FinalHavenLarp.com

So assume for a moment you have skills based on weapon types. Now assume you have the following weapon types

2-handed
Headed
Range
and well everything else (lets call it 1-handed non headed weapons)

Next think of the type of things or categories of damage. For example 2 well knows categories would be like surge damage versus continual damage. There is also utility I think. For example, 2-handed weapons were used to disarm pole arms. You might also think of a skill like hamstring falling into a certain category.

What type of skills would you put under each weapon type or what category. Do you see 2-handed weapons doing more continual damage (swinging 2 versus 1) or more surge damage (swing 1 but maybe have a big hit.

Stop stirring the already boiling over pot ya blasted rabblerouser!!!

you have to have an oppinion

Of cource I do...but I am not giving it until the other arguments/conversation are resolved. I dont wanna spread my forum angst to thin....

why are people angsty about a new larp in iowa? im trying to help some peeps out..you are all wierd

I didnt know there was a new Iowa LARP, I am guessing the classes are corn farmer, cattle farmer, shop owner, tavern owner, and local sheriff????




I was just being humorous about how my forum posts read and come off all angsty and angruy and hostile....I think the doctor called it Chrisolitus nicholsopothy or something like that.

The weapon catagories should be based on size and function.

........................... Blunt.....Edged
Small ................. SB ..... SE
Short.................. HB ..... HE
Long................... LB ..... LE
two handed/
Hand & half/staff.. 2B ..... 2E
Pole.................... PB ..... PE

This way its easy to deginate ion skill descriptions what weapons will work so as to limit confusion.

Edged weapons lend towords skills like backstab/critical hits; severing a limb, poison delivery, armor bypassing
Blunt weapons are more geared for Kenetic transferance (crushing), shattering, knodkout, and similar.

Small and short weapons will do less constant damage, and be eaiser to use in combination, and will be faster and more accurate. short weapons are also generally better for mounted or interior combat.

Long weapons is sort of the standard for footman and field combat. They are also the largest that can be skillfully used with a shield my 90% of warriors.

Bastard/hand & half/two handed weapons are designed to do more damage, have longer reach and be better suited for dis-mounting riders, and eliminating a pole arms advantage for the most part.

Pole weapons were all about footman versus rider combat and tripping and shield ripping, when not being used as a distance weapon for croud control.

The weapon catagories should be based on size and function.

........................... Blunt.....Edged
Small ................. SB ..... SE
Short.................. HB ..... HE
Long................... LB ..... LE
two handed/
Hand & half/staff.. 2B ..... 2E
Pole.................... PB ..... PE

This way its easy to deginate ion skill descriptions what weapons will work so as to limit confusion.

Edged weapons lend towords skills like backstab/critical hits; severing a limb, poison delivery, armor bypassing
Blunt weapons are more geared for Kenetic transferance (crushing), shattering, knodkout, and similar.

Small and short weapons will do less constant damage, and be eaiser to use in combination, and will be faster and more accurate. short weapons are also generally better for mounted or interior combat.

Long weapons is sort of the standard for footman and field combat. They are also the largest that can be skillfully used with a shield my 90% of warriors.

Bastard/hand & half/two handed weapons are designed to do more damage, have longer reach and be better suited for dis-mounting riders, and eliminating a pole arms advantage for the most part.

Pole weapons were all about footman versus rider combat and tripping and shield ripping, when not being used as a distance weapon for crowd control.

well a blunt weapon except for a staff are really all headed weapons.

A crush attack is a heavy blow with enough force that it cannot be parried (your not strong enough to stop the incomming force. Using that definition why can't an ax swing crush?

well a blunt weapon except for a staff are really all headed weapons.

Not true, if i grabbed a table leg and used it as a weapon or a crow bar they are blunt weapons with no head. Blunt means no edge/blade/cutting surface/sharp side. So a troll femur, fist, foot, round boulder, cannon ball..... are all blunt weapons, have no head and arent staves.

A crush attack is a heavy blow with enough force that it cannot be parried (your not strong enough to stop the incomming force. Using that definition why can't an ax swing crush?

No a crushing blow is one that CRUSHES you rather than cuts or punctures you. In FH/WH the term ALSO is USED to convay an attack so massive( the term most other larps use) or possesed of so much kinetic force, that it cannot be redirected or deflected by a person of normal strength.

Now an axe with that kind of energy behind it will not CRUSH you it will CUT you in half/sever your limb, decapitate you. So as far as the game mechanic goes it would be vorpal, since it would ignore armor (and shatter a normal shield in my opinion, but that would make it to comoplicated)

Thats just how the weapons really work.

I know what crush means I was referring specifically to the call.

I also agree that the ax would cut you and thus vorpal might be a better call, but vorpal attacks can be parried.

Another consideration is skill depth. The more categories the harder it is to have skill depth which isnt so good a thing.

I also agree that the ax would cut you and thus vorpal might be a better call, but vorpal attacks can be parried.

so come up with a new call that cant be skill parried, physically parried or both:

EVICERATE!
SEVER
NINJA OSCELOTT
REND (recommended)
CLEAVE (recommended)
SUNDER (recommended)

Another consideration is skill depth. The more categories the harder it is to have skill depth which isnt so good a thing.

define skill depth, I have never heard the term.

i agree if you have too many weapon types or skills associtated with said weapon types it starts to loose its flavor. so for sake of arguement i will list the 4 basic types

blade
blunt
2 handed
ranged

every weapon type should have a base damage, and perhaps one or two types of skills that define the weapon

blades
do 1 base damage
ability 1 - vorpal. wether it be a short term surge, a continual suffix, or touch of death like add on.
ability 2 - hamstring. charge up skill that slows or stops enemy movement.

blunts
do 1 base damage
ability 1 - crush. see vorpal above.
ability 2 - force. charge up skill that deals damage and presses back enemy (3-4 and press back?)

2 handed
do 1 base damage
ability 1 - weapon focus. do an additional 1 point of damage with weapon type.
ability 2 - swing weapon all around you striking all close. (2-3 lash attack, 1 life point?)


I want to say ahead of time that no i did not do ranged at this point because i just wanted to go over these 3. blades styles has a bit more finesse then blunt. choosing to weaken, cripple, or kill opponents as fast as possible. blunt favors the face to face combat a little more, crushing your opponent head on. and 2 handed is good at fighting many opponents.

obviously these are all just ideas, but i feel restricting the types of weapons and there abilities makes them more interesting and unique, instead of 50 different weapons with slightly different features.

i agree if you have too many weapon types or skills associtated with said weapon types it starts to loose its flavor

Not true at all, the game designer just needs to more educated on melee and non firearm ranged combat, and be more creative with the skills. given a few hours I could have put together an entire FH style discipline for each weapon size/ type catagory. Cant get any more "flavor" than that.

Well you could call crushing vorpal as well but crushing vorpal is definitely better than both vorpal and crush so becomes he more desirable skill though I guess it could just cost alot more as well.

What I mean by skill depth is if you have a skill based system (so skill trees) and you are linking skills to weapons then the base of the skill tree is the weapon and then how many skills can be associated with that weapon. There are only so many skills and effects available so the more categories the less skills per category and thus less depth.

For example using your weapon categories

Small Edge proficiency
This skill allows you to use small edged weapons like knives
---Skill Name 1
Pre req:Small edge
This skill allows Bla
Each time you buy this skill you get to do more bla

-------Skill name 2
Pre Req: Skill name 1
This skill allows you to Ka cha
Each time this skill is bought you can Ka cha more.

Small Blunt proficiency
This skill allows you to use a blunt object like a troll femur.
(same structure as above.


That is just 1 tree for each not alot of choice. I almost rather a person buy:
(small weapon)
This skills allows you to use small weapons
Each time this skill is bought you get something (something effect I can commonly attribute to all small weapons)
---Skill name 1
--------Skill name 2
---Skill Name X
---------Skill name Y

If I exapnd the category more maybe I can have the skill tree look like:

Headed weapons
This skill allows you to use all headed weapons
Each time this is bought you get some effect common to call headed weapons
---Skill name 1
--------Skill name 2
------------Skill name 2a
--------Skill name 3
------------Skill name 3a
---Skill Name X
---------Skill name Y
------------Skill name Y1
---------Skill name Z
------------Skill name Z1