Lion & Dragon RPG: Well, I've Done it Now

RPGPundit · March 18, 2017, 04:06:21 PM

God help me, I'm going to have parrying rules, so shields actually matter.

AsenRG · March 18, 2017, 04:09:55 PM

Where and how much is it:)?

K Peterson · March 18, 2017, 06:51:32 PM

And what system does this use? Something self-constructed or piggybacking off of something else?

Christopher Brady · March 18, 2017, 07:23:12 PM

Why is parrying rules a bad thing?? Oh, right, forgot whom this is.

JeremyR · March 18, 2017, 10:29:03 PM

Do shields actually matter if you are not part of an army fighting another army? 1 on 1, an archer would just aim where the shield is not. And I think they would be rather clumsy in melee combat, especially fighting someone with a weapon held in two hands (which would also likely be longer).

And I think they were largely made redundant by plate armor.

Christopher Brady · March 18, 2017, 11:33:14 PM

Quote from: JeremyR;952506Do shields actually matter if you are not part of an army fighting another army? 1 on 1, an archer would just aim where the shield is not. And I think they would be rather clumsy in melee combat, especially fighting someone with a weapon held in two hands (which would also likely be longer).

The Vikings and earlier civilizations prove you wrong.

Quote from: JeremyR;952506And I think they were largely made redundant by plate armor.

It was.

Spinachcat · March 19, 2017, 12:41:12 AM

Palladium Fantasy's parrying rules always worked fine, as did RuneQuest.

It does slow down the game.

The best parry rules I saw in D20 was Conan which broke down AC into Parry and Dodge.

Parry = 10 + Armor + STR + 4 for Shield

Dodge = 10 + Armor + DEX + 1 for Shield

It made shields valuable in close combat, but not a big thing in ranged combat. IIRC there were various class / feats that allowed people to Dodge in Melee or Parry vs Ranged.

Christopher Brady · March 19, 2017, 01:18:46 AM

Quote from: Spinachcat;952512Palladium Fantasy's parrying rules always worked fine, as did RuneQuest.

It does slow down the game.

The best parry rules I saw in D20 was Conan which broke down AC into Parry and Dodge.

Parry = 10 + Armor + STR + 4 for Shield

Dodge = 10 + Armor + DEX + 1 for Shield

It made shields valuable in close combat, but not a big thing in ranged combat. IIRC there were various class / feats that allowed people to Dodge in Melee or Parry vs Ranged.

It didn't add armour. Armour was Damage Reduction. Each class had a progressive counter you added to your parry and dodge each level, similar to the Base Attack Bonus they copied from the base 3.x they were using. It was my favourite version of D&D for a long time.

AsenRG · March 19, 2017, 05:11:48 AM

Quote from: JeremyR;952506Do shields actually matter if you are not part of an army fighting another army? 1 on 1, an archer would just aim where the shield is not. And I think they would be rather clumsy in melee combat, especially fighting someone with a weapon held in two hands (which would also likely be longer).

And I think they were largely made redundant by plate armor.

Short version: you're so wrong it's not even funny.
Also, they weren't made "redundant", people just needed two-handed weapons to overcome plate:).

Quote from: Spinachcat;952512Palladium Fantasy's parrying rules always worked fine, as did RuneQuest.

It does slow down the game.

The best parry rules I saw in D20 was Conan which broke down AC into Parry and Dodge.

Parry = 10 + Armor + STR + 4 for Shield

Dodge = 10 + Armor + DEX + 1 for Shield

It made shields valuable in close combat, but not a big thing in ranged combat. IIRC there were various class / feats that allowed people to Dodge in Melee or Parry vs Ranged.

Given that prior to the existence of heavy armour, shields were considered the best defence against missiles, those aren't "good" rules, just "better than normal for close combat"

.

kosmos1214 · March 19, 2017, 03:53:22 PM

Quote from: Spinachcat;952512Palladium Fantasy's parrying rules always worked fine, as did RuneQuest.

It does slow down the game.

The best parry rules I saw in D20 was Conan which broke down AC into Parry and Dodge.

Parry = 10 + Armor + STR + 4 for Shield

Dodge = 10 + Armor + DEX + 1 for Shield

It made shields valuable in close combat, but not a big thing in ranged combat. IIRC there were various class / feats that allowed people to Dodge in Melee or Parry vs Ranged.

Quote from: Christopher Brady;952514It didn't add armour. Armour was Damage Reduction. Each class had a progressive counter you added to your parry and dodge each level, similar to the Base Attack Bonus they copied from the base 3.x they were using. It was my favourite version of D&D for a long time.

That sounds cool I'll need to give that game A look.

Quote from: AsenRG;952545Short version: you're so wrong it's not even funny.
Also, they weren't made "redundant", people just needed two-handed weapons to overcome plate:).

Given that prior to the existence of heavy armour, shields were considered the best defence against missiles, those aren't "good" rules, just "better than normal for close combat".

Yes defiantly shields hung around for A reason Some thing I think to meany people fail to keep in mind is that fighting equipment stays around if it works and dies off if it doesn't.
So if something is still being used it has A purpose and is effective at what it dose.

Christopher Brady · March 19, 2017, 03:57:10 PM

The shield died off around the use plate armour, except for jousts and tournaments, because of the type of weapons needed that were being developed to defeat plate. That's not to say it wasn't used, it just wasn't used as much. It got re-purposed into a small blocking device for street fighting when the sword was relegated to a commoner's weapon with the introduction of firearms and gunpowder.

crkrueger · March 19, 2017, 03:57:31 PM

Well, since police and even military units still use them today, I think it's safe to say they've always had a purpose.

deleted user · March 19, 2017, 05:11:32 PM

It's not as if Johnny Peasant was allowed a suit of plate, so no, shields didn't die out, they weren't shiny painted Hollywood shields though.

AsenRG · March 19, 2017, 05:26:21 PM

Quote from: kosmos1214;952661Yes defiantly shields hung around for A reason Some thing I think to meany people fail to keep in mind is that fighting equipment stays around if it works and dies off if it doesn't.
So if something is still being used it has A purpose and is effective at what it dose.

Quote from: CRKrueger;952664Well, since police and even military units still use them today, I think it's safe to say they've always had a purpose.

Yes, the shield, the stick, the spear, the knife, the shortsword, the axe and the chain are the few weapons that have been in use for millennia, and are still used today. There's a reason for that, too.

Quote from: Sean !;952678It's not as if Johnny Peasant was allowed a suit of plate, so no, shields didn't die out, they weren't shiny painted Hollywood shields though.

Yeah, indeed.

Christopher Brady · March 19, 2017, 11:31:43 PM

Quote from: Sean !;952678It's not as if Johnny Peasant was allowed a suit of plate, so no, shields didn't die out, they weren't shiny painted Hollywood shields though.

OK, correction. Their utility fell off, but had a few resurgences, but nothing like they were back in the 12-13th centuries and earlier.