Monday, May 30, 2016
This has probably been discussed here before, but a quick gander through previous posts didn't immediately reveal...
This has probably been discussed here before, but a quick gander through previous posts didn't immediately reveal anything. So I figured I'd just throw it out there: page-20 of the Holmes rule book states light weapons such as the dagger allow two blows per round. Given that all weapons in Holmes inflict 1d6 damage, this little quirk in the rules would seem to make the dagger, with two attacks & potential 2d6 damage per round, the RAW weapon of choice. Curious about how others handle this. Do you ignore or embrace this apparent broken mechanic? And if you embrace it, do you classify any other weapons as light? Just as idiosyncratic are the heavy two-handed weapons such as the two-handed sword, battle axe, flail & pole arms. These only attack once every other round, which begs the question: other than being the only available weapon, why on earth would any PC choose one of these? Again, do you embrace or ignore? Or perhaps I'm missing something & misinterpreting all this.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I think it is a hold over and needs to be adjusted. I certainly did from the first time I played.
ReplyDeleteEither dump the rule or introduce differential weapon damage.
ReplyDeleteI hear you Michael Thomas.
ReplyDeleteThere's something to the idea of small, light weapons striking faster and lumbering, heavy weapons more slowly. It adds a bit of flavor & excitement. I know this appears to break with the all-weapons-do-1d6 tenet, but I'm inclined to allow that light weapons strike twice per round, but only do 1d3 per hit. Similarly, heavy weapons strike once every other round, but do 2d6 per hit. Way I figure, this kinda keeps with a base 1d6 damage potential per round for any given weapon.
On a related note, how do these rules relating the light & heavy weapon affect parrying. If a dagger strikes twice per round, can one strike be used to parry & the other to attack? Or does choosing to parry negate both attacks? I'm inclined to say strike or parry, not both.
With weapon damage I would use lower variation. If using different polyhedra: 1d4 light, 1d6 normal, 1d8 heavy, and 1d10 or 1d12 extra-heavy (only heavy crossbows). Alternatively, roll multiple d6 and pick one: light roll 2d6 pick lower, medium just 1d6, heavy roll 2d6 pick higher, extra-heavy roll 3d6 pick highest. Or use simple modifiers: 1d6-1, 1d6, 1d6+1, 1d6+2 or +3.
ReplyDeleteDefinitely allow 1 parry and 1 attack! I also allow characters to replace the shield with a dagger (main gauche). This incidentally allows thieves to make up for the lack of a shield. But that means you have to double the value of shields (-2 to AC), and consider reducing the parry to -1 (perhaps only whe using 2 weapons).
ReplyDeleteMichael Thomas Using a main gauche in lieu of a shield, that is lowering AC by 1, sounds reasonable. But I'd limit its AC benefit to melee only, not missile attacks. I also wouldn't go so far as to adjust the AC benefit of actual shields, because despite the fact a main gauche is technically used to parry, in this case it's functioning as a shield, again lowering AC by 1, rather than parrying in the context described by the rules. The parry maneuver in the book clearly implies the use of the melee weapon, not an off-hand weapon. Hence the loss of attack. Of course a character could get the AC benefit of a main gauche as well as parry with his main weapon. :-) Or following your earlier suggestion, if his melee weapon is also dagger I can see him gain the AC benefit of the main gauche, and parrying & attacking with his dagger all in the same round! :-D
ReplyDeleteThe rationale behind that is really to make the shield the defensive equipment of choice, rather than the dagger. You may be right, of course - the fact that the dagger is more limited (i.e. only useful against melee weapons, possibly not even against things like claw/claw/bite, and definitely not against missiles or other ranged attacks) might be enough to make it a meaningful choice between the two. The key with Holmes, of course, is that modifiers have to be kept small in order not to upset the balance.
ReplyDeleteYes, I said "balance" in an old-school context! :-)
The more I think about it, it probably shouldn't even be effective against heavy melee weapons. Either way, I think you're spot on regarding low modifiers. That's one of the features that sets Holmes apart from later editions. As for balance, no great sin in my book, ...unless you're talking encounters. ;-) Coincidentally, here's an interesting post on shields that popped JP in my feed this morning...
ReplyDeletehttp://hobbygamesrecce.blogspot.com/2016/05/shields-in-osr-games.html?m=1
I like Micheal's system for variable damage. If your 2 handed sword does 2 D6 you might risk using it. If your Strength is 16 + maybe you could swing 2 handed weapons one handed twice as fast like Conan.
ReplyDelete