they don't even know how ignorent on the subject they are.  And when you try to educate them, most back off going , "Woah man, I am just a gamer I don't need to know how to fight". (But wasn't that his question?? we respond.)  They also try to force you to use examples using their vocabulary and terms. They don't want to learn "your game system", i.e. the language we use to describe our forms.

The weapons boards have been so burned, and multiply burned, by gamers that they all have a knee jerk reaction to them.  

So be an author, a fiction author, who just asks more pointed question than most authors.

I have a certain ethic against lying. Honestly, I'd rather try 'Yes, I'm a RPG author. However, I know that I am quite clueless about sword fighting, the extent of my knowledge being only a little more than swords can be used for attack and defense, they generally weighed at far most six pounds and they had a handle and a sharp, flat end.

Therefore, I reserve only the right to ask stupid questions, not persist in stupid opinions.'

Think that might work?

It might at that Narf. I don't want to model reality myself. (Just my own imaginary moments.) Yet that doesn't mean I didn't do research

Hmm. Fun is greater than realism in a game.

You could go find a kendo/ fencing/ SCA fighting group/ a kung fu class, or such and experience it yourself.

That aside.

There is a degree of realism that players expect in a game. People like to have results they expect and seems to give with what they know about reality and combat they see (in movies, books, and other games, as very, very few people have actually experienced a combat art).  To be honest, any player that has watched too many combat orriented movies will actually not be that far off.

You can have fun and realism too. And if you love crunchy numbers, both go up as you notch them up. If you don't then elegance and simplicity is the goal.  However, it seems like you want to include concepts that are more "accurate" in their representation. Thus you might want to learn a bit more.

I have been learning a bit more. I was just noting the ultimate rule I use - That if something is accurate, but not fun, then it's gone.

For example, in the self-playtest I did, Tempo (Which measures who has the upper hand at any given exchange) turned out to be annoying, so I dropped it.

Quote from: Narf the Mouse;255721I have been learning a bit more. I was just noting the ultimate rule I use - That if something is accurate, but not fun, then it's gone.

For example, in the self-playtest I did, Tempo (Which measures who has the upper hand at any given exchange) turned out to be annoying, so I dropped it.

The thing is, really, that's important. Everyone has ideas on how sword fighting should look and feel---real combat is tiring, bloody, often with no decisive victor (two wounded people waiting to die.) This isn't as fun as fencing, or dramatic like movie combats for some people. For other people that's exactly what they want "gritty and real", I'd write to your audience (including yourself, as you count in that.)

I found that my rules from a long ago fantasy game that included wounding, combat maneuvers, shock that could kill you before the damage from the wound actually did--was alright, but not brilliant. What I have now is not remotely realistic; but brilliant (IMHO) for doing the kind of gaming I want.