a "small" suggestion

[Wyrmwrath]

Bob, I know exactly what the nodachi was designed for, I was using it as an example to counter the point that two handed weapons cant do vorpal damage.

Mike, I think fear of players misusing two-handed phys reps, hell ANY phys rep for that matter, as a reason to not implement a rule ignores the fact that the player base should be safety conscious and could "slip" and fall into the moment, as you described it, even in the absence of such a new rule. Safe use of the foam beat sticks isn’t dependent on any game rule, its based on the player’s ability to keep a cool head in larp combat.

Wayne, either we (the orcs) are a special case or someone is failing in their job, because we ALREADY get weapon tags with our check in that state what type of weapon it is. If you need to clarify what size a phys rep is simple add colored stickers to the pommel. Designate one color for small, one for short, on for long, one for bastard, and one for two-handed. They can be obtained at office Max and will stay on very well with the small addition of clear packing tape on top of them. Since this will be added at weapon phys rep creation stage and only need to be checked once by a marshal or GM, no complication added at all. This suggestion is not intended to imply I support the extra damage thingy, just to point out that weapon tags exist to some extent already.

I do not see requiring the use of a two-handed weapon for the crush skill making two-handed more appealing, it just makes then required. It also weakens the barbarian needlessly. Since the privileged category has the knight as its main warrior type, and the savage has the barbarian, I feel it would be better to tweak one of the common only disciplines to be more of a front-runner. R-tooling the drawback to swinging vorpal for swashbucklers is ONE option. The fact that they take crush makes the skill nearly useless for a warrior type and I feel is the likely reason for the proliferation of rogue swashbucklers. But that may be for another threads discussion.

Heh, who needs hands to use a shield? None of my shields require hands. I have them strapped to my arm so tight they rarely move. This has nothing to do with the weight of the weapon... And it'd be silly to require two hands to deal the extra damage. I can already see the arguments due to that ruling...

Yes Eric, weight DOES matter since that is what makes a two-handed weapon a two-handed weapon. The term refers to REAL WORLD weapons that were to heavy to use effectively in one hand. It’s not their size, since a staff was about as long and could be used in one hand. IN A LARP the phys-reps are defined by size because they are INTENTIONLY made light to cause no damage, so of course you, in your shining manliness, can use them one handed. It isn’t "silly" to require a player to use a weapon the way they are used in the real world. The only person that would expect to argue that making a player use both hands on a two-handed weapon to get any extra damage the GMs decide to give them is you. Keep in mind, the suggestion was to up damage on TWO-HANDED weapons, NOT weapons used in BOTH HANDS AT ONCE. There IS a difference.

[GM-Mike]

Just to clarify, I was supporting other comments made with the first half of my post. The rant about my face was just me amusing myself and not really my main plea for not upping damage without at the very least a new discipline to do so. Hell, to be honest, all weapons regardless of size like the right side of my face; I think maybe people are jealous of it or something and are attempting to make it ugly like my left side

[Bob-Z (kabre)]

Brian, Yea I think the difference in opinion came with our definitions of "vorpal". In, say, most d20 systems, vorpal means a weapon that autmatically beheads you. Finalhaven gave me a new look at the term, but it was never clearly defined for me. Bolts/Arrows deal vorpal, as well as a swashbuckler with a weapon. This lead me to conclude the definition that I gave earlier. I thought that was a pretty good one because arrows and surgically used blades can "get around" armor pretty well (so i assumed that while it wasn't spoken, swashbucklers were probably using a blade that allowd that sort of manuvering). If we say that the two-handed nodachi can deal vorpal because the users of that blade (always the physically strongest men), or or its design provided the ability to power thru armor, then we have a problem because if you have the same dude swinging at the same set of armor that a nodachi can cut thru, im guessing most other large swords can do the same.

I guess I'd just like to know what exactly "vorpal" means in finalhaven (i know this is getting way off topic).

I do like the idea of retooling some of the middleweight classes, rather than the obvious heavy-hitters

[Nelkie]

Mike,

Which head do you speak of. I have an uncanny abilty to smack you in a head at least once per session. I just have to say, I'm sorry in advance Don't mean to, it just seems to happen., sorry!

[dier_cire]

Brian, you aparently didn't either read my post or pay attention to anything I said. If I can strap a shield to my arm, I'd still have two, yes count them, 1, 2, hands free, thus NOT using a two handed weapon single handed. Woah.

As for the silliness of requiring two hands on a two handed weapon (an entirely different point), well this is because, say one swings the weapon in a sideways arc and lets go of the handle during the swing with one hand and re-grips it at a point after contact is made (used quite typically in a backhand type swing, since you can use the chest and more hip to add more power than the extra arm will ever do). Under the two hands on the weapon rule, you would lose the extra point of damage.

Ultimately, I don't think I've _ever_ used a two handed weapon, single handed for an extended period, so before you throw an insult, do have your facts straight.

Hmm, brings up another idea... what if we did single weapon only gained +2 with rage? you get rid of the two hands argument, and add a bonus to those without shields.

[Peace420]

I do not see requiring the use of a two-handed weapon for the crush skill making two-handed more appealing, it just makes then required. It also weakens the barbarian needlessly.

I was suggesting that it would bring crush and vorpal more inline. Currently crush is much much better than vorpal since vorpal can be blocked and crush cannot. Knight sword and board Barbarian swinging crush with a one handed weapon and a shield, if that barbarian loses then he is just a really crappy OOG fighter or the knight is an excellent OOG fighter.

R-tooling the drawback to swinging vorpal for swashbucklers is ONE option. The fact that they take crush makes the skill nearly useless for a warrior type

The problem is the balance between crush and vorpal IMO, and a warrior type is going to be the best at taking crush so that doesn't make much sense to me.

[Nelkie]

Eric,

I was about to agree with you, but found a break. Swashbukler with 2 weapons. Rage can be said some what like this

+1 damage if using a shield, two weapons, vorpal skill, and crush skill.
+2 damage if just using one weapon (no shield or 2 weapons can be used while raging for +2 damage). Maybe have the warrior spend 2 life instead of just 1 life to do +1 damage.

That would put the max damage up to +4 damage, or as eric said you cannot use any weapon focus while raging for +2 damage.

Is 4 damage that nasty compared to 3 damage? Especialy if you have to spend 2 life to activate the +2 extra damage, and every time you want to use a skill (Parry, resist fear, etcc) you have to drop the rage and pay another 2 life to reactivate it. Can't do that to many times before dropping dead!

This also leaves crush and vorpal at 2 damage. I kind like the idea!

Yes under these rules a person can do 4 damage with a dagger, but they are only attacking with a dagger. Not a ggod chance of surving against a larger weapon and especialy against a shield and sword.

Eric T, I understand your concern about the Crush skill, and I support your idea. It makes sense and is on par with the vorpal skill. But to comentsate for the lost of using a shield, a barbrain could get the full +2 damage bonus from rage when using crush. So barb's could do 3 crush. I think that is fair and balanced.

[dier_cire]

Not sure where the break was on swash with 2 weapons since 2 <> single weapon, but you can tell me later. Your idea was what I was wanting anyway.

Still not sure if a single weapon doing 3 vorpal or crush is broken (haven't even looked) since if it isn't we can just do "if the user is wielding only a single weapon only (ie no shield, fist, or weapon in other hand), the user may swing an additional +1 damage for an additional life point."

If it is then, "if the user is wielding only a single weapon only (ie no shield, fist, or weapon in other hand) and not using crush or vorpal, the user may swing an additional +1 damage for an additional life point."

[Peace420]

Aaron,
I don't see how upping the damage when doing crush balances the skills? The barbarian would do more damage and still be able to block the incoming swings, possibly doing damage at the same time. Why would you need to give the barbarian anything to replace what they lose in the use of a shield when crush is much better than vorpal already?

[dier_cire]

Well, in a one on one combat, the crush person will be taking at min 3 vorpal (assuming the attacker can hit for 3) for each hit if he wants to keep swinging 3 crush. (1 damage from parry, and 2 to restart rage)

So, all being equal, single weapon versus single crush weapon, the single weapon will win by a ton.

Granted, the 3 crush/vorpal may still be broken anyway. Like I said, I haven't even looked at it.

[Peace420]

So, all being equal, single weapon versus single crush weapon, the single weapon will win by a ton.

Not really since the crush person can block, not taking any damage, and do damage at the same time. This scenario isn't as obvious as the other and some play testing could show better what would happen, but I think decent fighter against decent fighter the barb will still probably win unless both decide to stand there trading blows and not worry about defense

[dier_cire]

that's what I'm betting on happening, since the non crush person will close with the crush person to make blocking a non issue. The crush guy can counter by moving back but can't run backwards faster than the atacker can forwards.

Also of note (and mark this day, since I'm agreeing with a Chris no cheese rule), hitting an attackers weapon and calling crush doesn't do damage since the crush blow wouldn't hit the attacker anyway. Otherwise, I could go full defensive and call 2 crush when anyone swung at me.

[Wyrmwrath]

Once the barbarian initiates the crush skill he cannot use any other skill, even cruch, for 5 seceonds if he is attempting to end his crush skill. Therefore he cannot parry while swinging crush; even if he was willing to pay the life points to end the crush skill, parry and then re-initiate the crush skill, he cant do it.

[Wyrmwrath]

Also hitting the weapon DOES do crush damage, the only stipulation Chris has even made was that if the target was out of weapon range of the PC swinging for crush THEN just hitting the targets weapon will not transfer the crush damage. I.E. if Jux is fighting a thingy weilding a polearm, and Jux is stuck using a short club because that all that was at hand when he was attacked, Jux cannot hit the polearm in the head of the weapon and hope to do cruch damage simply because he has been unable to get close enough to the opponent to hit it directly with the short club. If however Jux has using a bastard club against a thingy with a long weapon and sheild, hitting the thingys weapon WOULD be effective since the thingy is fully within the weapon reach of the bastard club. That is the explination Chris gave me directly about the skill.

[GM_Chris]

Brian and Eric you two are saying same thing

Chris