Re: we need to argue more...

[Wright Frazier <khelek@ns1.cioe.com>]

I started thinking about this, and I have to disagree fully that
it would hamper warriors in any way.  The highest damage any of
those weapons do is 1d8(Sabre), 1d6(rapier and estoc), and 1d4(main-gauche).
I don't see how this would take anything away from warriors.  Warriors
are still the only ones that get a d10, d12, and a d20+4 weapon(the lance).
I would argue heavily that warriors are still the weapon skill gods, and
that Marines get no increase in power, just an increase in variety.
They already have a d8 weapon that is very versitile(the maroglave).

Further, if warriors are 'obsolete', and marines are the combat
gods, then 4 weapons skills being juggled aren't going to fix or address
the problem.  Its things like Immobilize, pummeling, wrestling, etc... that
make Marines better in a fight usually. Since marines can  
immobilize to get around armor, and making you take a full round to
stand up, a Marine is the match of anyone in a fight because noone has
a grapple mod for shit.  I grapple you, and then do a few locks till
you are at a 7 die check on your own, then I indian burn you to death,
or Kosh you.  

btw, here is a quote from the book:
	"A quick blow to certain body areas can immobilize an opponent.
	The area (solar plexus, neck, etc.) must be unprotected, and
	certainly unarmored.  Roll 2d6.  If the total is less to or
	less than the skill rank, the opponent collapses and
	cannot take any actions for 3d6 rounds."
That has nothing to do with knocking the wind out of someone as some
folks would say.  You can immobilize people with a blow to the temples
to stun them, to the ears and burst their ear drums, to the groing,
to the knee, or various other nerve centers.  So unless you have
full plate and a helmet on, a Marine is gonna get you.

Weapon skills are not where the power of the marine lies, weapon skills
are secondary really, its things like immobilize and wrestling that
makes marines the true terrors of the game.

Examples:
	1 warrior vs 1 marine.  If the marine wins init and gets the
	grapple, he most likely wins.  If the warrior wins init and
	hits, he might kill the marine, but the marine will still
	get the grapple unless a crit comes into play, and then the
	marine wins if he gets the grapple.

	1 marine vs 2 warriors.  stalemate as the marine plays toss
	the monkey with the 2 warriors.  One is flying as the other
	gets up from being grappled and thrown.

	2 marines vs 1 warrior. warrior dies, hands down less the 2
	marines got dick for DP or he gets a crit.

	Thats just using the wrestling skill.  Add something like
	immobilize into it, and a respectably skilled marine will
	drop 1 warrior/round.

So if ya wanna move the weapon skills to Warrior, hey cool, I got
no problem with that, just realize that is not gonna fix anything
in my opinion.  Granted I might be wrong, won't be the first time,
but wacking someone 4 times with a d6 weapon is just a marine 
looking cool.  If he wants to be a killer, he'll use wrestling or
immobilize.

Wright

> > I had a short word wigh Wright about the new "marine weapons" on the list.
> > I assume marine weapons as a classification means that marines buy their
> > skills at cost.  I have a problem with this given that the overwhelming
> > majority of warrior skills are obselete weapon skills and giving the
> > marines more weapon skills just makes warriors that much more useless,
> > except for the mods.
> > 
> > I would perhaps agree that "fencing"  type weapons can be used with the
> > fencing skill in the book, but perhaps the skills associated with the
> > weapons
> > still be reserved to warriors.
> > 
> > Jevan
> > 
> > 
> 
> Then move the weapon skills to warrior as well, because as is, fencing
> is utterly worthless as a skill.
> 
> Okay, not utterly, but for a BC of 350, its just expensive combat mod.
> 
> Wright
> 
> 
>