Re: we need to argue more...

[Joel Gunderson <belgarat@expert.cc.purdue.edu>]

The only real problem I have with fencing weapons is the *ominous music
plays* ...realism.  The fact that historically fencing weapons were
created in the rennaissance as a new school of fighting...not technique.
These fencers did not go up against whupass knights in plate mail weilding
heavy cleaving/cutting weapons.  Anyone that put their parrying dagger in
front of a great sword would have their hand removed in short order.
We're trying to mix weapons from two different time periods...without
substantiated evidence that they had been invented in a logical manner.  

Joel
v


On Tue, 25 Aug 1998, Wright Frazier wrote:

> > I had Rob's warrior in my game last week. No single attack did more
> > than 40 points. Maybe he was rolling poorly. Admittedly that electric
> > shock thing does give you an advantage.
> 
> I guess he got rid of the flame sword.  *shrug* my bad. =)
> 
> > 
> > > 	With a 2 marines I whipped Elsinor, Mogradin, and severa other
> > > 	folks in a game.  Neither of those two have the magical boosting
> > > 	that claude does.
> > 
> > With 3 rate 20 priests (of Ra) I put down two adventurers in one round
> > last week. Roll 4d6-vs-WIL twice please. Anyone can take anyone given
> > the right circumstances. *shrug* Marines, being more versatile, can
> > handle more "circumstances".
> 
> *nod* very very true.
> 
> > 
> > I generally picture warriors as falling into one of two categories:
> > 
> > God of War as layed out in the Piers Anothony novels (knowledgeable
> > in all forms of combats and all weapons. Brilliant tactician and
> > master strategist. Its a realy unfortunate that some military skills
> > got move to "Auger" (military construction jumps to mind, though a
> > case could be made for that not being a real warrior skill, I'd still
> > leave it under warrior).
> 
> *nod* Again, I agree. and I prefer this view as well.
> 
> 
> re: following stuff.  Exactly.
> 
> > Marines are also classic killers. Pirates, brawlers and other scum.
> > I would expect them to be almost as good with a sword and probably
> > a little handier with their fists (than warriors). Perhaps better
> > with a sword if you count those lightweight girly type swords.
> >
> > As it stands, marines don't really have anything special to differentiate
> > them from warriors with wierd tastes in fighting. For instance:
> 
> I'd love to see something to differentiate them more, but with the
> present troika, that is gonna be fairly difficult to do without some
> pretty hefty shifts in what currently is.
> 
> I agree, Augers were a bad idea.  The general skill pool was much better.
> That way you could explain peasents who just have a few skills, instead
> of making them be the incredibly deep thinkers that Augers are supposed
> to be(but aren't), or killers(warriors or marines).
> 
> > Now its my personal belief that Augers were a bad idea. The thief/spy
> > background was vastly superior and left a general pool of skills that
> > anyone could get at the same base cost (made since for my non-backgrounded
> > NPCs), but we have Augers so lets deal with it. Augers have lots of skills.
> > 
> > Of course if we are using the Troika, marines wouldn't really need their
> > own weapons or stuff they would just pay double for weapon skills (realm
> > of the warrior) and any other non-magical skill (realm of Augers). This
> > would give them the extra versatility that they would need to balance
> > them out. They aren't as good at any type of fighting as warriors, but
> > they do have a lot of other skills that make them useful. A compromise
> > niche which is what everything is that falls between points.
> 
> *nod* I agree and like this much better as well.
> 
> re: getting noone to agree.  *nod* Status Quo here we go.
> 
> Wright
> 
> 
> 
> 
> > 
> There... thats my contribution to the spew. Your up against some 
> > fundamental system changes that no one is likely to approve and you
> > probably won't even be able to get enough GMs together to decide to
> > try it out to see if it _SHOULD_ be approved. 
> > 
> > 						-Steve
> > 
> > 
> 
>