Some observations I get from this video are:
- An armored body is a weapon.
- A dagger is really deadly in knight to knight combat.
- An armored hand is a club.
- The shield is a weapon.
- A character can roll with a punch or blow and still get up on the same move.
From a rule design perspective I'd consider this:
- So many moves it seems hard to create so many rules to cover each move, not to mention complex to use.
- Consider how an armored body part becomes a weapon.
- Consider an element of bludgeoning damage in all weapons. Should weapons like swords do slashing AND bludgeoning damage?
Now take a look at this video:
Some key moments:
- 0:08 - unarmed knight pushed the other one back with arms and body.
- 0:20 - knight pushes the other back with foot to make for space between both.
- 0:26 - knight locks weapon with shield and pushes the other knight back.
- 0:33 - knight once again pushes the other to make room between them, this time with shoulder.
- 0:55 - part in which one knight deliberately (and quickly) lays down to wait for an attack and then gets up quickly as well.
- 1:15 - ending part, one night is constantly hit, no apparent armor damage is done, but those sword hits must hurt some. In the end he is taken down and choked to death with the shield.
In view of these videos I find most of D&D's combat mechanics to be out of sync with reality (yes even within its "abstraction"). The concept of a sword swing and a set of damage being done until the character is dead is not congruent with what we see here. The body is never considered a real weapon. There are unarmed combat rules, but it's more along the lines of you're either armed or unarmed, not so much a mix in between.
They say that in love and in war anything goes. Have we become to accustomed to the sword, sword, shield, sword swing idea of initial role playing games that we don't think of a mix of activities to defeat one's opponent. When was the last time you killed a full plated knight with a dagger?
1 comment:
A lot of those moves would definitely add some cinematic fun to combat compared to standard D&D. Cinematic is the key here. Realism might be debatable. I don't think either video is really trying to model reality too closely. The first looks like some SCA guys trying to look macho for an audience and the second is meant to be stage combat. Nothing wrong with that per se, and they're probably better models than standard D&D combat.
Daggers can kill people just as easily as swords, which we all know is completely obvious when you think about it. But not when they can only ever do a quarter the damage of swords, and they're less effective against armor (they're not), and hit points are sky high, and there's no way to model stabbing someone in the neck. So many rules to change!
It seems to me that pummeling a guy's metal helmet with your fists would be more likely to cause broken fingers than anything, even if you do have gauntlets. I guess causing that temporary stun of having your head knocked around would be a good way to weaken him for a followup stabbing attack to the neck or armpit, especially if you're having a hard time getting through his armor otherwise.
As for having too many moves, you can combine and abstract a lot of them. The kick and the shoulder ram both have the same intent: create space, knock the guy down if possible. It doesn't necessarily matter what limb you use. I'm not sure how much use those moves would have unless you're also reflecting weapon length and armor piercing capability in your rules somehow. Why else would you want to create space? Knocking him down would still have some merit.
Should swords do slashing and bludgeoning damage? I would say absolutely--depending on armor. Plate is practically invulnerable to slashing attacks, but it might get dented with a really powerful blow and cause some shock and pain (especially a blow to the head). Chain could be cloven through with a particularly massive blow but otherwise is also really effective against slashing. But the pure force of the blow would transfer much more easily through chain. Broken bones would not be unheard of. Check out #18 on this page: http://www.thearma.org/essays/TopMyths.htm
Post a Comment