2 handed weapons

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.gurps (More info?)

Hi

What are the uses of 2-handed weapons like the "Great Axe" (p. 274)?

Compared to the normal axe (p. 273) it is only +1 damage and you need to
have the insane strength of 18 to use it every turn (to attack). Or did I
miss something essential?

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.gurps (More info?)

I think SJG missed something essential. The amount of force delivered
by larger 2 handed weapons is a factor of scale greater than their 1
handed counterparts. Ask someone who has swung a Claymore and how it
compares in striking power to a backsword.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.gurps (More info?)

It's only that much better if you do some weird wind up and and whack
during which your opponent will stick you 2 or 3 times. The big
weapon's greatest advantage is its REACH. The other guy has to get
past your weapon to get to you.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.gurps (More info?)

check out a video going around the web (should be able find it on your
favorite peer to peer) titles Katana vrs Claymore. Full speed sparing
by guys who know what they are doing Surprisingly, the Claymore
dominated, even if the first stike was parried. Big weapons aren't
necessarily Lift-Chop-Recover - Lift-Chop - Recover. Add it you're
wondering, the guy with the claymore is about ST11.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.gurps (More info?)

On Tue, 10 May 2005 18:37:36 +0200, Tobias
<tobias.langner@t-online.de> wrote:

>Hi
>
>What are the uses of 2-handed weapons like the "Great Axe" (p. 274)?
>
>Compared to the normal axe (p. 273) it is only +1 damage and you need to
>have the insane strength of 18 to use it every turn (to attack). Or did I
>miss something essential?

Hey, ST 18 is affordable these days so it isn't that insane.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.gurps (More info?)

"mathilda" <smart_aleck72@yahoo.com> writes:

>check out a video going around the web (should be able find it on your
>favorite peer to peer) titles Katana vrs Claymore.


Ponytailed guy in robe walks up to tree, draws sword, base of tree
explodes throwing him backward and sending a pound of hot metal shards
through him? That one?

--
Chimes peal joy. Bah. Joseph Michael Bay
Icy colon barge Cancer Biology
Frosty divine Saturn Stanford University
By reading this line you agree to mow my lawn. NO GIVEBACKS.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.gurps (More info?)

On 10 May 2005 14:16:10 -0700, "mathilda" <smart_aleck72@yahoo.com>
wrote:

>check out a video going around the web (should be able find it on your
>favorite peer to peer) titles Katana vrs Claymore. Full speed sparing
>by guys who know what they are doing Surprisingly, the Claymore
>dominated, even if the first stike was parried. Big weapons aren't
>necessarily Lift-Chop-Recover - Lift-Chop - Recover.

There's no need to recover with a claymore in GURPs because it would
be considered a "balanced weapon"

Add it you're
>wondering, the guy with the claymore is about ST11.

If he had ST 12 there would be no penalty. If he was ST 11 he'd be
using his claymore with a -1 to skill.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.gurps (More info?)

Sounds like a Variant or House Rule, but I like it. More realistic
than a simple +1. And if it is not in a Book but it works for you, use
it.

Regarding polarms in formation with largely untrained peasants, I
agree. But PCs are not untrained peasants and rarely fight in large
formations. In the hands of someone who knows what they are doing, a
polearm is a fierssom weapon in small units. A halberd or glaive is
not that much different from a Naginata but no one is surprised when
they see a martial artists put those to use. Useless up close (at
reach one) but if absolutely you keep your opponent at bay (reach 2-3).

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.gurps (More info?)

The 1.5 thing is from D&D 3E.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.gurps (More info?)

> Think about this for a moment, woul the polearm
> have lasted as long as it did as a common combat weapon if it could
> only manage to strike at an opponet every 2-3 seconds?
yes - the main use of polearms lies in formation-fighting. The Phalanx of
the ancient greeks and so on. Just give some peasants the polearms and put
them in line. The second line can fight to. And the shields protect each
other. For better performance train them like the spartans did.
The knights used them for their first attack - during the second the lances
were mostly destroyed by their first strike.

I think I remember a rule about using 1.5 times ST for damage if you use a
weapon 2-handed. Do I remember correctly? Where do I find it?

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.gurps (More info?)

Tobias <tobias.langner@t-online.de> wrote:
>> Think about this for a moment, woul the polearm
>> have lasted as long as it did as a common combat weapon if it could
>> only manage to strike at an opponet every 2-3 seconds?

> yes - the main use of polearms lies in formation-fighting. The Phalanx of
> the ancient greeks and so on. Just give some peasants the polearms and put
> them in line. The second line can fight to. And the shields protect each
> other. For better performance train them like the spartans did.

Phalanx had shields, yes, but late medieval polearms couldn't be used
with shields, but were far from useless. They were very versatile weapons
(unlike the pikes of the Greek phalanx, by the way); heavy enough to punch
through armour, long enough to fight cavalry, worked well against pikes,
and didn't need a rigid, tight formation like pikes do.
Really an all-round weapon, even without shield.

> I think I remember a rule about using 1.5 times ST for damage if you use a
> weapon 2-handed. Do I remember correctly? Where do I find it?

Sounds like a good rule. It can also be used for one-handed weapons that
are used two-handed (assuming a long enough handle). Long swords and
battle axes, though officially one-handed weapons, could often be used
two-handed (when you lose your shield, I imagine), and I'd expect them
to do a bit more damage then, although it might sacrifice one hex of
reach.

I don't have any experience with this myself, though, so I bow to the
knowledge of more experienced fighters.


mcv.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.gurps (More info?)

mcv wrote:

> Tobias <tobias.langner@t-online.de> wrote:
>>> Think about this for a moment, woul the polearm
>>> have lasted as long as it did as a common combat weapon if it could
>>> only manage to strike at an opponet every 2-3 seconds?
>
>> yes - the main use of polearms lies in formation-fighting. The Phalanx of
>> the ancient greeks and so on. Just give some peasants the polearms and
>> put them in line. The second line can fight to. And the shields protect
>> each other. For better performance train them like the spartans did.
>
> Phalanx had shields, yes, but late medieval polearms couldn't be used
> with shields, but were far from useless. They were very versatile weapons
> (unlike the pikes of the Greek phalanx, by the way); heavy enough to punch
> through armour, long enough to fight cavalry, worked well against pikes,
> and didn't need a rigid, tight formation like pikes do.
> Really an all-round weapon, even without shield.
>
actually - the Greeks used 2 types of polearms. The first: a spear - the
second a 5m long lance. The lance was used by the Greeks under Alexander
the Great, the spear was used by all otheres before that time.
The 5m lance (which is actually longer than anything I know from the Middle
Ages) was used with a shield stapped onto the left arm (to protect your
neighbour in you formation).
Fighting against cavalry is only effective if you can make them stop - which
leads again to formations.

But of course - formations are no option for PCs.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.gurps (More info?)

Tobias <tobias.langner@t-online.de> wrote:
> mcv wrote:
>> Tobias <tobias.langner@t-online.de> wrote:
>>>> Think about this for a moment, woul the polearm
>>>> have lasted as long as it did as a common combat weapon if it could
>>>> only manage to strike at an opponet every 2-3 seconds?
>>
>>> yes - the main use of polearms lies in formation-fighting. The Phalanx of
>>> the ancient greeks and so on. Just give some peasants the polearms and
>>> put them in line. The second line can fight to. And the shields protect
>>> each other. For better performance train them like the spartans did.
>>
>> Phalanx had shields, yes, but late medieval polearms couldn't be used
>> with shields, but were far from useless. They were very versatile weapons
>> (unlike the pikes of the Greek phalanx, by the way); heavy enough to punch
>> through armour, long enough to fight cavalry, worked well against pikes,
>> and didn't need a rigid, tight formation like pikes do.
>> Really an all-round weapon, even without shield.
>>
> actually - the Greeks used 2 types of polearms. The first: a spear - the
> second a 5m long lance. The lance was used by the Greeks under Alexander
> the Great, the spear was used by all otheres before that time.

Didn't they already have them at Thermopylae?

> The 5m lance (which is actually longer than anything I know from the Middle
> Ages) was used with a shield stapped onto the left arm (to protect your
> neighbour in you formation).

I think the pike from the renaissance was also somewhere around that
length.

> Fighting against cavalry is only effective if you can make them stop - which
> leads again to formations.

Or you let someone else stop them, and then you run around the flanks
and chop them to bits with your polearms. (Works well in Medieval
Total War.)

> But of course - formations are no option for PCs.

I'm not sure about the GURPS rules for mounted combat, but in Earthdawn,
fighting cavalry in the open is an exercise in frustration. And punishment.
But woods also help quite a lot to slow cavalry down. Woods are the
territory of infantry, although keeping a formation is a bit difficult.


mcv.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.gurps (More info?)

> Didn't they already have them at Thermopylae?
>
nope - at Thermopylae the Spartans fought. And they had spears.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.gurps (More info?)

On 11 May 2005 04:20:23 -0700, "mathilda" <smart_aleck72@yahoo.com>
wrote:

>Sounds like a Variant or House Rule, but I like it. More realistic
>than a simple +1. And if it is not in a Book but it works for you, use
>it.
>
>Regarding polarms in formation with largely untrained peasants, I
>agree. But PCs are not untrained peasants and rarely fight in large
>formations. In the hands of someone who knows what they are doing, a
>polearm is a fierssom weapon in small units. A halberd or glaive is
>not that much different from a Naginata but no one is surprised when
>they see a martial artists put those to use. Useless up close (at
>reach one) but if absolutely you keep your opponent at bay (reach 2-3).


the 1.5 x strength for melee wpns thing is from dnd 3rd ed.
--
"Ineffective, unfocused violence leads to more violence. Limp,
panicky half-measures lead to more violence. However, complete,
fully-thought-through, professional, well-executed violence
never leads to more violence because, you see, afterwards, the
other guys are all dead."