Equipment

[Lurid Sorcerer]

The equipment chart is available on the site, though there are no links to it. Until now.

kalarsys.cogia.net/documents/Kalarsys-Equipment.html

There are some corrections that need to be made, and I have notes written on a hard copy of the document that need to be added. In addition, there are some things missing, such as:

Maces:en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mace_(club)
Flails: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flail_(weapon)
Morning Stars: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morning_star_(weapon)

Also, some stuff needs to be removed. And I mean from the armor section. Does anyone actually take the "pants" armor? How about the "gloves"?

And one final thing: Only a small set of these should appear on the main rulebook, I think. Which ones should it be?

[Child of Flame]

I think Morning Stars and Maces are virtually the same thing (considering how they're wielded and used and how many dice would be rolled out for it), so there should be little to no distinction between the two. That's firstly. Secondly, I think it goes without saying that the better the material, the stronger the weapon will be...though I think the dex penalties if any should be the same throughout, as the weapon class itself doesn't change weight dramatically with different materials. They're all pretty freaking heavy. Probably lighter than (2-handed) axes, but still heavy. And then Flails would be in the same category, but with more of a dex penalty but I'm sure you already knew that. Onwards!

Okay, it says 'leggings', not pants. And they're leather. And they give +1 Vitality, why not use them? But the gloves? All the gloves should go if they're not doing anything for the player. If I wanted to waste my precious gold on a pair of steel gauntlets that aren't going to offer me any protection, I might as well just fashion myself a pair of cotton gloves for free.

Speaking of which, what about a general price for each of these equipment?

So I think an example for each weapon type should be up there: A dagger, a lance, an axe, a mace, a flail and a bow/gun type. Same with the armor if you really wanted to make it that short, just give an idea of how it works by listing a leather plate and a chainmail plate...things like that. And when you make a concise book about armor, include boots and bracers and shoulder pads and things like that! But that's later. How small are you looking for anyway?

[Lurid Sorcerer]

Okay, I've done some updates to the Equipment page:

-Green was lightened to make it easier to read the text on it
-Blunt weapons added
-Bows added
-Minor rebalancing
-Notes from my hardcopy were added
-Lots of "behind-the-scenes" tags were added to make changes easier

Some things to think about:

-Stats for blunt weapons
-Easy explanation for bow use
-Should bows and firearms be on a separate table?
-Should we add prices?
-Equipment to be added and removed

I've been reading so many articles about weapons on Wikipedia... @_@

[DC_Desperado]

BLunt weapons should be fairly simple.

Just give them the stats of its bladed counter part.

Example:
One handed sword= +1 STR ( 1 unsoakable)
One handed mace= +1 STR ( ALL SOAKABLE)

[Perilaxis]

What about exotic weapons? there are plenty of those abounding and I don't just mean the way cool Asian style weapons either. Egyptians had amazing weapons. What about combo weapons and high-bred weapons also unusual weapons should have some form of exact system for damage calculation. Also COF makes a convincing argument about materials and to add on to it their should probably be a durability system for weapons and Armour. Those pieces that are used a lot or poorly maintained will dull and break faster than a properly cared for piece of equipment and naturally the materials used will affect how that would work as well. The materials themselves could also affect the qualities a piece of equipment could produce if magic where involved. Come to think of it the quality of craftsmanship would go into those things as well... but I'm probably over complicating things already.

Also as to the blunt weapons they do need a system of their own. Unfortunately when you have as little life as I do you have time to sit around and think about such things as weapons combat and my own musings have led me to now disagree with DC_Desperado. A mace deals a different type of damage than a sword or Axe. A sword even the big ones cut and slice through flesh, an Axe cleaves and mangles muscle, a mace crushes bone. in the same scenario a mace and sword preform very differently even if put in equally skilled hands...

You are in a duel with a knight who wields a 1h sword and a shield you have similar equipment, a sword can be used to "lock blades" and with proper skill and finesse you cut off your opponents arm. yes he no longer has a shield and you have dealt a crippling blow but he can still fight at only a minimally decreased level if theres any change at all. sure he'll eventually die from blood loss but during that time he might get lucky and strike a lethal blow himself. A mace on the other hand would have broken or shattered his arm but it would have still been there throwing him off balance and making every move excruciating particularly against the blows that a mace would deal sending a fresh jolt of pain with every hit reducing his morale as he would slowly bleed internally and depending how and where he was hit later killing or paralyzing him for life. ahem... sorry about that... evil moment... still I'm sure I've illustrated my point. The way a weapon damages the body is unique and therefore should be reexamined on an individual basis for damage ratios.

[Torke]

for the most part ima have to side with Perilaxis on this one...
when i think of some one swinging a sword at me im also thinking (depending on the roll) of anything from a small nick to a deep gash or even dismemberment.
however with maces im thinking something as minor as a large bruise (which if roleplayed right could effect you later on, maybe if you got hit there again it would be a additional + 1 damage or something) all the way to crushed bones and muscles hanging off of your body.
Anyways to get to the point i dont see someone soaking damage from a mace UNLESS they have armour on or something to that affect.

[Lurid Sorcerer]

I'd hate to have to look like an asshole by saying this, but...

The point of Kalarsys is its simplicity. All of these considerations (durability, weapon materials, damage type) all are more variables that need to be kept track of for EVERY successful attack that is made and for EVERY piece of equipment that strikes or is struck.

That having been said, these are extremely good ideas. I think all (or at least nearly all) of thes ideas should be contained in the "Advanced Combat" book (which will also include the full lists of armor and weapons).

Now, THAT having been said, some of these advances should filter down into the core rulebook, I think. Our bow system is pretty much done, I just need to write it up (probably on the equipment list and in in the core rulebook), but what do we do about all of these weapon types? Each one should have some quirk so that a mace and a short sword aren't simply different in aesthetics. Here's what I mean:

Swords: Balanced (?)
Axes: Penetrate Armor
Spears: Longer Reach
Blunt Weapons: (No idea.)

<edit>

Forgot about those exotic weapons... My thoughts on that were that they'd take the stats (though perhaps slightly modified) from their nearest listed relative. Katanas, for instance, would take the stats of long swords. As much as I'd like to give them an additional +1 damage, I'm sure most people would take them over long swords simply for that additional damage and not for any roleplaying purpose. This would apply to exceptional weapons, too, such as a long sword made of steel being more durable than one made of iron.

Oh yeah, and should we move long range weapons (guns, bows) onto a new table? </edit>

[DC_Desperado]

All I was saying is that bladed weapons sense the dawn of this game, if they hit, would do an automatic 1 dmg. and blunt weapons, which leave no laseration (sp?) to the skin, would give the player on the recieving end of the attack and chance to soak without and auto dmg for the hit. Yes, a mace can break bone and leave and oppenent disoriented after an attack, but its combat formula is no different from that of a bladed weapon.

Fists for example are a blunt weapon, if i bunch you for 4 dmg and you soak 5 dmg, YOU WILL NOT receive an open wound or broken bone, YOU SOAKED IT! My fists are not bladed, its that simple. Like lurid said, this doesn't have to be so complex. For years its been, a sword is a sword, a spear is a spear, ect ect. it never mattered what it was made out of because what really was the deciding factors in the game was the characters stats and how good they could weild the weapon. Adding craftmanship and material factors are just easy ways to make a boss characters that cant die because of what he has, not what hes capible (sp?) of doing.

As for the unique combat trait of blunt weapons.... i'd say 1 of 2 things.....

1: after an attack, the oppenent attacked and hit ( dmg not a requirment) would roll his/her vitality again, if its below the attack dmg then the character would become disoriented and cannot move his next turn.
2: If the attack results in the opponent having to roll a system shock, and pass, the reward would be disorientation and aq loss of a turn.

lets remember to keep things simple here.

[Perilaxis]

Like I said I was probably over thinking things. Okay just so Lurid doesn't have to ask again NO keep the long range weapons on the same tables as short to mid range weapons we don't need an extra table for all of, what, five or six things. As to those weapon statistics when DC puts it that way Blunt weapons could have the same damage stats but by adding different abillites to the weapons we could simulate the differences in damage types. A good Idea but maybe have several, say three, for each weapon class and then a simple trine roll will tell you which you got, or you could pay extra for the one you want. No doubling up on said abilities. And no one ever ansered my other question you know the one about combo and high-bred weapons the kind history tells us exsisted. A halbeard for example. DC will remember one of my Characters from one of his stories who had a cutting spear on one end of a metal shaft and a mace head on the other as another for high-bred weapons. and how about the straight edged Katana/tanto combo of the samurai. How would those work we couldn't (at least for the combo weapons any way) simply take the two stats of the weapons and use them as is could we?

[Lurid Sorcerer]

So we're all in agreement that each type of weapon should have it's own special effect, it seems.

I'm not opposed to having multiple effects if we can come up with them, but we should probably work on coming up with at least one effect each before jumping to multiple ones.

Combo weapons are going to be tough. That's something that's going to have to be discussed somewhere, but we can't just try to think of every combo weapon that could exist and make up stats for it. I think we should dump this responsibility on the Tale Spinner (with the help of some guidelines). Each weapon will be an individual case.

"High-bred" weapons, on the other hand, would have superior stats, but these shouldn't be common, and characters certainly should not start with them without some extreme circumstances. This, also, would be determined by the Tale Spinner on a per-weapon basis.

<edit>

Oh, and we need shields.

</edit>

[Child of Flame]

Combo/High-bred weapons seem like something that would be part of advanced combat. Just because you wouldn't normally find either type in a store or anything, and the character better have the stat requirements to wield something so complicated in the first place (maybe for something like a spear with a mace on one end, you may want to pick up a proficiency in spear AND mace? Just as an example).

And shields...I think small ones- ...well, there should be three different sizes. small, medium and large. I think the protection across material types should be the same (you know, equal evasion or vitality or whatever we choose for them), but that the bigger shields would offer more of it with a dex penalty, because they'd be heavier. I think that the material that the shield is made out of would be what makes them better.

'Cause if you think about it, a large wooden shield will offer as much protection as a large steel shield...but if a huge war hammer comes crashing down on either one of those shields and the wooden shield is going to offer less protection if it didn't break from the blow.

Edit: I often make disjointed thoughts and today, even I[/b] didn't make sense to me. So I fixed that.

[Eow]

Swords: Slash/Slab; Slash could have a longer effect on the HP..bleeding? If you're cut, you bleed. The less accurate the blow, the less bleeding and therefore less hit on the HP (and the faster you patch yourself up, ect ect ect).

Maces: Smash/Bash; That'd do more of a "disable". A large, round iron ball would most likely break a bone (could roll on the chances, and the bigger the body part, the more accuracy roll you get (like VATS sorta in Fallout3?)). Also, if spiked, could also trigger bleeding <edit> but not as much bleeding as a sword, unless you had good profieciency in maces?<edit>, but again the accuracy roll would come into play and/or the size of the spikes ect ect ect?

Spears: Pierce(skin); this would only work on low grade/no armor, I think, since axes would work on armor, then spears would do more of a grievous wound. Internal bleeding comes in mind. If you pierce the heart, then you better patch that bastard up or you'll die (or try an evasion roll?). Again, accuracy roll comes into play (and where the person aims; no hitting the heart if you aim for a leg, you know?)

Also, the better your weapon, the more likely for those "critical hits" (bleeding, heart-stabbing). You'd have to have the roll of a God to pierce the heart of someone with a dinky wooden spear. Also, stats would come into play (duh). If you have 2 str and try to swing a mace into someone, it may shock them a little, but it won't break anything.

Shields...*shrugs*

Sorry if I'm sounding stupid or retyping what someone else said >.> <.<

[Lurid Sorcerer]

I liked most of that. Okay, so here's what we're looking at for effects so far:

Swords: Adds a bleeding effect. Perhaps it would work as such: after being attacked by a sword, you do a fate roll every after your next turn. If you get it wrong, you take one damage. If you get it right, the bleeding effect stops.
Blunt: Target is stunned or limbs are disabled.
Axes: Pierce armor.

Now, the thing for spears I have some trouble with. Why would you not be able to achieve the same effect with a long sword or something to that effect?

Shields, in my opinion, should offer a bonus to EVA. Shields are used for deflecting attacks, or otherwise making them miss their target. When you hit someone's shield, you haven't actually hit them, thus you deal no damage. On the other hand, armor prevents some damage from reaching your body, but the force of the attack has still hit you, therefore you haven't evaded the attack.

[Eow]

Well, I was stumped on spears. My thought was you'd stab with them more then you'd stab with a sword, but you're right, it's not unique enough to the spear?

For some reason I keep having the idea to make *some* shields breakable. Not just by any blow, but a really good blow on an iffy shield. Couldn't people abuse that, if their evade was high enough and they had a shield as a plus (I'm not 100% on everything Kalarsys >.> <.<)? And if you're fighting Bruno with a greataxe, shouldn't that axe pierce?

[Child of Flame]

Yeah I totally think shields should be breakable. And for the durable ones, at least dentable. Something that with every hit, brings down the evasion just a little bit and isn't as protective as a brand new shield. I thought for the medium and large shields (or just large if we want to just make small and large shields), there would have to be a STR check to see if the character can carry it.

Ahh, I can just picture some lanky little thief trying to pickpocket someone and running with this huge kite shield on his back. It would make too much noise to do anything stealthy...and the poor guy's gonna fall over if you blow on him. Poor fella.

But spears? Maybe it's effect should be emphasis on it's long reach? You don't have to waste an action getting close to your opponent, because you're likely to reach him in the first place. You'd be one of the few melee units that could knock a guy off a horse. Things like that. That's probably not what we're looking for here but...the downside of the spear is that it would be weaker than a sword generally and like Eow said, it would work better on people that have no armor/light armor.