Do staves get W.P Blunt bonuses and W.P. Staff bonuses?

Ley Line walkers, Juicers, Coalition Troops, Samas, Tolkeen, & The Federation Of Magic. Come together here to discuss all things Rifts®.

Moderators: Immortals, Supreme Beings, Old Ones

Do staves get W.P Blunt bonuses and W.P. Staff bonuses?

Yes
16
33%
No
30
61%
Undecided
3
6%
 
Total votes: 49

User avatar
Axelmania
Knight
Posts: 5523
Joined: Sun Dec 27, 2015 1:13 pm

Re: Do staves get W.P Blunt bonuses and W.P. Staff bonuses?

Unread post by Axelmania »

Hm, should have acted in impulse to check that next but got extracted. Is it possible this is exclusive to the running skill?

I wonder how it adds up. Average of 4d6+4d4 (human with running and athletics) is 24. Traditionally this meant you could run 480 yards per minute for 11.5 minutes, so 5520 yards or 3.126 miles.

PE/6 miles at full speed would need PE18 to last 3 so it is somewhat of a nerf for high speed characters. By basing it on distance instead of time, speedsters burn up their endurance quicker.

HU2 p 16 "Movevement and Exertion" (this absent from PF2 p 17 though) "A character can run maximum speed for one minute for each point of P.E."

Dead Reign 148 "weight and movement" doesn't explain but Running on 206 says 1 mile per PE without fatigue, 2 miles per PE (minimum 27) before collapsing. Not entirely helpful though since we don't know what rest breaks every 26 miles would do. Nor does this say what % of speed you can run at. Forced March has the similar problem of not saying what the normal PE rate is.
User avatar
wyrmraker
Hero
Posts: 1547
Joined: Tue May 11, 2010 3:52 pm

Re: Do staves get W.P Blunt bonuses and W.P. Staff bonuses?

Unread post by wyrmraker »

I may have missed it, but does anyone know where the "only one WP's bonuses apply" thing originates?
User avatar
Blue_Lion
Knight
Posts: 6226
Joined: Tue Oct 16, 2001 1:01 am
Location: Clone Lab 27

Re: Do staves get W.P Blunt bonuses and W.P. Staff bonuses?

Unread post by Blue_Lion »

wyrmraker wrote:I may have missed it, but does anyone know where the "only one WP's bonuses apply" thing originates?

The only support for that idea I have seen is based on a reference from GMG where weapon bonuses stacking is rare found in FAQ.
The Clones are coming you shall all be replaced, but who is to say you have not been replaced already.

Master of Type-O and the obvios.

Soon my army oc clones and winged-monkies will rule the world but first, must .......

I may debate canon and RAW, but the games I run are highly house ruled. So I am not debating for how I play but about how the system works as written.
User avatar
wyrmraker
Hero
Posts: 1547
Joined: Tue May 11, 2010 3:52 pm

Re: Do staves get W.P Blunt bonuses and W.P. Staff bonuses?

Unread post by wyrmraker »

I mean, I've heard that ruling from GMs for decades. My best guess is that it might have originated waaaay back in the original Palladium Fantasy, but I was hoping that someone actually knew where it came from. The ruling seems to be an "Everyone knows" sort of thing.

Although it seems that the rules as written support the stacking, thus enabling a kind of specialization.
User avatar
Killer Cyborg
Priest
Posts: 27954
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2001 2:01 am
Comment: "Your Eloquence with a sledge hammer is a beautiful thing..." -Zer0 Kay
Location: In the ocean, punching oncoming waves
Contact:

Re: Do staves get W.P Blunt bonuses and W.P. Staff bonuses?

Unread post by Killer Cyborg »

Blue_Lion wrote:
wyrmraker wrote:I may have missed it, but does anyone know where the "only one WP's bonuses apply" thing originates?

The only support for that idea I have seen is based on a reference from GMG where weapon bonuses stacking is rare found in FAQ.


And the lack of game balance if things are done otherwise.
And the lack of any simulationist reason for things to be done otherwise.
And the weapons like the Sai that list "forked OR knife" as the appropriate WP, instead of "Forked AND Knife."
And the lack of any NPCs that utilize stacked WPs.
And the OCCs that are designed to be dedicated staff fighters having "WP Staff," but NOT WP Blunt, which would only make sense if WP Blunt would be redundant, not if it would stack.

And probably some other stuff.

Edit:
like this:
RGMG 32 is:
However, some different WPs may offer an accumulated bonus for the same type of weapon, like Archery and Targeting, or Sharpshooting, but these are very rare.


the TL;DR is that the basis for the rule is that without that rule, the game ends up pretty broken and nonsensical.
Annual Best Poster of the Year Awards (2012)

"That rifle on the wall of the laborer's cottage or working class flat is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there." -George Orwell

Check out my Author Page on Amazon!
User avatar
wyrmraker
Hero
Posts: 1547
Joined: Tue May 11, 2010 3:52 pm

Re: Do staves get W.P Blunt bonuses and W.P. Staff bonuses?

Unread post by wyrmraker »

So it's not actually an official rule that can be cited and posted. I understand the desire for game balance (never mind that Rifts isn't balanced in the slightest), but I can see the stacking potential being used as an actual method of a character specializing in a particular weapon through training that the system itself tends to lack in canon without taking a specific OCC..
guardiandashi
Hero
Posts: 1437
Joined: Wed Nov 27, 2013 12:21 am

Re: Do staves get W.P Blunt bonuses and W.P. Staff bonuses?

Unread post by guardiandashi »

wyrmraker wrote:So it's not actually an official rule that can be cited and posted. I understand the desire for game balance (never mind that Rifts isn't balanced in the slightest), but I can see the stacking potential being used as an actual method of a character specializing in a particular weapon through training that the system itself tends to lack in canon without taking a specific OCC..

to be honest its one of those "unwritten" rules that is there because of context.

if you look at skills in general (which WP are really a subset of) other skills don't actually stack, what you get is some skills synergize IE I have electrical engineer and security so the skill gets a ~5% (typically) or similar bonus but you don't actually stack them and get say 45% electrical engineer, and 55% security so when working on electronic security systems you have a 100 (adjusted to 98%) with a 2% "adjustment to reduce penalties" skill.

so the "reasonable, or common conclusion" is that skills and WP don't stack unless specifically and explicitly noted in the skill like fencing and archery targeting. or sniper.
Eagle
Dungeon Crawler
Posts: 323
Joined: Fri Aug 21, 2015 4:31 pm

Re: Do staves get W.P Blunt bonuses and W.P. Staff bonuses?

Unread post by Eagle »

The rules in Rifts are pure poetry. People argue over the meaning for decades and there's a good chance the author was on drugs when he wrote it.

Debating the RAW seems pretty pointless, as everyone here knows that Palladium rules are incredibly vague and often contradictory. The game is virtually unplayable without a GM making house rulings along the way. In fact, I'd say that following pure RAW is the least reasonable way to play. I remember I spent years trying to figure out if I was supposed to track the bonuses for "roll with punch" separately from "roll with punch/fall" and separately again from "roll with punch/fall/impact".
User avatar
wyrmraker
Hero
Posts: 1547
Joined: Tue May 11, 2010 3:52 pm

Re: Do staves get W.P Blunt bonuses and W.P. Staff bonuses?

Unread post by wyrmraker »

So, what you're saying is that it's practically the oldest House Rule in Palladium. Because I have heard this in every Palladium game group I've been in over the course of 30 years, on 3 different continents, and in 5 different states. That's why I raised the question of where that rule was originally from. It's too widespread to not have been in a book somewhere, IMO.
User avatar
Blue_Lion
Knight
Posts: 6226
Joined: Tue Oct 16, 2001 1:01 am
Location: Clone Lab 27

Re: Do staves get W.P Blunt bonuses and W.P. Staff bonuses?

Unread post by Blue_Lion »

wyrmraker wrote:So, what you're saying is that it's practically the oldest House Rule in Palladium. Because I have heard this in every Palladium game group I've been in over the course of 30 years, on 3 different continents, and in 5 different states. That's why I raised the question of where that rule was originally from. It's too widespread to not have been in a book somewhere, IMO.

Basically yes, there is nothing in writing that says they do not. It is rule people create on there own based on how they think it should work. AS I said in 20 years of playing PB games it has never came up in a game I played or was the GM, when I looked for a book no it did not exist.(I am curios at why it came up in every game you played for 30 years.)
The Clones are coming you shall all be replaced, but who is to say you have not been replaced already.

Master of Type-O and the obvios.

Soon my army oc clones and winged-monkies will rule the world but first, must .......

I may debate canon and RAW, but the games I run are highly house ruled. So I am not debating for how I play but about how the system works as written.
User avatar
Prysus
Champion
Posts: 2593
Joined: Mon May 03, 2004 7:48 pm
Location: Boise, ID (US)
Contact:

Re: Do staves get W.P Blunt bonuses and W.P. Staff bonuses?

Unread post by Prysus »

wyrmraker wrote:So, what you're saying is that it's practically the oldest House Rule in Palladium. Because I have heard this in every Palladium game group I've been in over the course of 30 years, on 3 different continents, and in 5 different states. That's why I raised the question of where that rule was originally from. It's too widespread to not have been in a book somewhere, IMO.

Greetings and Salutations. I don't believe it's ever actually written explicitly, just that many of us will mentally insert the rule without ever realizing it based on what else is written and the other game mechanics. For example, Palladium doesn't explicitly tell you to pick a race before rolling your attributes. However, we do it because it makes sense and we never really question the fact that Palladium didn't tell us to do it.

With stacking W.P., we have things like Targeting (or Archery and Targeting, or whatever the skill may be called in the edition you're using) specifically tells us that it stacks. Because the skill specifies it stacks, my brain (and many others) say: "Oh, if the book is taking the time to specify this one specific skill stacks, then they don't all stack."

When I look at the logic and see that some weapons stack with three or four (if using just one book, more if you're willing to use multiple books) different W.P. while others are limited to only one, I start thinking stacking is probably not how it's meant to work.

Some of the justification for saying staff and blunt should be allowed to stack is that S.D.C. staves won't be very powerful in Rifts, which is true (even more so considering all the ranged weapons). However, not everyone started playing Palladium only with Rifts and then focused solely on Rifts and refused to acknowledge any other game line existed. For people who started with TMNT, or have played Palladium Fantasy, or various other S.D.C. settings, things like a staff becoming twice as powerful as most other weapons stands out more.

With other skills such as Acrobatics and Gymnastics (which have various overlapping skills), we know to use the higher of the two percentages. We don't add them together. Sense Balance doesn't start at 110% if you select both, and it doesn't go up +6% per level if you have both. For the most part, unless we're told otherwise (such as the attribute bonuses in Physical skills or W.P. Targeting), we separate skills and don't stack.

Then there's the stuff Killer Cyborg mentioned above. Basically, it's never outright stated, but I believe when reading the book as a whole many people intuit the rule and don't realize it. Hopefully that helps some. Farewell and safe journeys for now.
Living the Fantasy (fan website)

Rifter #45; Of Bows & Arrows (Archery; expanding rules and abilities)
Rifter #52; From Ruins to Runes (Living Rune Weapons; playable characters and NPC)
Rifter #55; Home Away From Home (Quorian Culture; expanded from PF Book 9: Baalgor Wastelands)

Official PDF versions of Rifter #45, #52, and #55 can be found at DriveThruRPG.
User avatar
Axelmania
Knight
Posts: 5523
Joined: Sun Dec 27, 2015 1:13 pm

Re: Do staves get W.P Blunt bonuses and W.P. Staff bonuses?

Unread post by Axelmania »

Killer Cyborg wrote:lack of game balance if things are done otherwise.

I don't see anything unbalancing about it. Do you suggest that Rifts is actually a balanced game and that THIS is what tips Glitterboys vs Vagabonds situations?

Killer Cyborg wrote:And the lack of any simulationist reason for things to be done otherwise.

On the contrary, I'd personally find it a lot easier to whack someone with a staff or parry an attack with a staff than with a sword.

Killer Cyborg wrote:And the weapons like the Sai that list "forked OR knife" as the appropriate WP, instead of "Forked AND Knife."

If it said 'and' a reader might think you would need both WP to get bonuses, whereas 'or' makes it clear that either can work in isolation, but this does not say they can't work in unity.

Killer Cyborg wrote:And the lack of any NPCs that utilize stacked WPs.

NPCs are rarely very detailed in regard to WP bonuses, point out some who have blunt and staff to begin with and then whether or not it goes to the trouble of statting out each weapon's individual bonuses.

Killer Cyborg wrote:And the OCCs that are designed to be dedicated staff fighters having "WP Staff," but NOT WP Blunt, which would only make sense if WP Blunt would be redundant, not if it would stack.

Blunt wouldn't be redundant if it was a 'better of the two' situation, because it is BETTER.

It just means the OCC isn't as good as you thought it was.

Killer Cyborg wrote:RGMG 32 is:
However, some different WPs may offer an accumulated bonus for the same type of weapon, like Archery and Targeting, or Sharpshooting, but these are very rare.

Blunt/Staff IS rare, it's not like axe/sword works this way.

Killer Cyborg wrote:the TL;DR is that the basis for the rule is that without that rule, the game ends up pretty broken and nonsensical.

This is in no way a gamebreaker. Nor is skilled staff fighters nonsense. No matter how good you make staffs, the rune swords will always be the uber melee weapons.

Is a T-Archer having Archery / Sniper / Sharpshooter a gamebreaker? Staff still can't approach that.

Prysus wrote:With other skills such as Acrobatics and Gymnastics (which have various overlapping skills), we know to use the higher of the two percentages. We don't add them together. Sense Balance doesn't start at 110% if you select both, and it doesn't go up +6% per level if you have both.

There's a huge difference between bonuses to rolls which anyone can do and percentage bases for new abilities.
User avatar
Killer Cyborg
Priest
Posts: 27954
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2001 2:01 am
Comment: "Your Eloquence with a sledge hammer is a beautiful thing..." -Zer0 Kay
Location: In the ocean, punching oncoming waves
Contact:

Re: Do staves get W.P Blunt bonuses and W.P. Staff bonuses?

Unread post by Killer Cyborg »

Axelmania wrote:
Killer Cyborg wrote:lack of game balance if things are done otherwise.

I don't see anything unbalancing about it.


Noted.

Killer Cyborg wrote:And the lack of any simulationist reason for things to be done otherwise.

On the contrary


Yes.
Quite on the contrary.

Killer Cyborg wrote:And the weapons like the Sai that list "forked OR knife" as the appropriate WP, instead of "Forked AND Knife."

If it said 'and' a reader might think you would need both WP to get bonuses, whereas 'or' makes it clear that either can work in isolation, but this does not say they can't work in unity.


Yeah, it does.
That's what the word "or" means.

Killer Cyborg wrote:And the lack of any NPCs that utilize stacked WPs.

NPCs are rarely very detailed in regard to WP bonuses, point out some who have blunt and staff to begin with and then whether or not it goes to the trouble of statting out each weapon's individual bonuses.


Sure, but in 37 years worth of books, you'd think there would be at least ONE example of the WPs stacking.

Killer Cyborg wrote:And the OCCs that are designed to be dedicated staff fighters having "WP Staff," but NOT WP Blunt, which would only make sense if WP Blunt would be redundant, not if it would stack.

Blunt wouldn't be redundant if it was a 'better of the two' situation, because it is BETTER.


How do you figure?

Killer Cyborg wrote:RGMG 32 is:
However, some different WPs may offer an accumulated bonus for the same type of weapon, like Archery and Targeting, or Sharpshooting, but these are very rare.

Blunt/Staff IS rare,


Got a source that it's rare...?

it's not like axe/sword works this way.


With the right weapon, such as a sword-axe, why wouldn't it? :roll:

The argument is that WPs stack as a default, unless specified to be an exception, which is the opposite of very rare.


Killer Cyborg wrote:the TL;DR is that the basis for the rule is that without that rule, the game ends up pretty broken and nonsensical.

This is in no way a gamebreaker.


Incorrect.
Annual Best Poster of the Year Awards (2012)

"That rifle on the wall of the laborer's cottage or working class flat is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there." -George Orwell

Check out my Author Page on Amazon!
User avatar
eliakon
Palladin
Posts: 9093
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 9:40 pm
Comment: Palladium Books Canon is set solely by Kevin Siembieda, either in person, or by his approval of published material.
Contact:

Re: Do staves get W.P Blunt bonuses and W.P. Staff bonuses?

Unread post by eliakon »

Just an aside here...
what does the abbreviation TL;DR mean?
The rules are not a bludgeon with which to hammer a character into a game. They are a guide to how a group of friends can get together to weave a collective story that entertains everyone involved. We forget that at our peril.

Edmund Burke wrote:The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."
User avatar
Killer Cyborg
Priest
Posts: 27954
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2001 2:01 am
Comment: "Your Eloquence with a sledge hammer is a beautiful thing..." -Zer0 Kay
Location: In the ocean, punching oncoming waves
Contact:

Re: Do staves get W.P Blunt bonuses and W.P. Staff bonuses?

Unread post by Killer Cyborg »

eliakon wrote:Just an aside here...
what does the abbreviation TL;DR mean?


"Too Long; Didn't Read."
Annual Best Poster of the Year Awards (2012)

"That rifle on the wall of the laborer's cottage or working class flat is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there." -George Orwell

Check out my Author Page on Amazon!
User avatar
Prysus
Champion
Posts: 2593
Joined: Mon May 03, 2004 7:48 pm
Location: Boise, ID (US)
Contact:

Re: Do staves get W.P Blunt bonuses and W.P. Staff bonuses?

Unread post by Prysus »

Axelmania wrote:Is a T-Archer having Archery / Sniper / Sharpshooter a gamebreaker? Staff still can't approach that.

Greetings and Salutations. This example has been bugging me for a while (and this isn't the first time it's been brought up), so I'm going to address a few things about it ...

1: The bonuses from any of the above noted stacking skills tend to be considerably less than stacking two full Weapon Proficiencies on top of each other.
2: Skills such as Sniper require a Called or Aimed shots, which means spending at least one extra melee action/attack just to use it. There's a price to pay for it.
3: Both Archery and Targeting as well as Sharpshooter explicitly state they stack. This would be completely unnecessary if stacking was default. Note: When Palladium split Targeting into a separate skill in RUE, it now requires an appropriate W.P. to be selected first, and is not a stand alone skill. It only works with stacking.
4: Most importantly, something people tend to gloss over, Archery, Sniper, and Sharpshooter all apply to ranged combat. Ranged combat does not gain the benefit of Hand to Hand skills, nor can you add in P.S. damage bonuses. These bonuses would help offset the bonuses melee weapons receive from Hand to Hand combat training. Can anyone actually site any explicit allowance for any non-ranged (a.k.a. melee/hand to hand) W.P. stacking with another W.P.?

Okay, I'm done for now. Farewell and safe journeys.
Living the Fantasy (fan website)

Rifter #45; Of Bows & Arrows (Archery; expanding rules and abilities)
Rifter #52; From Ruins to Runes (Living Rune Weapons; playable characters and NPC)
Rifter #55; Home Away From Home (Quorian Culture; expanded from PF Book 9: Baalgor Wastelands)

Official PDF versions of Rifter #45, #52, and #55 can be found at DriveThruRPG.
User avatar
Blue_Lion
Knight
Posts: 6226
Joined: Tue Oct 16, 2001 1:01 am
Location: Clone Lab 27

Re: Do staves get W.P Blunt bonuses and W.P. Staff bonuses?

Unread post by Blue_Lion »

They way I see it the book neither says they do or do not stack.(no evidence has been provided that proves they do or do not)
So weather they do or not is a house rule and not RAW. So there is no standard to this.
The Clones are coming you shall all be replaced, but who is to say you have not been replaced already.

Master of Type-O and the obvios.

Soon my army oc clones and winged-monkies will rule the world but first, must .......

I may debate canon and RAW, but the games I run are highly house ruled. So I am not debating for how I play but about how the system works as written.
User avatar
Prysus
Champion
Posts: 2593
Joined: Mon May 03, 2004 7:48 pm
Location: Boise, ID (US)
Contact:

Re: Do staves get W.P Blunt bonuses and W.P. Staff bonuses?

Unread post by Prysus »

Blue_Lion wrote:They way I see it the book neither says they do or do not stack.(no evidence has been provided that proves they do or do not)
So weather they do or not is a house rule and not RAW. So there is no standard to this.

Greetings and Salutations. If it matters, I have no problem agreeing with that. Farewell and safe journeys.
Living the Fantasy (fan website)

Rifter #45; Of Bows & Arrows (Archery; expanding rules and abilities)
Rifter #52; From Ruins to Runes (Living Rune Weapons; playable characters and NPC)
Rifter #55; Home Away From Home (Quorian Culture; expanded from PF Book 9: Baalgor Wastelands)

Official PDF versions of Rifter #45, #52, and #55 can be found at DriveThruRPG.
User avatar
Killer Cyborg
Priest
Posts: 27954
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2001 2:01 am
Comment: "Your Eloquence with a sledge hammer is a beautiful thing..." -Zer0 Kay
Location: In the ocean, punching oncoming waves
Contact:

Re: Do staves get W.P Blunt bonuses and W.P. Staff bonuses?

Unread post by Killer Cyborg »

Blue_Lion wrote:They way I see it the book neither says they do or do not stack.(no evidence has been provided that proves they do or do not)
So weather they do or not is a house rule and not RAW. So there is no standard to this.


RAW, the standard is WPs stack "very rarely."
RAW, the standard is that Sai use WP Forked or WP Knife.

RAW seems to conflict with the idea that WPs stack as a default.
Annual Best Poster of the Year Awards (2012)

"That rifle on the wall of the laborer's cottage or working class flat is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there." -George Orwell

Check out my Author Page on Amazon!
User avatar
Blue_Lion
Knight
Posts: 6226
Joined: Tue Oct 16, 2001 1:01 am
Location: Clone Lab 27

Re: Do staves get W.P Blunt bonuses and W.P. Staff bonuses?

Unread post by Blue_Lion »

Killer Cyborg wrote:
Blue_Lion wrote:They way I see it the book neither says they do or do not stack.(no evidence has been provided that proves they do or do not)
So weather they do or not is a house rule and not RAW. So there is no standard to this.


RAW, the standard is WPs stack "very rarely."
RAW, the standard is that Sai use WP Forked or WP Knife.

RAW seems to conflict with the idea that WPs stack as a default.

What does RAW mean by verry rarely? it is a undifnied term in RAW making it just flavor.
I am sorry but I missed where the Sai reference came from I would need to look at the whole text and not the few words cherry picked to see what it means. But the fact something can use A or B does not prove it can not use them both together.

RAW says they can stack, modified by a undefined term. Verry could refer to the chances of it happen or how often people take the skills that stack or just be irrelevant flavor.

You are miss using "standard"(one of your standards seams more a obscure statement that you are impowering) to make your opinion on how house rules seam correct, and the other side seam wrong.

As I said no definitive evidence has been provided that I have seen that proves that they do not stack. (We do have a statement with a undefined qualifier that they do stack.)
I also have not seen any definitive evidence that they do stack by default.

So as I said nothing provided had proven either side is correct and can be called the standard on this.
So there is no standard only how people think the game should work or "House Rules".
Replace "standard" with the "books say".


****Looking through this topic I did not find where the Sai was stated as using WP forked or knife. That means you are presenting a new claim of evidence please provide the source of this claim. *******As it stands now it is not something that I seen presented as evidence with a book cited so is not part of any evidence, and until you provide a source is a unsupported claim. The source text of the claim would need to be looked to see how it was used, for it to be considered evidence.
The Clones are coming you shall all be replaced, but who is to say you have not been replaced already.

Master of Type-O and the obvios.

Soon my army oc clones and winged-monkies will rule the world but first, must .......

I may debate canon and RAW, but the games I run are highly house ruled. So I am not debating for how I play but about how the system works as written.
User avatar
Killer Cyborg
Priest
Posts: 27954
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2001 2:01 am
Comment: "Your Eloquence with a sledge hammer is a beautiful thing..." -Zer0 Kay
Location: In the ocean, punching oncoming waves
Contact:

Re: Do staves get W.P Blunt bonuses and W.P. Staff bonuses?

Unread post by Killer Cyborg »

Blue_Lion wrote:
Killer Cyborg wrote:
Blue_Lion wrote:They way I see it the book neither says they do or do not stack.(no evidence has been provided that proves they do or do not)
So weather they do or not is a house rule and not RAW. So there is no standard to this.


RAW, the standard is WPs stack "very rarely."
RAW, the standard is that Sai use WP Forked or WP Knife.

RAW seems to conflict with the idea that WPs stack as a default.

What does RAW mean by verry rarely? it is a undifnied term in RAW making it just flavor.


No. Being an undefined term makes it an undefined term.
That's not the same as flavor.

I am sorry but I missed where the Sai reference came from I would need to look at the whole text and not the few words cherry picked to see what it means.


Apology not accepted.
Reread the thread.

But the fact something can use A or B does not prove it can not use them both together.


Yes, it does. That is the definition of the word "or," its sole purpose in being.

RAW says they can stack, modified by a undefined term.


No, RAW does not say that.

You are miss using "standard"(one of your standards seams more a obscure statement that you are impowering) to make your opinion on how house rules seam correct, and the other side seam wrong.


No idea what you're talking about there.

As I said no definitive evidence has been provided that I have seen that proves that they do not stack. (We do have a statement with a undefined qualifier that they do stack.)
I also have not seen any definitive evidence that they do stack by default.


:ok:

So as I said nothing provided had proven either side is correct and can be called the standard on this.
So there is no standard only how people think the game should work or "House Rules".
Replace "standard" with the "books say".


RAI is a standard.
Annual Best Poster of the Year Awards (2012)

"That rifle on the wall of the laborer's cottage or working class flat is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there." -George Orwell

Check out my Author Page on Amazon!
User avatar
Blue_Lion
Knight
Posts: 6226
Joined: Tue Oct 16, 2001 1:01 am
Location: Clone Lab 27

Re: Do staves get W.P Blunt bonuses and W.P. Staff bonuses?

Unread post by Blue_Lion »

Killer Cyborg wrote:
Blue_Lion wrote:
Killer Cyborg wrote:
Blue_Lion wrote:They way I see it the book neither says they do or do not stack.(no evidence has been provided that proves they do or do not)
So weather they do or not is a house rule and not RAW. So there is no standard to this.


RAW, the standard is WPs stack "very rarely."
RAW, the standard is that Sai use WP Forked or WP Knife.

RAW seems to conflict with the idea that WPs stack as a default.

What does RAW mean by verry rarely? it is a undifnied term in RAW making it just flavor.


No. Being an undefined term makes it an undefined term.
That's not the same as flavor.

I am sorry but I missed where the Sai reference came from I would need to look at the whole text and not the few words cherry picked to see what it means.


Apology not accepted.
Reread the thread.

But the fact something can use A or B does not prove it can not use them both together.


Yes, it does. That is the definition of the word "or," its sole purpose in being.

RAW says they can stack, modified by a undefined term.


No, RAW does not say that.

You are miss using "standard"(one of your standards seams more a obscure statement that you are impowering) to make your opinion on how house rules seam correct, and the other side seam wrong.


No idea what you're talking about there.

As I said no definitive evidence has been provided that I have seen that proves that they do not stack. (We do have a statement with a undefined qualifier that they do stack.)
I also have not seen any definitive evidence that they do stack by default.


:ok:

So as I said nothing provided had proven either side is correct and can be called the standard on this.
So there is no standard only how people think the game should work or "House Rules".
Replace "standard" with the "books say".


RAI is a standard.

I checked the whole thread and could not find the source of the claim listed. The first time it appears was this page. The apology was me owning not knowing where it was presented. I did check the whole thread, the first time I saw that claim appear was when you made it on this page. So instead of being rude provide a source or with draw the claim.

RAW is the standard but the standard does not say if it stacks or not.

I may have been unclear RAW does not say specifically WP do stack just that WP can stack. With what can stack modified by a undefined term.
The Clones are coming you shall all be replaced, but who is to say you have not been replaced already.

Master of Type-O and the obvios.

Soon my army oc clones and winged-monkies will rule the world but first, must .......

I may debate canon and RAW, but the games I run are highly house ruled. So I am not debating for how I play but about how the system works as written.
User avatar
Killer Cyborg
Priest
Posts: 27954
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2001 2:01 am
Comment: "Your Eloquence with a sledge hammer is a beautiful thing..." -Zer0 Kay
Location: In the ocean, punching oncoming waves
Contact:

Re: Do staves get W.P Blunt bonuses and W.P. Staff bonuses?

Unread post by Killer Cyborg »

Blue_Lion wrote:I checked the whole thread and could not find the source of the claim listed. The first time it appears was this page. The apology was me owning not knowing where it was presented. I did check the whole thread, the first time I saw that claim appear was when you made it on this page. So instead of being rude provide a source or with draw the claim.


I withdraw the claim; I misremembered.

Instead, substitute the following claim:

RUE mentions Sai under WP Forked, yet Rifts Japan 119 lists Sai as being "WP Category: Knife."
The Japan entry might be considered to be a correction of the previous description, but the two listings are not possibly concurrent, as the WP Category listing is something that excludes other categories as written.

The weapon in Rifts: Japan that does specify "or" is the Shikomi-Zue, which is listed as being WP category "Staff or Spear."

Your apology is accepted.
My apology is offered.

RAW is the standard but the standard does not say if it stacks or not.


RAW is a standard.
So is RAI.

I may have been unclear RAW does not say specifically WP do stack just that WP can stack. With what can stack modified by a undefined term.


Agreed.
Annual Best Poster of the Year Awards (2012)

"That rifle on the wall of the laborer's cottage or working class flat is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there." -George Orwell

Check out my Author Page on Amazon!
User avatar
Blue_Lion
Knight
Posts: 6226
Joined: Tue Oct 16, 2001 1:01 am
Location: Clone Lab 27

Re: Do staves get W.P Blunt bonuses and W.P. Staff bonuses?

Unread post by Blue_Lion »

RAI is a guess at how you think it should work and as it requires a guess can not be presented as a standard. What in writing is the standard, what you think the writers intended if not in writing is a guess and can not be a standard as different people can read the same text and get a different impression of intent.

I was under the impression that WP was first introduced to rifts in Japan. RUE came much later so japan can not be correcting RUE but RUE can correct japan.
(My personal judgement would be only weapons specifically listed in multiple WP in rue or later have a chance to stack by most currant RAW. Because RUE did rewrite the base rules and change some of the WP. The logic being if a weapon is not listed specifically then it is a GM call if it is in more than one WP. That is not saying they will stack but I would be more willing to rule it does for them. But that is just how I fill about it.)

Staff and spear would have entirely different ways to be wielded so I can clearly see why they would use an or in that case. It does not prove that WP do not stack but would imply that weapon can be used two different ways.

Apology accepted.
We all make mistakes, after all to error is human but to really fowl things up takes a computer.
The Clones are coming you shall all be replaced, but who is to say you have not been replaced already.

Master of Type-O and the obvios.

Soon my army oc clones and winged-monkies will rule the world but first, must .......

I may debate canon and RAW, but the games I run are highly house ruled. So I am not debating for how I play but about how the system works as written.
User avatar
Killer Cyborg
Priest
Posts: 27954
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2001 2:01 am
Comment: "Your Eloquence with a sledge hammer is a beautiful thing..." -Zer0 Kay
Location: In the ocean, punching oncoming waves
Contact:

Re: Do staves get W.P Blunt bonuses and W.P. Staff bonuses?

Unread post by Killer Cyborg »

Blue_Lion wrote:RAI is a guess


No.
RAI is the rules as the author(s) intended them.
I might have a guess at what that might be.
You might have a guess at what that might be.
We both might be right. We both might be wrong. One of us might be right, and the other wrong.
But our guesses are not RAI--they are only guesses at what RAI might be.

Unless an author spells out intent, in which case we know RAI as essentially fact.

Quit pretending that our guesses are the same as RAI--they're very, very, very clearly NOT the same.
Just like when there's a mystery box, and you or I might guess what's inside. Our guesses are NOT what's inside, unless we happen to be right.
But that doesn't mean that there's nothing inside, nor does it mean that our guesses are the only thing that exists.
There is something inside of the box. We might know what it is. We might guess what it is.
But that doesn't mean that there's nothing in the box.

I was under the impression that WP was first introduced to rifts in Japan. RUE came much later so japan can not be correcting RUE but RUE can correct japan.


Which WP?

(My personal judgement would be only weapons specifically listed in multiple WP in rue or later have a chance to stack by most currant RAW. Because RUE did rewrite the base rules and change some of the WP. The logic being if a weapon is not listed specifically then it is a GM call if it is in more than one WP. That is not saying they will stack but I would be more willing to rule it does for them. But that is just how I fill about it.)


Noted.

Staff and spear would have entirely different ways to be wielded


Source?

so I can clearly see why they would use an or in that case. It does not prove that WP do not stack but would imply that weapon can be used two different ways.


I can see why such an implication might be interpreted.

Apology accepted.
We all make mistakes, after all to error is human but to really fowl things up takes a computer.


:ok:
Annual Best Poster of the Year Awards (2012)

"That rifle on the wall of the laborer's cottage or working class flat is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there." -George Orwell

Check out my Author Page on Amazon!
User avatar
Blue_Lion
Knight
Posts: 6226
Joined: Tue Oct 16, 2001 1:01 am
Location: Clone Lab 27

Re: Do staves get W.P Blunt bonuses and W.P. Staff bonuses?

Unread post by Blue_Lion »

Killer Cyborg wrote:
Blue_Lion wrote:RAI is a guess


No.
RAI is the rules as the author(s) intended them.
I might have a guess at what that might be.
You might have a guess at what that might be.
We both might be right. We both might be wrong. One of us might be right, and the other wrong.
But our guesses are not RAI--they are only guesses at what RAI might be.

Unless an author spells out intent, in which case we know RAI as essentially fact.

Quit pretending that our guesses are the same as RAI--they're very, very, very clearly NOT the same.
Just like when there's a mystery box, and you or I might guess what's inside. Our guesses are NOT what's inside, unless we happen to be right.
But that doesn't mean that there's nothing inside, nor does it mean that our guesses are the only thing that exists.
There is something inside of the box. We might know what it is. We might guess what it is.
But that doesn't mean that there's nothing in the box.

I was under the impression that WP was first introduced to rifts in Japan. RUE came much later so japan can not be correcting RUE but RUE can correct japan.


Which WP?

(My personal judgement would be only weapons specifically listed in multiple WP in rue or later have a chance to stack by most currant RAW. Because RUE did rewrite the base rules and change some of the WP. The logic being if a weapon is not listed specifically then it is a GM call if it is in more than one WP. That is not saying they will stack but I would be more willing to rule it does for them. But that is just how I fill about it.)


Noted.

Staff and spear would have entirely different ways to be wielded


Source?

so I can clearly see why they would use an or in that case. It does not prove that WP do not stack but would imply that weapon can be used two different ways.


I can see why such an implication might be interpreted.

Apology accepted.
We all make mistakes, after all to error is human but to really fowl things up takes a computer.


:ok:
If the writer puts their intent in writing(or other published medium) we know it, if it is not in writing it is a guess you might think it is a logical guess but still a guess. Other people may read the same text and get a different impression or guess of intent so intent is not something we know but something we guess at and as such not something that can be used as a standard.

WP fork first time I saw it in rifts was in rifts japan.(sorry I was not clear.)

Source is real world knowledge that a spear is primarily a thrusting weapon while staff is a striking weapon, so it is not part of RAW but my opinion. That is why it is something I can see.
The Clones are coming you shall all be replaced, but who is to say you have not been replaced already.

Master of Type-O and the obvios.

Soon my army oc clones and winged-monkies will rule the world but first, must .......

I may debate canon and RAW, but the games I run are highly house ruled. So I am not debating for how I play but about how the system works as written.
guardiandashi
Hero
Posts: 1437
Joined: Wed Nov 27, 2013 12:21 am

Re: Do staves get W.P Blunt bonuses and W.P. Staff bonuses?

Unread post by guardiandashi »

Blue_Lion wrote:
Source is real world knowledge that a spear is primarily a thrusting weapon while staff is a striking weapon, so it is not part of RAW but my opinion. That is why it is something I can see.


Technically a spear is actually a staff with a pointy end.
Yes they may be different lengths and a bunch of other differences but that is the basic difference.

With that said I believe a lot of staff fighting involves using it as a long blunt thing with occasional thrust strikes.
Whereas the spear gets used for thrusting significantly more.
User avatar
Axelmania
Knight
Posts: 5523
Joined: Sun Dec 27, 2015 1:13 pm

Re: Do staves get W.P Blunt bonuses and W.P. Staff bonuses?

Unread post by Axelmania »

Killer Cyborg wrote:in 37 years worth of books, you'd think there would be at least ONE example of the WPs stacking.

I wouldn't, because NPCs rarely go into detail about combat bonuses, they simply list WP skills and leave you to figure it out, occasionally listing 1-2 key weapons that the NPC uses more often. Blunt/Staff have not consistently coexisted in all of the RPGs the company has put out, so they would not coincide that often. Rifts originally just had Blunt, Staff got added later.

Killer Cyborg wrote:
Blunt wouldn't be redundant if it was a 'better of the two' situation, because it is BETTER.

How do you figure?

Already went over this in January:
Axelmania wrote:WP Staff has inferior bonuses to WP Blunt (Blunt is S&P 1/3/6/9/12 Staff is S 1/3/7/10/13 P 2/5/8/11/14)

Blunt will always provide, at every single level, a better strike and parry bonuses with staffs/staves than Staff does. 'Better of the two' approach makes Staff pointless, not applying Blunt to staffs/staves ignores the description of the skill.

Unless the purpose of WP Staff is to teach people a less broad and less beneficial form of WP Blunt, its purpose is clearly an add-on to WP Blunt. Same with Shield, which I also brought up:
Axelmania wrote:The one or the other approach you suggest also effectively makes WP Shield pointless in the same way it does WP Staff, because why go for 1/3/7/10/13 parry w/ Shield when you can get 1/3/6/9/12 via Blunt? That's 1 level earlier for the last 3.

Stacking on blunt is the primary use of Shield/Staff aside from trying to be 'Blunt Light' on OCC skills.


That isn't to say you can't enjoy both approaches: OCCs lacking WP Blunt but which start with Shield or Staff would be a good example. They could be intentionally trained only in a limited WP which applies to less lethal implements, intentionally denied the superior WP Blunt training they might encounter optionally via skill selection.

Killer Cyborg wrote:Got a source that it's rare...?

In the sense of % of number of WP that exist which combine.

Killer Cyborg wrote:With the right weapon, such as a sword-axe, why wouldn't it? :roll:

WHAT HAS SCIENCE DONE?

The key distinction is Palladium hasn't, far a I know, published any axe-swords, while all shields/staffs are inherently blunt, as the WP descriptions inform us.

Killer Cyborg wrote:The argument is that WPs stack as a default, unless specified to be an exception, which is the opposite of very rare.

My argument is more broadly that all bonuses stack by default. Bonuses are additive by nature.

Killer Cyborg wrote:Incorrect.

Parry bonuses don't break games. Parries always fail at least 4.75% of the time.

Strike bonuses on melee weapons don't break games. Parries always succeed at least 5% of the time.

Prysus wrote:1: The bonuses from any of the above noted stacking skills tend to be considerably less than stacking two full Weapon Proficiencies on top of each other.

Tendencies don't matter, tendencies are based on all WP, including ones which do not stack.

Blunt 1/3/6/9/12
Staff S 1/3/7/10/13
P 2/5/8/11/14

stack for S/P as follows:
    1st 2/1
    2nd 2/2
    3rd 4/3
    4th 4/3
    5th 4/4
    6th 5/5
    7th 6/5
    8th 6/6
    9th 7/7
    10th 8/7
    11th 8/8
    12th 9/9
    13th 10/9
    14th 10/10

That ends up being better than any other individual WP, sure, but it also costs you 2 skills, just like WP Modern + Sharpshooter, which gives similar strike results.

Prysus wrote:2: Skills such as Sniper require a Called or Aimed shots, which means spending at least one extra melee action/attack just to use it. There's a price to pay for it.

Range is king, regardless. Unless you're an ambush-mater / teleport / machflier able to close into melee range with opponents, the power balance of the game is largely due to ranged weaponry, not variations in melee skill.

Prysus wrote:3: Both Archery and Targeting as well as Sharpshooter explicitly state they stack. This would be completely unnecessary if stacking was default.

Palladium engages in unnecessary reminders frequently. If you say something early, it isn't necessary to state it again later, for example. "Mega Damage : 1d6 MD" stuff for example, unnecessarily tells us the damage type twice.

Engaging in unnecessary things isn't evidence for their necessity.

Prysus wrote:Archery, Sniper, and Sharpshooter all apply to ranged combat. Ranged combat does not gain the benefit of Hand to Hand skills

I seem to recall HTH Assassin giving some bonuses to strike with gunshots.

Out of curiosity, do you recall where it says that strike bonuses from HTH skills do not apply to ancient WP attacks like bowmanship/throwing stars?

Prysus wrote:nor can you add in P.S. damage bonuses.

Similarly, do you recall where it states not to add damage bonuses (broadly, PS or HTH) to thrown weapons?

Prysus wrote:Can anyone actually site any explicit allowance for any non-ranged (a.k.a. melee/hand to hand) W.P. stacking with another W.P.?

The way the WP work are explicit. WP Blunt adds a bonus when using staffs. WP Staff adds a bonus when using staffs. So that's what we do: we add their bonuses when using staffs.

There's no text under either of them talking about them replacing each other, or needing to choose between each other.

What you need is explicit disallowance, to ignore how a WP works, if you want to turn one off when it doesn't say to do that.

Killer Cyborg wrote:RAW, the standard is that Sai use WP Forked or WP Knife.

If I say "I'll date humans or elves" it doesn't preclude me from dating a human and an elf simultaneously. You have a pretty narrow view of what the word 'or' means.

I don't have to say "I'll date humans and elves" to be able to simultaneously court both.

Killer Cyborg wrote:RAI is a standard.

Only in extreme situations, like the plasma cannon metres being an obvious mistake as kilometres.

RAW is standard because intent is pure speculation and assuming intentions is only done in very obvious cases, like a feet>metres conversion correction.

Killer Cyborg wrote:RUE mentions Sai under WP Forked, yet Rifts Japan 119 lists Sai as being "WP Category: Knife."
The Japan entry might be considered to be a correction of the previous description, but the two listings are not possibly concurrent, as the WP Category listing is something that excludes other categories as written.

Neglecting to list every possible category a thing can fall under is not the same as explicitly stating it does not fall under an un-mentioned category.

There have been times that dragons are only referred to as creatures or magic, or only referred to as supernatural beings, for example. Or only referred to as MDC creatures.
Colonel_Tetsuya
Champion
Posts: 2172
Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2012 3:22 am

Re: Do staves get W.P Blunt bonuses and W.P. Staff bonuses?

Unread post by Colonel_Tetsuya »

guardiandashi wrote:
Blue_Lion wrote:
Source is real world knowledge that a spear is primarily a thrusting weapon while staff is a striking weapon, so it is not part of RAW but my opinion. That is why it is something I can see.


Technically a spear is actually a staff with a pointy end.
Yes they may be different lengths and a bunch of other differences but that is the basic difference.

With that said I believe a lot of staff fighting involves using it as a long blunt thing with occasional thrust strikes.
Whereas the spear gets used for thrusting significantly more.


You're both correct and incorrect at the same time.

For one, there are several types of staves and spears - and we're strictly talking Western culture here, as i have little experience with most eastern weapon styles and martial arts.

Spears (in the west) go from being about 38" long, to over 7ft (84") in some cases. They are all wielded slightly differently, but by and large, yes, one (or sometimes both) ends are pointy and its "primarily" a thrusting weapon. The primary difference, as well, as it that it also primarily a military weapon, and a staff is not. A staff is a peasant/commoner/man around town's weapon...

so the differences in wielding them come largely in the forum of how you use them. Spears are almost always used in formations. Staves are almost always used in situations where you're isolated.

However, a man who is taught to use a spear in a military fashion (as some spears were hunting tools, as opposed to weapons of war, and generally speaking, hunting spears actually made poor weapons of war because they were not balanced well for fighting, or had features that made them excel at bringing down animals but decidedly not good for fighting), would learn almost all of the techniques a staff fighter would use as well.

While, most of the time, you're going to be in a formation with your fellow soldiers, in a situation where you find yourself cut off or alone, you learn how to use all parts of the spear offensively, performing strikes with the haft, tripping, hooking, and knocking things down.

Similarly. a staple of western staff fighting, particularly English and French (who used staves as a commoners sidearm much more frequently than a lot of other european countries), ARE thrusts with the butt ends. They were usually tapered (not pointed, but rounded down to about the width of an american 5c piece) and thrusting was a big part of fighting with them - you could rupture internal organs; shatter knees, elbows, or other joints, crush the tops of someones foot, or shatter their ribcage, and crush their throat.

The TLDR version is:

A spearman will spend most of his time trying to thrust because that's where the pointy/sharp bits are and that's how he can do the most damage. When pressed, he will be capable of fighting with his spear similarly to how a staff-wielding expert would fight, but probably not as proficiently - but choking up on the haft, performing blunt strikes, and tripping and hooking were all taught in medieval spear fighting - as backup. You only take those shots "when you have to" - and you try to use the point, primarily (particularly if it is a bladed spear).

A staff-man will spend most of his time trying to his the ends of his staff (the last 2ft or so) as a crushing weapon, particularly targeting joints, calves, forearms, and the opponents head. When pressed, particularly by an opponent whom you out-reach with your staff, you will attempt to thrust to the gut, groin, joints, or throat - as those can all end the fight in your favor without letting the enemy close on you, but again, that's more of a "when you have to" or "when the opportunity presents itself" - most of the time, you use it is as crushing weapon.

Someone who is skilled in fighting with a spear could use a staff just fine - he'd probably treat it more like a spear, thrusting more than a staff fighter would, but he's not going to be clueless about how to work it, and if he has time and a knife, can sharpen one end and make it plenty deadly.

Someone who is skilled in fighting with a staff could use a spear just fine; he'd almost assuredly make a lot of smashing chops with it out of reflex and muscle memory - but he's not going to be defenseless by any means. And, if it is one of the styles of spear that has a substantial blade, some of those chops are a lot more deadly.
Im loving the Foes list; it's the only thing keeping me from tearing out my eyes from the dumb.
User avatar
Blue_Lion
Knight
Posts: 6226
Joined: Tue Oct 16, 2001 1:01 am
Location: Clone Lab 27

Re: Do staves get W.P Blunt bonuses and W.P. Staff bonuses?

Unread post by Blue_Lion »

guardiandashi wrote:
Blue_Lion wrote:
Source is real world knowledge that a spear is primarily a thrusting weapon while staff is a striking weapon, so it is not part of RAW but my opinion. That is why it is something I can see.


Technically a spear is actually a staff with a pointy end.
Yes they may be different lengths and a bunch of other differences but that is the basic difference.

With that said I believe a lot of staff fighting involves using it as a long blunt thing with occasional thrust strikes.
Whereas the spear gets used for thrusting significantly more.

And technically a axe is just a club with a mettle head on one end. But that does not mean it is used like a club.
The head being the main damaging part changes how you use a weapon. A spear your primary attack is to put the pointy end into the target. While a staff may occasionally be thrusted it primarily is used to strike with both ends.
The Clones are coming you shall all be replaced, but who is to say you have not been replaced already.

Master of Type-O and the obvios.

Soon my army oc clones and winged-monkies will rule the world but first, must .......

I may debate canon and RAW, but the games I run are highly house ruled. So I am not debating for how I play but about how the system works as written.
User avatar
eliakon
Palladin
Posts: 9093
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 9:40 pm
Comment: Palladium Books Canon is set solely by Kevin Siembieda, either in person, or by his approval of published material.
Contact:

Re: Do staves get W.P Blunt bonuses and W.P. Staff bonuses?

Unread post by eliakon »

The point that no one here in Team Stack has ever managed to answer is this
if the RGMG says on page 32 that "However, some different WPs may offer an accumulated bonus for the same type of weapon, like Archery and Targeting, or Sharpshooting, but these are very rare."
Then how is it rare if "all WPs automatically stack for any weapon that can be wielded by multiple WPs"

"Default usage" and "Very Rare" are pretty much opposites.

I am still waiting for someone to justify this
The rules are not a bludgeon with which to hammer a character into a game. They are a guide to how a group of friends can get together to weave a collective story that entertains everyone involved. We forget that at our peril.

Edmund Burke wrote:The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."
Colonel_Tetsuya
Champion
Posts: 2172
Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2012 3:22 am

Re: Do staves get W.P Blunt bonuses and W.P. Staff bonuses?

Unread post by Colonel_Tetsuya »

eliakon wrote:The point that no one here in Team Stack has ever managed to answer is this
if the RGMG says on page 32 that "However, some different WPs may offer an accumulated bonus for the same type of weapon, like Archery and Targeting, or Sharpshooting, but these are very rare."
Then how is it rare if "all WPs automatically stack for any weapon that can be wielded by multiple WPs"

"Default usage" and "Very Rare" are pretty much opposites.

I am still waiting for someone to justify this


Not saying i support "team stack", as it were, but it might be considered rare because there are few instances of it occurring, plain and simple.

I just got home a day or two ago, and brought the plague with me, so ive been down and out, but ill look through the books if i get time.

I really dont think there are that many cases where there is overlap. Therefore, it could be considered "Rare".

Edit:

My own opinion (and what is going into my slowly evolving re-write) is that if there are places where WPs overlap/stack, you take the higher bonus, and then add 1 for having a second proficiency. If there are cases where it is covered by more, add 1 for each additional proficiency, to benefit you from focusing but not get too far out of hand.
Im loving the Foes list; it's the only thing keeping me from tearing out my eyes from the dumb.
User avatar
eliakon
Palladin
Posts: 9093
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 9:40 pm
Comment: Palladium Books Canon is set solely by Kevin Siembieda, either in person, or by his approval of published material.
Contact:

Re: Do staves get W.P Blunt bonuses and W.P. Staff bonuses?

Unread post by eliakon »

Another interesting thing from the GMG is that under Forked they explicitly state that "...except for tridents which have their own WP"
Which is odd if you stack WPs then you should be able to take both of them not be required to pick!
The rules are not a bludgeon with which to hammer a character into a game. They are a guide to how a group of friends can get together to weave a collective story that entertains everyone involved. We forget that at our peril.

Edmund Burke wrote:The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."
User avatar
Killer Cyborg
Priest
Posts: 27954
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2001 2:01 am
Comment: "Your Eloquence with a sledge hammer is a beautiful thing..." -Zer0 Kay
Location: In the ocean, punching oncoming waves
Contact:

Re: Do staves get W.P Blunt bonuses and W.P. Staff bonuses?

Unread post by Killer Cyborg »

Blue_Lion wrote:If the writer puts their intent in writing(or other published medium) we know it, if it is not in writing it is a guess


No.
If we don't know it, then I might make a guess about what it is, but it is not a guess.
IT is the writers intent, and that is not a guess.

Other people may read the same text and get a different impression or guess


Same issue exists with RAW.

of intent so intent is not something we know but something we guess at and as such not something that can be used as a standard.


Sounds like you're saying that RAI can be used as a standard when we know what it is, but not when we don't know what it is.
Annual Best Poster of the Year Awards (2012)

"That rifle on the wall of the laborer's cottage or working class flat is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there." -George Orwell

Check out my Author Page on Amazon!
User avatar
Killer Cyborg
Priest
Posts: 27954
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2001 2:01 am
Comment: "Your Eloquence with a sledge hammer is a beautiful thing..." -Zer0 Kay
Location: In the ocean, punching oncoming waves
Contact:

Re: Do staves get W.P Blunt bonuses and W.P. Staff bonuses?

Unread post by Killer Cyborg »

Axelmania wrote:
Killer Cyborg wrote:in 37 years worth of books, you'd think there would be at least ONE example of the WPs stacking.

I wouldn't, because NPCs rarely go into detail about combat bonuses, they simply list WP skills and leave you to figure it out, occasionally listing 1-2 key weapons that the NPC uses more often. Blunt/Staff have not consistently coexisted in all of the RPGs the company has put out, so they would not coincide that often. Rifts originally just had Blunt, Staff got added later.


Okay, so how many years has it been since Staff has been added?

Killer Cyborg wrote:
Blunt wouldn't be redundant if it was a 'better of the two' situation, because it is BETTER.

How do you figure?

Already went over this in January:
Axelmania wrote:WP Staff has inferior bonuses to WP Blunt (Blunt is S&P 1/3/6/9/12 Staff is S 1/3/7/10/13 P 2/5/8/11/14)

Blunt will always provide, at every single level, a better strike and parry bonuses with staffs/staves than Staff does.


Look at your own numbers and do some recounting.
To me, it looks like they're both +5 strike/parry at levels 14 & 15.
Before those levels, the differences in direct combat bonuses are in favor of WP Blunt, but they're also negligible.
And there may be other factors. WP Staff, for example, may be a component in unlocking the Jodu abilities of the Japanese Monks. Or perhaps it's easier to learn, at least in some circumstances.
There could be any number of factors other than pure strike/parry bonuses.

Unless the purpose of WP Staff is to teach people a less broad and less beneficial form of WP Blunt, its purpose is clearly an add-on to WP Blunt.


So unless you're wrong, then you're right...?
;)

Axelmania wrote:The one or the other approach you suggest also effectively makes WP Shield pointless in the same way it does WP Staff, because why go for 1/3/7/10/13 parry w/ Shield when you can get 1/3/6/9/12 via Blunt? That's 1 level earlier for the last 3.

Stacking on blunt is the primary use of Shield/Staff aside from trying to be 'Blunt Light' on OCC skills.


You're hinging all of that on the passage that states that a shield can inflict certain damage when used "as" a blunt weapon, and your personal interpretation that this means that a shield IS a blunt weapon.
So... nice opinion...?

Killer Cyborg wrote:Got a source that it's rare...?

In the sense of % of number of WP that exist which combine.


So no.

Palladium hasn't, far a I know, published any axe-swords, while all shields/staffs are inherently blunt, as the WP descriptions inform us.


No, not all shields are blunt.
No, no WP tells us that shields are blunt.

Killer Cyborg wrote:The argument is that WPs stack as a default, unless specified to be an exception, which is the opposite of very rare.

My argument is more broadly that all bonuses stack by default. Bonuses are additive by nature.


And you believe THAT is the same as "very rare"...?

Killer Cyborg wrote:Incorrect.

Parry bonuses don't break games.


Anything can break a game, if it's broken enough.

Parries always succeed at least 5% of the time.


Your math is wrong; try again.

Killer Cyborg wrote:RAW, the standard is that Sai use WP Forked or WP Knife.

If I say "I'll date humans or elves" it doesn't preclude me from dating a human and an elf simultaneously.


Yeah, it does, if your claim is correct.

Killer Cyborg wrote:RAI is a standard.

Only in extreme situations, like the plasma cannon metres being an obvious mistake as kilometres.


So RAI is a standard "when it's obvious."

RAW is standard because intent is pure speculation and assuming intentions is only done in very obvious cases, like a feet>metres conversion correction.


Any interpretation of RAW includes some degree of assuming RAI.

Killer Cyborg wrote:RUE mentions Sai under WP Forked, yet Rifts Japan 119 lists Sai as being "WP Category: Knife."
The Japan entry might be considered to be a correction of the previous description, but the two listings are not possibly concurrent, as the WP Category listing is something that excludes other categories as written.

Neglecting to list every possible category a thing can fall under is not the same as explicitly stating it does not fall under an un-mentioned category.


"Neglecting to list every possible category" is a pretty funny way of phrasing "specifically listing only one category."
I think we've been over this before: if you want to posit that every weapon stat is only an abbreviated list of possibilities for that weapon, then the meaning of game stats swiftly falls apart.

There have been times that dragons are only referred to as creatures or magic, or only referred to as supernatural beings, for example. Or only referred to as MDC creatures.


THAT is a topic in its own right.
Annual Best Poster of the Year Awards (2012)

"That rifle on the wall of the laborer's cottage or working class flat is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there." -George Orwell

Check out my Author Page on Amazon!
User avatar
Killer Cyborg
Priest
Posts: 27954
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2001 2:01 am
Comment: "Your Eloquence with a sledge hammer is a beautiful thing..." -Zer0 Kay
Location: In the ocean, punching oncoming waves
Contact:

Re: Do staves get W.P Blunt bonuses and W.P. Staff bonuses?

Unread post by Killer Cyborg »

Blue_Lion wrote:
guardiandashi wrote:
Blue_Lion wrote:
Source is real world knowledge that a spear is primarily a thrusting weapon while staff is a striking weapon, so it is not part of RAW but my opinion. That is why it is something I can see.


Technically a spear is actually a staff with a pointy end.
Yes they may be different lengths and a bunch of other differences but that is the basic difference.

With that said I believe a lot of staff fighting involves using it as a long blunt thing with occasional thrust strikes.
Whereas the spear gets used for thrusting significantly more.

And technically a axe is just a club with a mettle head on one end. But that does not mean it is used like a club.
The head being the main damaging part changes how you use a weapon. A spear your primary attack is to put the pointy end into the target. While a staff may occasionally be thrusted it primarily is used to strike with both ends.


Spears and staffs use mostly the same combat moves.
It's not the same as an axe and a club.
Annual Best Poster of the Year Awards (2012)

"That rifle on the wall of the laborer's cottage or working class flat is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there." -George Orwell

Check out my Author Page on Amazon!
User avatar
Blue_Lion
Knight
Posts: 6226
Joined: Tue Oct 16, 2001 1:01 am
Location: Clone Lab 27

Re: Do staves get W.P Blunt bonuses and W.P. Staff bonuses?

Unread post by Blue_Lion »

Killer Cyborg wrote:
Blue_Lion wrote:
guardiandashi wrote:
Blue_Lion wrote:
Source is real world knowledge that a spear is primarily a thrusting weapon while staff is a striking weapon, so it is not part of RAW but my opinion. That is why it is something I can see.


Technically a spear is actually a staff with a pointy end.
Yes they may be different lengths and a bunch of other differences but that is the basic difference.

With that said I believe a lot of staff fighting involves using it as a long blunt thing with occasional thrust strikes.
Whereas the spear gets used for thrusting significantly more.

And technically a axe is just a club with a mettle head on one end. But that does not mean it is used like a club.
The head being the main damaging part changes how you use a weapon. A spear your primary attack is to put the pointy end into the target. While a staff may occasionally be thrusted it primarily is used to strike with both ends.


Spears and staffs use mostly the same combat moves.
It's not the same as an axe and a club.

Wait spears that are often used with a shield use the same combat moves as a staff that is always used two handed?
Please explain, I would like to know how a one handed thrusting weapon uses the same combat moves as a two handed striking weapon.
The Clones are coming you shall all be replaced, but who is to say you have not been replaced already.

Master of Type-O and the obvios.

Soon my army oc clones and winged-monkies will rule the world but first, must .......

I may debate canon and RAW, but the games I run are highly house ruled. So I am not debating for how I play but about how the system works as written.
Colonel_Tetsuya
Champion
Posts: 2172
Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2012 3:22 am

Re: Do staves get W.P Blunt bonuses and W.P. Staff bonuses?

Unread post by Colonel_Tetsuya »

Blue_Lion wrote:
Killer Cyborg wrote:
Blue_Lion wrote:
guardiandashi wrote:
Blue_Lion wrote:
Source is real world knowledge that a spear is primarily a thrusting weapon while staff is a striking weapon, so it is not part of RAW but my opinion. That is why it is something I can see.


Technically a spear is actually a staff with a pointy end.
Yes they may be different lengths and a bunch of other differences but that is the basic difference.

With that said I believe a lot of staff fighting involves using it as a long blunt thing with occasional thrust strikes.
Whereas the spear gets used for thrusting significantly more.

And technically a axe is just a club with a mettle head on one end. But that does not mean it is used like a club.
The head being the main damaging part changes how you use a weapon. A spear your primary attack is to put the pointy end into the target. While a staff may occasionally be thrusted it primarily is used to strike with both ends.


Spears and staffs use mostly the same combat moves.
It's not the same as an axe and a club.

Wait spears that are often used with a shield use the same combat moves as a staff that is always used two handed?
Please explain, I would like to know how a one handed thrusting weapon uses the same combat moves as a two handed striking weapon.


Well, for one, the vast majority of spears are not usable one-handed. Shorter spears (in the 36-44" range) could be used with a shield, but anything much longer than that and it is too forward-heavy to be used with a shield. Most spears require two hands.

Also, there are staves that are ALSO in the 3-4' range, that can be wielded in one hand. That's more eastern-european, though, than western. When you think staff, if you think "quarterstaff" (big 5'-7', 2 1/2" thick staves), you're pretty much only thinking of England and France. The staff was fairly uncommon in central europe, and eastern european staves were shorter (rarely longer than 5') and were largely a weapon used by herdsmen and farmers.

That being said - yes, spears and staves of similar sizes use primarily the same moves, simply with a different emphasis. Spearmen and Staff fighters both learn to thrust and make strikes with the haft of the weapon; a spearman will tend to thrust, but IS trained on how to use the haft to strike, and a staff-fighter will tend to use the haft, but IS trained on how to thrust, particularly at vulnerable joints, the neck, and the tops of the feet.
Im loving the Foes list; it's the only thing keeping me from tearing out my eyes from the dumb.
User avatar
Blue_Lion
Knight
Posts: 6226
Joined: Tue Oct 16, 2001 1:01 am
Location: Clone Lab 27

Re: Do staves get W.P Blunt bonuses and W.P. Staff bonuses?

Unread post by Blue_Lion »

I find the claim that most spears where not usable one handed some what hard to swallow. Only a few countries before the 1400s where known for the use of long spears. In the 1400 spears fall out of common use and where replaced with spear like pole arms. Pikes replaced spear units to fend off Calvary. This was also the time frame that Renascence was gearing up.(Is it possible you are mistaking the use of spear like pole arms for the use of spears after the transition?)

The standard battle tacit for spear units was shield wall, hard to do that if your troops where not using shields.

Any spear to long to be held one handed is a pike, pikes are typically lumped in to pole arms in rpgs.(Pikes are unwieldy in close combat so pike units would have to carry close combat weapons kind of defeats your claim that they where used in close combat as common practice.)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pike_%28weapon%29

This video shows the use of long spears about as tall as the user(so greater than 60 inches) being used with a shield in a formation one handed.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ZVs97QKH-8
That was the typicall use of spears in battle.

What you are describing as spear use seams more like spear like pole arms use.

(I would also think a one handed staff is a club.)
The Clones are coming you shall all be replaced, but who is to say you have not been replaced already.

Master of Type-O and the obvios.

Soon my army oc clones and winged-monkies will rule the world but first, must .......

I may debate canon and RAW, but the games I run are highly house ruled. So I am not debating for how I play but about how the system works as written.
User avatar
Killer Cyborg
Priest
Posts: 27954
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2001 2:01 am
Comment: "Your Eloquence with a sledge hammer is a beautiful thing..." -Zer0 Kay
Location: In the ocean, punching oncoming waves
Contact:

Re: Do staves get W.P Blunt bonuses and W.P. Staff bonuses?

Unread post by Killer Cyborg »

Blue_Lion wrote:
Killer Cyborg wrote:
Blue_Lion wrote:
guardiandashi wrote:
Blue_Lion wrote:
Source is real world knowledge that a spear is primarily a thrusting weapon while staff is a striking weapon, so it is not part of RAW but my opinion. That is why it is something I can see.


Technically a spear is actually a staff with a pointy end.
Yes they may be different lengths and a bunch of other differences but that is the basic difference.

With that said I believe a lot of staff fighting involves using it as a long blunt thing with occasional thrust strikes.
Whereas the spear gets used for thrusting significantly more.

And technically a axe is just a club with a mettle head on one end. But that does not mean it is used like a club.
The head being the main damaging part changes how you use a weapon. A spear your primary attack is to put the pointy end into the target. While a staff may occasionally be thrusted it primarily is used to strike with both ends.


Spears and staffs use mostly the same combat moves.
It's not the same as an axe and a club.

Wait spears that are often used with a shield use the same combat moves as a staff that is always used two handed?
Please explain, I would like to know how a one handed thrusting weapon uses the same combat moves as a two handed striking weapon.


:roll:

Let me rephrase.
There is a wide spectrum of weapons that are called "spears," including any number of javelins, various lances of different lengths dimensions and purposes. WP Spear provides combat moves for all of them.
There is a wide spectrum weapons that are called "staffs," including hanbos, jos, bos, quarterstaffs, and many other weapons of various dimensions and purposes. WP Staff provides combat moves for all of them.

Each of these spectrums have overlapping territory encompassed by a variety of spears and staffs that are only really differentiated from each other by whether or not one end is pointy.
With any such weapons, the training is essentially the same whether the weapon is a staff or a spear.

This does not mean that one uses the same techniques with all staffs and all spears.
This does mean that one uses the same techniques with many common staffs and spears.

Which is why experts in the field often say stuff such as:
http://www.swordsmanship.ca/academy-art ... and-spear/
It could be argued that a staff and spear are two different weapons, but I might argue back that they would be held and used exactly the same way depending on whether or not one held a shield, and the only real difference is whether or not the ends have a point. Both weapons have the same shape and are the same length, each can be used to thrust, strike or throw and it really is only a matter of how many hands you have free as to how you may wield it.
Annual Best Poster of the Year Awards (2012)

"That rifle on the wall of the laborer's cottage or working class flat is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there." -George Orwell

Check out my Author Page on Amazon!
Colonel_Tetsuya
Champion
Posts: 2172
Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2012 3:22 am

Re: Do staves get W.P Blunt bonuses and W.P. Staff bonuses?

Unread post by Colonel_Tetsuya »

Blue_Lion wrote:I find the claim that most spears where not usable one handed some what hard to swallow.


Okay. It's not a claim. It's like... reality.

Only a few countries before the 1400s where known for the use of long spears.


If by "only a few" you mean "all of Europe", then, uh, sure. The most common infantry weapon in Medieval warfare was the spear. Because it was cheap to produce in quantity and extremely effective. Swords were extremely expensive in comparison, and were not issued commonly to every soldier until much later in history. (The core professional soldiers of any given medieval army were armed with swords - but these were, by and large, never more than about 1/5th to 1/3rd of any given army, the rest of which were conscripts and semi-professional militia troops, until much later (1450s and later).

In the 1400 spears fall out of common use and where replaced with spear like pole arms.


Um, not really, no. Polearms were, by and large, the province of professional soldiers and knights. Spears fell out of use because the changing tactics of the day no longer required them, and the accumulating wealth of the various nations meant more and more soldiers could be armed with swords, and, more importantly, heavier and more effective armor. A spear isn't much use against a good brigandine. By this time, most of the troops that would have been using spears were using bows or crossbows, which were more effective against the heavier types of armor now prevalent on the battlefield amongst the professional infantry.

Pikes replaced spear units to fend off Calvary.


Pikes didn't replace spears. Pikes were used independently of spears for different forms of warfare. Pikes, or simple forms of them, were also in use as early as about AD 800.

This was also the time frame that Renascence was gearing up.(Is it possible you are mistaking the use of spear like pole arms for the use of spears after the transition?)


No, not remotely. I have a degree in this stuff. I've also done extensive re-enactment and have transitioned into HEMA (Historical European Martial Arts) in the last five years. One of the areas i specialize in, actually, is pole-arm fighting. Im particularly fond of Halberds and what is called a Lochaber Axe.

The standard battle tacit for spear units was shield wall, hard to do that if your troops where not using shields.


In the Bronze Age, maybe.. but no medieval European power fielded units of men with shields and spears. If they were using shields, they were using swords (or axes, maces, et al - as the individual soldier preferred). There is zero historical evidence that spear and shield lived much past the Bronze Age in most of Europe (as far as infantry goes). Spears, and the lances that grew from them, were commonly used by cavalry with a shield, but not when dismounted.

Any spear to long to be held one handed is a pike,


False. Pikes -start- around 10ft in length and go all the way to 25ft in some extreme cases. The Landschnekts, for instance, carried 18-20ft Pikes.

pikes are typically lumped in to pole arms in rpgs.(Pikes are unwieldy in close combat so pike units would have to carry close combat weapons kind of defeats your claim that they where used in close combat as common practice.)


Pikes are completely unusable individually in combat. If you're just a lone dude standing around with a pike, you're a dead man. But that does NOT mean Pikes were useless in close combat. In fact, pike formations were used more against enemy infantry than cavalry much after the 15th century - a single man with a pike is relatively helpless (which is why pikemen carried sidearms - so they weren't defenseless if their formation was broken) but if you're an infantry unit confronted with an unbroken pike company - your options are run or die. They fought, in many cases, six ranks deep - so even if you manage to get past the first rank of pikes, there are 5 more stabbing at you before you can even close to the range of a sword. There's a reason pike formations ruled the battlefield for almost a century.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pike_%28weapon%29

This video shows the use of long spears about as tall as the user(so greater than 60 inches) being used with a shield in a formation one handed.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ZVs97QKH-8
That was the typicall use of spears in battle.


In the Bronze Age. With a spear whose haft is about 1/2 the thickness of an actual fighting spear used any time past the bronze age. (Largely because the hafts had to be stand up to different abuses and shocks later in history as armor improved and weapons used to counter spears improved). You try that with a 10th century Norman spear, and you wont be able to recover your weapon after a thrust. Youll literally be dragging it back across the ground.

Now, there are some examples of medieval spear and buckler fighting in the 13th-16th centuries - but this is largely for dueling. (Halberd Dueling was a thing, too, and is actually quite elegant).

What you are describing as spear use seams more like spear like pole arms use.

(I would also think a one handed staff is a club.)


You probably also think there are one-handed swords called "long swords" (false) and a lot of other stuff that isn't correct.

A practical one-handed club (and yes, there were two-handed clubs, that aren't staves) tops out around ~30". What differentiates a club and a staff? Clubs often have spikes, stones, and weights on them, and are usually carved/shaped so that the top is wider/heavier than the bottom. Any longer than that and the weight wont make it practical to use in one hand.

A good example would be the Hawaiian Koa War Clubs:

https://www.google.com/search?q=hawaiia ... 4&bih=1221

Now, again, we're talking Europe here. Other cultures continued to use the spear (and used wildly different spears) for a long time after europe largely abandoned it, and certainly used them with shields. (The Zulu are a great example). But this has a lot to do with the kind of battlefield the weapons were being used on - the Zulu were not facing people in plate and brigandine and mail - so their spears could be relatively lightly hafted, and fairly short. A Zulu spear would have been completely ineffectual against a mail hauberk.

I know eastern martial arts used a variety of spears, though im not sure if any eastern cultures used them heavily with shields. Again, though, weapons conform to the battlefield they are on - many chinese swords, for instance, are VERY thin and light. Since most chinese soldiers were conscripts that didn't have armor, this is fine - but such swords would have been very ineffectual against european armor of the day, and probably would have broken if they had come into conflict with european swords of the day. This doesn't make them bad weapons - merely products of their time.
Im loving the Foes list; it's the only thing keeping me from tearing out my eyes from the dumb.
User avatar
Blue_Lion
Knight
Posts: 6226
Joined: Tue Oct 16, 2001 1:01 am
Location: Clone Lab 27

Re: Do staves get W.P Blunt bonuses and W.P. Staff bonuses?

Unread post by Blue_Lion »

Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:
Blue_Lion wrote:I find the claim that most spears where not usable one handed some what hard to swallow.


Okay. It's not a claim. It's like... reality.

Only a few countries before the 1400s where known for the use of long spears.


If by "only a few" you mean "all of Europe", then, uh, sure. The most common infantry weapon in Medieval warfare was the spear. Because it was cheap to produce in quantity and extremely effective. Swords were extremely expensive in comparison, and were not issued commonly to every soldier until much later in history. (The core professional soldiers of any given medieval army were armed with swords - but these were, by and large, never more than about 1/5th to 1/3rd of any given army, the rest of which were conscripts and semi-professional militia troops, until much later (1450s and later).

In the 1400 spears fall out of common use and where replaced with spear like pole arms.


Um, not really, no. Polearms were, by and large, the province of professional soldiers and knights. Spears fell out of use because the changing tactics of the day no longer required them, and the accumulating wealth of the various nations meant more and more soldiers could be armed with swords, and, more importantly, heavier and more effective armor. A spear isn't much use against a good brigandine. By this time, most of the troops that would have been using spears were using bows or crossbows, which were more effective against the heavier types of armor now prevalent on the battlefield amongst the professional infantry.

Pikes replaced spear units to fend off Calvary.


Pikes didn't replace spears. Pikes were used independently of spears for different forms of warfare. Pikes, or simple forms of them, were also in use as early as about AD 800.

This was also the time frame that Renascence was gearing up.(Is it possible you are mistaking the use of spear like pole arms for the use of spears after the transition?)


No, not remotely. I have a degree in this stuff. I've also done extensive re-enactment and have transitioned into HEMA (Historical European Martial Arts) in the last five years. One of the areas i specialize in, actually, is pole-arm fighting. Im particularly fond of Halberds and what is called a Lochaber Axe.

The standard battle tacit for spear units was shield wall, hard to do that if your troops where not using shields.


In the Bronze Age, maybe.. but no medieval European power fielded units of men with shields and spears. If they were using shields, they were using swords (or axes, maces, et al - as the individual soldier preferred). There is zero historical evidence that spear and shield lived much past the Bronze Age in most of Europe (as far as infantry goes). Spears, and the lances that grew from them, were commonly used by cavalry with a shield, but not when dismounted.

Any spear to long to be held one handed is a pike,


False. Pikes -start- around 10ft in length and go all the way to 25ft in some extreme cases. The Landschnekts, for instance, carried 18-20ft Pikes.

pikes are typically lumped in to pole arms in rpgs.(Pikes are unwieldy in close combat so pike units would have to carry close combat weapons kind of defeats your claim that they where used in close combat as common practice.)


Pikes are completely unusable individually in combat. If you're just a lone dude standing around with a pike, you're a dead man. But that does NOT mean Pikes were useless in close combat. In fact, pike formations were used more against enemy infantry than cavalry much after the 15th century - a single man with a pike is relatively helpless (which is why pikemen carried sidearms - so they weren't defenseless if their formation was broken) but if you're an infantry unit confronted with an unbroken pike company - your options are run or die. They fought, in many cases, six ranks deep - so even if you manage to get past the first rank of pikes, there are 5 more stabbing at you before you can even close to the range of a sword. There's a reason pike formations ruled the battlefield for almost a century.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pike_%28weapon%29

This video shows the use of long spears about as tall as the user(so greater than 60 inches) being used with a shield in a formation one handed.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ZVs97QKH-8
That was the typicall use of spears in battle.


In the Bronze Age. With a spear whose haft is about 1/2 the thickness of an actual fighting spear used any time past the bronze age. (Largely because the hafts had to be stand up to different abuses and shocks later in history as armor improved and weapons used to counter spears improved). You try that with a 10th century Norman spear, and you wont be able to recover your weapon after a thrust. Youll literally be dragging it back across the ground.

Now, there are some examples of medieval spear and buckler fighting in the 13th-16th centuries - but this is largely for dueling. (Halberd Dueling was a thing, too, and is actually quite elegant).

What you are describing as spear use seams more like spear like pole arms use.

(I would also think a one handed staff is a club.)


You probably also think there are one-handed swords called "long swords" (false) and a lot of other stuff that isn't correct.

A practical one-handed club (and yes, there were two-handed clubs, that aren't staves) tops out around ~30". What differentiates a club and a staff? Clubs often have spikes, stones, and weights on them, and are usually carved/shaped so that the top is wider/heavier than the bottom. Any longer than that and the weight wont make it practical to use in one hand.

A good example would be the Hawaiian Koa War Clubs:

https://www.google.com/search?q=hawaiia ... 4&bih=1221

Now, again, we're talking Europe here. Other cultures continued to use the spear (and used wildly different spears) for a long time after europe largely abandoned it, and certainly used them with shields. (The Zulu are a great example). But this has a lot to do with the kind of battlefield the weapons were being used on - the Zulu were not facing people in plate and brigandine and mail - so their spears could be relatively lightly hafted, and fairly short. A Zulu spear would have been completely ineffectual against a mail hauberk.

I know eastern martial arts used a variety of spears, though im not sure if any eastern cultures used them heavily with shields. Again, though, weapons conform to the battlefield they are on - many chinese swords, for instance, are VERY thin and light. Since most chinese soldiers were conscripts that didn't have armor, this is fine - but such swords would have been very ineffectual against european armor of the day, and probably would have broken if they had come into conflict with european swords of the day. This doesn't make them bad weapons - merely products of their time.


So let me get this straight you have no real support for your claim other than making a statement that it is reality? In other words your whole claim is BS, thanks good to know.

"a spear becomes a pike when it is too long to be wielded with one hand in combat."
"The pike was a long weapon, varying considerably in size, from 3 to 7.5 metres (10 to 25 feet) long. "
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pike_%28weapon%29
Seams the facts support my claim with nothing supporting your claim other than your claim of reality.
(listing the changing of tech that changed war far does not change the fact that spears fell out of favor in use in Europe during the 1400 and the ones that where left where pikes.)
You have presented no support for your claim that spears greater than 44 inches can not be used one handed. (and are dismissive of evidence showing that they can be used one handed.)
Spears where the main weapon of shield walls as the thrusting weapon could be used with less risk of disrupting the tight formation.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6p93xUp9GrQ

He also had no problem holding this spear one handed

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IjqwZrEnJTU



I have seen no evidence and have no experience in training with spears of being unable to use a 5-6' spear one handed. Spears are defined as primarly a thrusting/throwing weapon weapon.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/spear



A weighted and spiked club is sub class called mace. Typically maces had spikes , or a weighted head any peace of wood picked up and used to bash is a club.
https://www.google.com/search?q=billy+c ... 40&bih=767

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/club
(well that seams to support my claim that a one handed staff would be a club.)
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/mace
Heavy often spiked club.

You are playing fast and loose with claims with no support. A mace is a type of club but not all clubs are maces. Not all clubs are weighted.

At this point it is clear you are making un suported claims and using poor research into the topic, while trying to sound like an expert.
Last edited by Blue_Lion on Sat May 27, 2017 7:12 pm, edited 1 time in total.
The Clones are coming you shall all be replaced, but who is to say you have not been replaced already.

Master of Type-O and the obvios.

Soon my army oc clones and winged-monkies will rule the world but first, must .......

I may debate canon and RAW, but the games I run are highly house ruled. So I am not debating for how I play but about how the system works as written.
User avatar
Killer Cyborg
Priest
Posts: 27954
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2001 2:01 am
Comment: "Your Eloquence with a sledge hammer is a beautiful thing..." -Zer0 Kay
Location: In the ocean, punching oncoming waves
Contact:

Re: Do staves get W.P Blunt bonuses and W.P. Staff bonuses?

Unread post by Killer Cyborg »

Blue_Lion wrote: "a spear becomes a pike when it is too long to be wielded with one hand in combat."


Any reason you didn't include the entire quote:
"Generally, a spear becomes a pike when it is too long to be wielded with one hand in combat."
:?
Annual Best Poster of the Year Awards (2012)

"That rifle on the wall of the laborer's cottage or working class flat is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there." -George Orwell

Check out my Author Page on Amazon!
User avatar
Blue_Lion
Knight
Posts: 6226
Joined: Tue Oct 16, 2001 1:01 am
Location: Clone Lab 27

Re: Do staves get W.P Blunt bonuses and W.P. Staff bonuses?

Unread post by Blue_Lion »

Killer Cyborg wrote:
Blue_Lion wrote: "a spear becomes a pike when it is too long to be wielded with one hand in combat."


Any reason you didn't include the entire quote:
"Generally, a spear becomes a pike when it is too long to be wielded with one hand in combat."
:?

Cut and past error.
his claim was "Shorter spears (in the 36-44" range) could be used with a shield, but anything much longer than that and it is too forward-heavy to be used with a shield. Most spears require two hands."

Most videos with spear and shield show spears greater than 48 inches being used.

A spear that can be used one handed can be used with a shield, the part from pike sets a general length that a spear becomes incapable of being used one handed at some where near 10' or 120 inches. Well past his claim of 44 inches.
Pikes replaced spears in the 14th century as a common infantry weapon. the general rule is a spear becomes a pike when it is to long to be used one handed.

That means if most spears could not be used one handed do to size, they would have generally been pikes before then so the 6-8 spear being replaced by a pike means that generally 6-8 spear could be used one handed.


Most spear like pole arms do require two hands to use whoever there is no evidence provided that most spears do require two hands.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spear
Broadly speaking, spears were either designed to be used in melee, or to be thrown. Within this simple classification, there was a remarkable range of types. For example, M.J. Swanton identified thirty different spearhead categories and sub-categories in Early Saxon England.[16] Most medieval spearheads were generally leaf-shaped. Notable types of Early medieval spears include the angon, a throwing spear with a long head similar to the Roman pilum, used by the Franks and Anglo-Saxons and the winged (or lugged) spear, which had two prominent wings at the base of the spearhead, either to prevent the spear penetrating too far into an enemy or to aid in spear fencing.[17] Originally a Frankish weapon, the winged spear also was popular with the Vikings. It would become the ancestor of later medieval polearms, such as the partisan and spetum.

The thrusting spear also has the advantage of reach, being considerably longer than other weapon types. Exact spear lengths are hard to deduce as few spear shafts survive archaeologically but 6 ft. – 8 ft. (1.8m – 2.5m) would seem to have been the norm. Some nations were noted for their long spears, including the Scots and the Flemish. Spears usually were used in tightly ordered formations, such as the shieldwall or the schiltron. To resist cavalry, spear shafts could be planted against the ground.[18] William Wallace drew up his schiltrons in a circle at the Battle of Falkirk in 1298 to deter charging cavalry,[19] it was a widespread tactic sometimes known as the "crown" formation.[20]

Throwing spears became rarer as the Middle Ages drew on, but survived in the hands of specialists such as the Catalan Almogavars.[21] They were commonly used in Ireland until the end of the 16th century.[22]

Spears began to lose fashion among the infantry during the 14th century, being replaced by pole weapons that combined the thrusting properties of the spear with the cutting properties of the axe, such as the halberd. Where spears were retained they grew in length, eventually evolving into pikes, which would be a dominant infantry weapon in the 16th and 17th centuries
The Clones are coming you shall all be replaced, but who is to say you have not been replaced already.

Master of Type-O and the obvios.

Soon my army oc clones and winged-monkies will rule the world but first, must .......

I may debate canon and RAW, but the games I run are highly house ruled. So I am not debating for how I play but about how the system works as written.
Colonel_Tetsuya
Champion
Posts: 2172
Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2012 3:22 am

Re: Do staves get W.P Blunt bonuses and W.P. Staff bonuses?

Unread post by Colonel_Tetsuya »

Blue_Lion wrote:
Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:
Blue_Lion wrote:I find the claim that most spears where not usable one handed some what hard to swallow.


Okay. It's not a claim. It's like... reality.

Only a few countries before the 1400s where known for the use of long spears.


If by "only a few" you mean "all of Europe", then, uh, sure. The most common infantry weapon in Medieval warfare was the spear. Because it was cheap to produce in quantity and extremely effective. Swords were extremely expensive in comparison, and were not issued commonly to every soldier until much later in history. (The core professional soldiers of any given medieval army were armed with swords - but these were, by and large, never more than about 1/5th to 1/3rd of any given army, the rest of which were conscripts and semi-professional militia troops, until much later (1450s and later).

In the 1400 spears fall out of common use and where replaced with spear like pole arms.


Um, not really, no. Polearms were, by and large, the province of professional soldiers and knights. Spears fell out of use because the changing tactics of the day no longer required them, and the accumulating wealth of the various nations meant more and more soldiers could be armed with swords, and, more importantly, heavier and more effective armor. A spear isn't much use against a good brigandine. By this time, most of the troops that would have been using spears were using bows or crossbows, which were more effective against the heavier types of armor now prevalent on the battlefield amongst the professional infantry.

Pikes replaced spear units to fend off Calvary.


Pikes didn't replace spears. Pikes were used independently of spears for different forms of warfare. Pikes, or simple forms of them, were also in use as early as about AD 800.

This was also the time frame that Renascence was gearing up.(Is it possible you are mistaking the use of spear like pole arms for the use of spears after the transition?)


No, not remotely. I have a degree in this stuff. I've also done extensive re-enactment and have transitioned into HEMA (Historical European Martial Arts) in the last five years. One of the areas i specialize in, actually, is pole-arm fighting. Im particularly fond of Halberds and what is called a Lochaber Axe.

The standard battle tacit for spear units was shield wall, hard to do that if your troops where not using shields.


In the Bronze Age, maybe.. but no medieval European power fielded units of men with shields and spears. If they were using shields, they were using swords (or axes, maces, et al - as the individual soldier preferred). There is zero historical evidence that spear and shield lived much past the Bronze Age in most of Europe (as far as infantry goes). Spears, and the lances that grew from them, were commonly used by cavalry with a shield, but not when dismounted.

Any spear to long to be held one handed is a pike,


False. Pikes -start- around 10ft in length and go all the way to 25ft in some extreme cases. The Landschnekts, for instance, carried 18-20ft Pikes.

pikes are typically lumped in to pole arms in rpgs.(Pikes are unwieldy in close combat so pike units would have to carry close combat weapons kind of defeats your claim that they where used in close combat as common practice.)


Pikes are completely unusable individually in combat. If you're just a lone dude standing around with a pike, you're a dead man. But that does NOT mean Pikes were useless in close combat. In fact, pike formations were used more against enemy infantry than cavalry much after the 15th century - a single man with a pike is relatively helpless (which is why pikemen carried sidearms - so they weren't defenseless if their formation was broken) but if you're an infantry unit confronted with an unbroken pike company - your options are run or die. They fought, in many cases, six ranks deep - so even if you manage to get past the first rank of pikes, there are 5 more stabbing at you before you can even close to the range of a sword. There's a reason pike formations ruled the battlefield for almost a century.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pike_%28weapon%29

This video shows the use of long spears about as tall as the user(so greater than 60 inches) being used with a shield in a formation one handed.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ZVs97QKH-8
That was the typicall use of spears in battle.


In the Bronze Age. With a spear whose haft is about 1/2 the thickness of an actual fighting spear used any time past the bronze age. (Largely because the hafts had to be stand up to different abuses and shocks later in history as armor improved and weapons used to counter spears improved). You try that with a 10th century Norman spear, and you wont be able to recover your weapon after a thrust. Youll literally be dragging it back across the ground.

Now, there are some examples of medieval spear and buckler fighting in the 13th-16th centuries - but this is largely for dueling. (Halberd Dueling was a thing, too, and is actually quite elegant).

What you are describing as spear use seams more like spear like pole arms use.

(I would also think a one handed staff is a club.)


You probably also think there are one-handed swords called "long swords" (false) and a lot of other stuff that isn't correct.

A practical one-handed club (and yes, there were two-handed clubs, that aren't staves) tops out around ~30". What differentiates a club and a staff? Clubs often have spikes, stones, and weights on them, and are usually carved/shaped so that the top is wider/heavier than the bottom. Any longer than that and the weight wont make it practical to use in one hand.

A good example would be the Hawaiian Koa War Clubs:

https://www.google.com/search?q=hawaiia ... 4&bih=1221

Now, again, we're talking Europe here. Other cultures continued to use the spear (and used wildly different spears) for a long time after europe largely abandoned it, and certainly used them with shields. (The Zulu are a great example). But this has a lot to do with the kind of battlefield the weapons were being used on - the Zulu were not facing people in plate and brigandine and mail - so their spears could be relatively lightly hafted, and fairly short. A Zulu spear would have been completely ineffectual against a mail hauberk.

I know eastern martial arts used a variety of spears, though im not sure if any eastern cultures used them heavily with shields. Again, though, weapons conform to the battlefield they are on - many chinese swords, for instance, are VERY thin and light. Since most chinese soldiers were conscripts that didn't have armor, this is fine - but such swords would have been very ineffectual against european armor of the day, and probably would have broken if they had come into conflict with european swords of the day. This doesn't make them bad weapons - merely products of their time.


So let me get this straight you have no real support for your claim other than making a statement that it is reality? In other words your whole claim is BS, thanks good to know.


Other than BFA in Medieval History, specifically warfare and weaponry, yeah, no support at all.

"a spear becomes a pike when it is too long to be wielded with one hand in combat."
"The pike was a long weapon, varying considerably in size, from 3 to 7.5 metres (10 to 25 feet) long. "
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pike_%28weapon%29


.. yeah, Wikipedia is an AMAZING source of correct information about period weaponry.

Seams the facts support my claim with nothing supporting your claim other than your claim of reality.


Wikipedia is not "the facts". Seriously. You could, oh, i dont know, take ten seconds to look up what actual historians and people who study this stuff say.
Lets do an experiment:

If you have a broom handle available, i want you to take it, and find something that weighs about... 3/4 of a lb, and duct tape it to the end of the broom handle. Now, put your left hand about 3/4 of the way up the shaft, and your right at the back (if you're right handed). Thrust it out to full extension, removing your left hand.

Watch what happens.

Now understand that a broom handle is about 1/3 the weight of a proper spear haft, and about a foot to a foot and a half shorter. And missing about another 8oz of weight on the end.

You cant wield it effectively with one hand.

Alternatively, if you have a stainless steel headed shovel, that's about right as well. Try drop-thrusting that out to full extension and let me know how that goes.

(listing the changing of tech that changed war far does not change the fact that spears fell out of favor in use in Europe during the 1400 and the ones that where left where pikes.)
You have presented no support for your claim that spears greater than 44 inches can not be used one handed.


Just physics. Seriously, try it out.

Spears where the main weapon of shield walls


In the Bronze Age. Not even the romans used spears in the shield wall. The Pilum was a specially designed throwing spear with a soft iron haft meant to bend after it penetrated the enemy shield as it was thrown. When they closed... they used the Gladius.

Literally no medieval european armies used spears and shields as a primary armament. None. Zero many. Vikings/Norsemen? Sword and shield. Francs? Sword and Shield. Normans? Sword and Shield. Poles? Sword and Shield - usually from horseback. Spaniards? sword and shield. (You can substitute "one handed weapon of choice" in there for "sword" as axes, maces, and warhammers were used consistently (if not by the majority). Italians? Sword and shield.

I mean.. unless all of the historical texts, iconography, and arch. evidence are wrong somehow.

as the thrusting weapon could be used with less risk of disrupting the tight formation.


Thrusting with a sword doesn't disrupt a shield formation any more than a spear would. Less, honestly, as you dont have as much weight dragging around behind you and a sword blade is significantly slimmer than a spear haft. (Seriously, if you were thrusting with a 5-6' spear out of a formation, you'd be jamming the butt of the spear into the guy behind you every time you struck - not ideal). Not that medieval shield formations were meant to stick close to together. They only stuck extremely close together during closing (so their shields could provide each other cover against projectile fire). Once they got close enough, it was charge-and-get-stuck-in time (usually in attempt to break the enemy formation into smaller pieces so it could be beaten easier). You tried to use your heavy foot against the opponents more lightly armed and armored men, if you could, and he tried to do the same to you.

Maneuver tactics didn't really pick back up until the late 13th century, when even more common soldiers were fairly well equipped in armor, and sticking together in a tight formation more necessary to bring the correct amount of force of arms against an opponent to successfully overwhelm them.

(your claim was that most spears where used two handed and used to strike not primary as a thrusting weapon but as a striking weapon. \


Yeah except you're completely inventing that. Here, ill go back and quote myself so you can see what i actually said:

Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:
You're both correct and incorrect at the same time.

For one, there are several types of staves and spears - and we're strictly talking Western culture here, as i have little experience with most eastern weapon styles and martial arts.

Spears (in the west) go from being about 38" long, to over 7ft (84") in some cases. They are all wielded slightly differently, but by and large, yes, one (or sometimes both) ends are pointy and its "primarily" a thrusting weapon The primary difference, as well, as it that it also primarily a military weapon, and a staff is not. A staff is a peasant/commoner/man around town's weapon...

so the differences in wielding them come largely in the forum of how you use them. Spears are almost always used in formations. Staves are almost always used in situations where you're isolated.

However, a man who is taught to use a spear in a military fashion (as some spears were hunting tools, as opposed to weapons of war, and generally speaking, hunting spears actually made poor weapons of war because they were not balanced well for fighting, or had features that made them excel at bringing down animals but decidedly not good for fighting), would learn almost all of the techniques a staff fighter would use as well.

While, most of the time, you're going to be in a formation with your fellow soldiers, in a situation where you find yourself cut off or alone, you learn how to use all parts of the spear offensively, performing strikes with the haft, tripping, hooking, and knocking things down.

Similarly. a staple of western staff fighting, particularly English and French (who used staves as a commoners sidearm much more frequently than a lot of other european countries), ARE thrusts with the butt ends. They were usually tapered (not pointed, but rounded down to about the width of an american 5c piece) and thrusting was a big part of fighting with them - you could rupture internal organs; shatter knees, elbows, or other joints, crush the tops of someones foot, or shatter their ribcage, and crush their throat.

The TLDR version is:

A spearman will spend most of his time trying to thrust because that's where the pointy/sharp bits are and that's how he can do the most damage. When pressed, he will be capable of fighting with his spear similarly to how a staff-wielding expert would fight, but probably not as proficiently - but choking up on the haft, performing blunt strikes, and tripping and hooking were all taught in medieval spear fighting - as backup. You only take those shots "when you have to" - and you try to use the point, primarily (particularly if it is a bladed spear).

A staff-man will spend most of his time trying to his the ends of his staff (the last 2ft or so) as a crushing weapon, particularly targeting joints, calves, forearms, and the opponents head. When pressed, particularly by an opponent whom you out-reach with your staff, you will attempt to thrust to the gut, groin, joints, or throat - as those can all end the fight in your favor without letting the enemy close on you, but again, that's more of a "when you have to" or "when the opportunity presents itself" - most of the time, you use it is as crushing weapon.

Someone who is skilled in fighting with a spear could use a staff just fine - he'd probably treat it more like a spear, thrusting more than a staff fighter would, but he's not going to be clueless about how to work it, and if he has time and a knife, can sharpen one end and make it plenty deadly.

Someone who is skilled in fighting with a staff could use a spear just fine; he'd almost assuredly make a lot of smashing chops with it out of reflex and muscle memory - but he's not going to be defenseless by any means. And, if it is one of the styles of spear that has a substantial blade, some of those chops are a lot more deadly.


Hmm, seems like i said exactly the opposite of what you claimed i said. Weird.

Ignoring spear use from when the spear was in high use seams to say it only true after the fall of spears. Spear use after the 1400 was mostly hold outs in Europe.)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6p93xUp9GrQ

He also had no problem holding this spear one handed


Ironic that you should stumble upon Matt's channel. You should take the time to actually watch all of his videos. (I mean that, all of them; Also check out Skallagrim and LindyBeige.). He's a great HEMA instructor (one of the founders of the HEMA movement; ive fought with him when i was in Britain visiting family.) and very knowledgeable. You might want to watch the other.. oh.. two dozen videos hes done on spears. You know, where he goes over the fact that they were primarily a poor infantrymans weapon. And not used with shields in medieval warfare. The particular video you're referrencing is him responding to people discussing how spears were used with shields when that was done, I.E., the Bronze Age. He doesn't happen to own a bronze-age appropriate spear or shield, though, so he made do with what he does own. Edit: also worth noting that some early Celts (just after the Bronze age) used spear and shield - but hardly in large formations, as there just werent that many of them - and the spears in question were shorter (about 4.5-5ft) and leaf-bladed, usually with iron heads. But shield walls and tight formation? No. And as soon as they got their hands on the metallurgy required to make steel weapons? They went to swords.. like everyone else that could afford them.

Also notice how far he has to choke up on the haft to make it workable to use in one hand. He's denying himself almost 3 feet of reach. That winged spear he's using is also rather short for a medieval spear. (its only about 5ft tall - ive actually handled that replica (not the one he owns, but another from the same manufacturer, Hanweii).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IjqwZrEnJTU

I have seen no evidence and have no experience in training with spears of being unable to use a 5-6' spear one handed. Spears are defined as primarly a thrusting/throwing weapon weapon.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/spear


Ooohh.. the dictionary! Yay! Again, this would be like saying "well the dictionary says "sword" means..." and trying to compare that to say, the works of Oakeshotte, and saying that the dictionary must be right. It isn't, any more than Wikipedia is.

A weighted and spiked club is sub class called mace.


Ahh, no. The club i linked is definitely a club, not a mace. Here's a few more:

http://www.coldsteel.com/media/catalog/ ... /92pgs.jpg - based on a rifle stock. Used by native americans.
http://www.nihonzashi.com/japanese_weap ... 94_640.jpg - Japanese club.
http://www.new-guinea-tribal-art.com/wp ... .52-PM.png - several types of polynesian clubs.
https://www.google.com/search?q=war+clu ... 1maW1D6s8M: - Mayan

Those are all clubs, not maces.

A mace is a longer (compared to most one-handed clubs) hafted weapon with a bulbous or flanged HEAD. The haft will be completely undecorated other than perhaps with langettes (if its wooden hafted).

Here's some maces:
http://pics.myarmoury.com/gothicmace1480_a_s.jpg - Gothic
http://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/XtEAAMXQV ... s-l640.jpg - Persian
http://www.kultofathena.com/images/APW45_2_l.jpg - Medieval

Also note that only very early maces used wood hafts. Most used metal.

The difference between a club and a mace is the weighting. A club is more evenly weighted with a BIT of additional weight at the end (to impart momentum when swinging); a mace is weighted entirely around the head, more like an axe - all the force is focused down onto the head.

They are fought with entirely differently. A mace is used quite a bit more like an axe than a club.

Typically maces had spikes any peace of wood picked up and used is basically a club.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/club
(well that seams to support my claim that a one handed staff would be a club.)
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/mace
Heavy often spiked club


Merriam Webster is not going to save you from people who actually know what theyre talking about. At best, it uses coloquial definitions that are "common" and not terribly correct in the specifics.

Seriously, though, if you want to educate yourself, lose a day or three and watch through all of Matt's videos. He's really good (and a really good fighter - despite having ~20 years of re-enactment and about 3 of HEMA under my belt when i dropped by his school, he soundly kicked my ass with single blade/saber. I held my own with polearms (not his specialty) and did.. better in sword and shield (but he still got me at least 3 out of 5) and knowledgeable about the topics he's educated in (which, if you watch enough of his videos, he will be very upfront about when a topic is not in his usual wheelhouse).

Lloyd (LindyBeige) and Skal are also quite knowledgeable, and Skal does a lot of real-world testing of weapons. Raphael (Metatron) is also very good, and EXTREMELY knowledgeable about Eastern weapons and both Eastern and Western armors - especially Roman, Medieval European, and Japanese armor.

Matt Easton (Scholagladatoria) - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCt14YO ... GCwcjhrOdA
Lloyd (LindyBeige) - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC9pgQf ... KrI8q0zjXQ
Skallagrim - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC3WIoh ... oMrrWVZZFA
Raphael (Metatron) - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCIjGKy ... 0VLO40RlOw
Im loving the Foes list; it's the only thing keeping me from tearing out my eyes from the dumb.
User avatar
Blue_Lion
Knight
Posts: 6226
Joined: Tue Oct 16, 2001 1:01 am
Location: Clone Lab 27

Re: Do staves get W.P Blunt bonuses and W.P. Staff bonuses?

Unread post by Blue_Lion »

Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:
Blue_Lion wrote:
Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:
Blue_Lion wrote:I find the claim that most spears where not usable one handed some what hard to swallow.


Okay. It's not a claim. It's like... reality.

Only a few countries before the 1400s where known for the use of long spears.


If by "only a few" you mean "all of Europe", then, uh, sure. The most common infantry weapon in Medieval warfare was the spear. Because it was cheap to produce in quantity and extremely effective. Swords were extremely expensive in comparison, and were not issued commonly to every soldier until much later in history. (The core professional soldiers of any given medieval army were armed with swords - but these were, by and large, never more than about 1/5th to 1/3rd of any given army, the rest of which were conscripts and semi-professional militia troops, until much later (1450s and later).

In the 1400 spears fall out of common use and where replaced with spear like pole arms.


Um, not really, no. Polearms were, by and large, the province of professional soldiers and knights. Spears fell out of use because the changing tactics of the day no longer required them, and the accumulating wealth of the various nations meant more and more soldiers could be armed with swords, and, more importantly, heavier and more effective armor. A spear isn't much use against a good brigandine. By this time, most of the troops that would have been using spears were using bows or crossbows, which were more effective against the heavier types of armor now prevalent on the battlefield amongst the professional infantry.

Pikes replaced spear units to fend off Calvary.


Pikes didn't replace spears. Pikes were used independently of spears for different forms of warfare. Pikes, or simple forms of them, were also in use as early as about AD 800.

This was also the time frame that Renascence was gearing up.(Is it possible you are mistaking the use of spear like pole arms for the use of spears after the transition?)


No, not remotely. I have a degree in this stuff. I've also done extensive re-enactment and have transitioned into HEMA (Historical European Martial Arts) in the last five years. One of the areas i specialize in, actually, is pole-arm fighting. Im particularly fond of Halberds and what is called a Lochaber Axe.

The standard battle tacit for spear units was shield wall, hard to do that if your troops where not using shields.


In the Bronze Age, maybe.. but no medieval European power fielded units of men with shields and spears. If they were using shields, they were using swords (or axes, maces, et al - as the individual soldier preferred). There is zero historical evidence that spear and shield lived much past the Bronze Age in most of Europe (as far as infantry goes). Spears, and the lances that grew from them, were commonly used by cavalry with a shield, but not when dismounted.

Any spear to long to be held one handed is a pike,


False. Pikes -start- around 10ft in length and go all the way to 25ft in some extreme cases. The Landschnekts, for instance, carried 18-20ft Pikes.

pikes are typically lumped in to pole arms in rpgs.(Pikes are unwieldy in close combat so pike units would have to carry close combat weapons kind of defeats your claim that they where used in close combat as common practice.)


Pikes are completely unusable individually in combat. If you're just a lone dude standing around with a pike, you're a dead man. But that does NOT mean Pikes were useless in close combat. In fact, pike formations were used more against enemy infantry than cavalry much after the 15th century - a single man with a pike is relatively helpless (which is why pikemen carried sidearms - so they weren't defenseless if their formation was broken) but if you're an infantry unit confronted with an unbroken pike company - your options are run or die. They fought, in many cases, six ranks deep - so even if you manage to get past the first rank of pikes, there are 5 more stabbing at you before you can even close to the range of a sword. There's a reason pike formations ruled the battlefield for almost a century.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pike_%28weapon%29

This video shows the use of long spears about as tall as the user(so greater than 60 inches) being used with a shield in a formation one handed.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ZVs97QKH-8
That was the typicall use of spears in battle.


In the Bronze Age. With a spear whose haft is about 1/2 the thickness of an actual fighting spear used any time past the bronze age. (Largely because the hafts had to be stand up to different abuses and shocks later in history as armor improved and weapons used to counter spears improved). You try that with a 10th century Norman spear, and you wont be able to recover your weapon after a thrust. Youll literally be dragging it back across the ground.

Now, there are some examples of medieval spear and buckler fighting in the 13th-16th centuries - but this is largely for dueling. (Halberd Dueling was a thing, too, and is actually quite elegant).

What you are describing as spear use seams more like spear like pole arms use.

(I would also think a one handed staff is a club.)


You probably also think there are one-handed swords called "long swords" (false) and a lot of other stuff that isn't correct.

A practical one-handed club (and yes, there were two-handed clubs, that aren't staves) tops out around ~30". What differentiates a club and a staff? Clubs often have spikes, stones, and weights on them, and are usually carved/shaped so that the top is wider/heavier than the bottom. Any longer than that and the weight wont make it practical to use in one hand.

A good example would be the Hawaiian Koa War Clubs:

https://www.google.com/search?q=hawaiia ... 4&bih=1221

Now, again, we're talking Europe here. Other cultures continued to use the spear (and used wildly different spears) for a long time after europe largely abandoned it, and certainly used them with shields. (The Zulu are a great example). But this has a lot to do with the kind of battlefield the weapons were being used on - the Zulu were not facing people in plate and brigandine and mail - so their spears could be relatively lightly hafted, and fairly short. A Zulu spear would have been completely ineffectual against a mail hauberk.

I know eastern martial arts used a variety of spears, though im not sure if any eastern cultures used them heavily with shields. Again, though, weapons conform to the battlefield they are on - many chinese swords, for instance, are VERY thin and light. Since most chinese soldiers were conscripts that didn't have armor, this is fine - but such swords would have been very ineffectual against european armor of the day, and probably would have broken if they had come into conflict with european swords of the day. This doesn't make them bad weapons - merely products of their time.


So let me get this straight you have no real support for your claim other than making a statement that it is reality? In other words your whole claim is BS, thanks good to know.


Other than BFA in Medieval History, specifically warfare and weaponry, yeah, no support at all.

"a spear becomes a pike when it is too long to be wielded with one hand in combat."
"The pike was a long weapon, varying considerably in size, from 3 to 7.5 metres (10 to 25 feet) long. "
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pike_%28weapon%29


.. yeah, Wikipedia is an AMAZING source of correct information about period weaponry.

Seams the facts support my claim with nothing supporting your claim other than your claim of reality.


Wikipedia is not "the facts". Seriously. You could, oh, i dont know, take ten seconds to look up what actual historians and people who study this stuff say.
Lets do an experiment:

If you have a broom handle available, i want you to take it, and find something that weighs about... 3/4 of a lb, and duct tape it to the end of the broom handle. Now, put your left hand about 3/4 of the way up the shaft, and your right at the back (if you're right handed). Thrust it out to full extension, removing your left hand.

Watch what happens.

Now understand that a broom handle is about 1/3 the weight of a proper spear haft, and about a foot to a foot and a half shorter. And missing about another 8oz of weight on the end.

You cant wield it effectively with one hand.

Alternatively, if you have a stainless steel headed shovel, that's about right as well. Try drop-thrusting that out to full extension and let me know how that goes.

(listing the changing of tech that changed war far does not change the fact that spears fell out of favor in use in Europe during the 1400 and the ones that where left where pikes.)
You have presented no support for your claim that spears greater than 44 inches can not be used one handed.


Just physics. Seriously, try it out.

Spears where the main weapon of shield walls


In the Bronze Age. Not even the romans used spears in the shield wall. The Pilum was a specially designed throwing spear with a soft iron haft meant to bend after it penetrated the enemy shield as it was thrown. When they closed... they used the Gladius.

Literally no medieval european armies used spears and shields as a primary armament. None. Zero many. Vikings/Norsemen? Sword and shield. Francs? Sword and Shield. Normans? Sword and Shield. Poles? Sword and Shield - usually from horseback. Spaniards? sword and shield. (You can substitute "one handed weapon of choice" in there for "sword" as axes, maces, and warhammers were used consistently (if not by the majority). Italians? Sword and shield.

I mean.. unless all of the historical texts, iconography, and arch. evidence are wrong somehow.

as the thrusting weapon could be used with less risk of disrupting the tight formation.


Thrusting with a sword doesn't disrupt a shield formation any more than a spear would. Less, honestly, as you dont have as much weight dragging around behind you and a sword blade is significantly slimmer than a spear haft. (Seriously, if you were thrusting with a 5-6' spear out of a formation, you'd be jamming the butt of the spear into the guy behind you every time you struck - not ideal). Not that medieval shield formations were meant to stick close to together. They only stuck extremely close together during closing (so their shields could provide each other cover against projectile fire). Once they got close enough, it was charge-and-get-stuck-in time (usually in attempt to break the enemy formation into smaller pieces so it could be beaten easier). You tried to use your heavy foot against the opponents more lightly armed and armored men, if you could, and he tried to do the same to you.

Maneuver tactics didn't really pick back up until the late 13th century, when even more common soldiers were fairly well equipped in armor, and sticking together in a tight formation more necessary to bring the correct amount of force of arms against an opponent to successfully overwhelm them.

(your claim was that most spears where used two handed and used to strike not primary as a thrusting weapon but as a striking weapon. \


Yeah except you're completely inventing that. Here, ill go back and quote myself so you can see what i actually said:

Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:
You're both correct and incorrect at the same time.

For one, there are several types of staves and spears - and we're strictly talking Western culture here, as i have little experience with most eastern weapon styles and martial arts.

Spears (in the west) go from being about 38" long, to over 7ft (84") in some cases. They are all wielded slightly differently, but by and large, yes, one (or sometimes both) ends are pointy and its "primarily" a thrusting weapon The primary difference, as well, as it that it also primarily a military weapon, and a staff is not. A staff is a peasant/commoner/man around town's weapon...

so the differences in wielding them come largely in the forum of how you use them. Spears are almost always used in formations. Staves are almost always used in situations where you're isolated.

However, a man who is taught to use a spear in a military fashion (as some spears were hunting tools, as opposed to weapons of war, and generally speaking, hunting spears actually made poor weapons of war because they were not balanced well for fighting, or had features that made them excel at bringing down animals but decidedly not good for fighting), would learn almost all of the techniques a staff fighter would use as well.

While, most of the time, you're going to be in a formation with your fellow soldiers, in a situation where you find yourself cut off or alone, you learn how to use all parts of the spear offensively, performing strikes with the haft, tripping, hooking, and knocking things down.

Similarly. a staple of western staff fighting, particularly English and French (who used staves as a commoners sidearm much more frequently than a lot of other european countries), ARE thrusts with the butt ends. They were usually tapered (not pointed, but rounded down to about the width of an american 5c piece) and thrusting was a big part of fighting with them - you could rupture internal organs; shatter knees, elbows, or other joints, crush the tops of someones foot, or shatter their ribcage, and crush their throat.

The TLDR version is:

A spearman will spend most of his time trying to thrust because that's where the pointy/sharp bits are and that's how he can do the most damage. When pressed, he will be capable of fighting with his spear similarly to how a staff-wielding expert would fight, but probably not as proficiently - but choking up on the haft, performing blunt strikes, and tripping and hooking were all taught in medieval spear fighting - as backup. You only take those shots "when you have to" - and you try to use the point, primarily (particularly if it is a bladed spear).

A staff-man will spend most of his time trying to his the ends of his staff (the last 2ft or so) as a crushing weapon, particularly targeting joints, calves, forearms, and the opponents head. When pressed, particularly by an opponent whom you out-reach with your staff, you will attempt to thrust to the gut, groin, joints, or throat - as those can all end the fight in your favor without letting the enemy close on you, but again, that's more of a "when you have to" or "when the opportunity presents itself" - most of the time, you use it is as crushing weapon.

Someone who is skilled in fighting with a spear could use a staff just fine - he'd probably treat it more like a spear, thrusting more than a staff fighter would, but he's not going to be clueless about how to work it, and if he has time and a knife, can sharpen one end and make it plenty deadly.

Someone who is skilled in fighting with a staff could use a spear just fine; he'd almost assuredly make a lot of smashing chops with it out of reflex and muscle memory - but he's not going to be defenseless by any means. And, if it is one of the styles of spear that has a substantial blade, some of those chops are a lot more deadly.


Hmm, seems like i said exactly the opposite of what you claimed i said. Weird.

Ignoring spear use from when the spear was in high use seams to say it only true after the fall of spears. Spear use after the 1400 was mostly hold outs in Europe.)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6p93xUp9GrQ

He also had no problem holding this spear one handed


Ironic that you should stumble upon Matt's channel. You should take the time to actually watch all of his videos. (I mean that, all of them; Also check out Skallagrim and LindyBeige.). He's a great HEMA instructor (one of the founders of the HEMA movement; ive fought with him when i was in Britain visiting family.) and very knowledgeable. You might want to watch the other.. oh.. two dozen videos hes done on spears. You know, where he goes over the fact that they were primarily a poor infantrymans weapon. And not used with shields in medieval warfare. The particular video you're referrencing is him responding to people discussing how spears were used with shields when that was done, I.E., the Bronze Age. He doesn't happen to own a bronze-age appropriate spear or shield, though, so he made do with what he does own. Edit: also worth noting that some early Celts (just after the Bronze age) used spear and shield - but hardly in large formations, as there just werent that many of them - and the spears in question were shorter (about 4.5-5ft) and leaf-bladed, usually with iron heads. But shield walls and tight formation? No. And as soon as they got their hands on the metallurgy required to make steel weapons? They went to swords.. like everyone else that could afford them.

Also notice how far he has to choke up on the haft to make it workable to use in one hand. He's denying himself almost 3 feet of reach. That winged spear he's using is also rather short for a medieval spear. (its only about 5ft tall - ive actually handled that replica (not the one he owns, but another from the same manufacturer, Hanweii).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IjqwZrEnJTU

I have seen no evidence and have no experience in training with spears of being unable to use a 5-6' spear one handed. Spears are defined as primarly a thrusting/throwing weapon weapon.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/spear


Ooohh.. the dictionary! Yay! Again, this would be like saying "well the dictionary says "sword" means..." and trying to compare that to say, the works of Oakeshotte, and saying that the dictionary must be right. It isn't, any more than Wikipedia is.

A weighted and spiked club is sub class called mace.


Ahh, no. The club i linked is definitely a club, not a mace. Here's a few more:

http://www.coldsteel.com/media/catalog/ ... /92pgs.jpg - based on a rifle stock. Used by native americans.
http://www.nihonzashi.com/japanese_weap ... 94_640.jpg - Japanese club.
http://www.new-guinea-tribal-art.com/wp ... .52-PM.png - several types of polynesian clubs.
https://www.google.com/search?q=war+clu ... 1maW1D6s8M: - Mayan

Those are all clubs, not maces.

A mace is a longer (compared to most one-handed clubs) hafted weapon with a bulbous or flanged HEAD. The haft will be completely undecorated other than perhaps with langettes (if its wooden hafted).

Here's some maces:
http://pics.myarmoury.com/gothicmace1480_a_s.jpg - Gothic
http://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/XtEAAMXQV ... s-l640.jpg - Persian
http://www.kultofathena.com/images/APW45_2_l.jpg - Medieval

Also note that only very early maces used wood hafts. Most used metal.

The difference between a club and a mace is the weighting. A club is more evenly weighted with a BIT of additional weight at the end (to impart momentum when swinging); a mace is weighted entirely around the head, more like an axe - all the force is focused down onto the head.

They are fought with entirely differently. A mace is used quite a bit more like an axe than a club.

Typically maces had spikes any peace of wood picked up and used is basically a club.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/club
(well that seams to support my claim that a one handed staff would be a club.)
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/mace
Heavy often spiked club


Merriam Webster is not going to save you from people who actually know what theyre talking about. At best, it uses coloquial definitions that are "common" and not terribly correct in the specifics.

Seriously, though, if you want to educate yourself, lose a day or three and watch through all of Matt's videos. He's really good (and a really good fighter - despite having ~20 years of re-enactment and about 3 of HEMA under my belt when i dropped by his school, he soundly kicked my ass with single blade/saber. I held my own with polearms (not his specialty) and did.. better in sword and shield (but he still got me at least 3 out of 5) and knowledgeable about the topics he's educated in (which, if you watch enough of his videos, he will be very upfront about when a topic is not in his usual wheelhouse).

Lloyd (LindyBeige) and Skal are also quite knowledgeable, and Skal does a lot of real-world testing of weapons. Raphael (Metatron) is also very good, and EXTREMELY knowledgeable about Eastern weapons and both Eastern and Western armors - especially Roman, Medieval European, and Japanese armor.

Matt Easton (Scholagladatoria) - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCt14YO ... GCwcjhrOdA
Lloyd (LindyBeige) - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC9pgQf ... KrI8q0zjXQ
Skallagrim - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC3WIoh ... oMrrWVZZFA
Raphael (Metatron) - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCIjGKy ... 0VLO40RlOw

So let me get this straight you do not need to provide any real evidence to your claim that spears could not be used one handed and ignore how words are defined in dictionaries.

(Dictionary and historical references do seam to disprove your claims but you just keep saying it true when you did not provide any evidence of it. Tapestry from the battle of hasting depicts a mounted Calvary man using a spear and shied to fight from horse back https://www.britannica.com/event/Battle-of-Hastings Here is one showing a formation using the shield and spear https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shield_wa ... stry_4.jpg that was 10 century part of middle ages well past the start of the iron age.)

Got it you have no real evidence and are just wasting my time with a unsupported claim and want me to more of my waist my time watching videos that you think channels you will prove your point. Your claim is unproven I am going to just ignore you as you have presented no evidence your claim that a spear greater than 44 inches can not be used one handed.
The Clones are coming you shall all be replaced, but who is to say you have not been replaced already.

Master of Type-O and the obvios.

Soon my army oc clones and winged-monkies will rule the world but first, must .......

I may debate canon and RAW, but the games I run are highly house ruled. So I am not debating for how I play but about how the system works as written.
User avatar
Killer Cyborg
Priest
Posts: 27954
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2001 2:01 am
Comment: "Your Eloquence with a sledge hammer is a beautiful thing..." -Zer0 Kay
Location: In the ocean, punching oncoming waves
Contact:

Re: Do staves get W.P Blunt bonuses and W.P. Staff bonuses?

Unread post by Killer Cyborg »

Blue Lion,
Your response to Colonel_Tetsuya's post does not match what he actually posted.
Annual Best Poster of the Year Awards (2012)

"That rifle on the wall of the laborer's cottage or working class flat is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there." -George Orwell

Check out my Author Page on Amazon!
User avatar
eliakon
Palladin
Posts: 9093
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 9:40 pm
Comment: Palladium Books Canon is set solely by Kevin Siembieda, either in person, or by his approval of published material.
Contact:

Re: Do staves get W.P Blunt bonuses and W.P. Staff bonuses?

Unread post by eliakon »

I am just going to ask a question here...
What The Heck does real world weaponry or historical combat/recreation combat have to do with this?
No seriously what?

I ask this because other than having the same name the Weapon Proficiencies in question share nothing at all with the real world skills being discussed.

W.P. Shield covers ALL shields of every sort regardless of the size or kind. Even though in the real world there are multiple different kinds that need different training

W.P. Sword covers ALL swords of every sort regardless of size, kind, or usage. This means that one skill covers broad swords, bastard swords, epees, foils, rapiers, katannas, bokken, short swords, great swords... ALL OF THEM

W.P. Pole Arms covers ALL pole arms. All of them, pikes, awls, mancatchers, glaives... everything

W.P. Spear covers, you guessed it any weapon that is like a spear

W.P. Staff covers all staff like weapons

The list goes on and on.

Except for a few exceptions WPs are not a narrow skill that covers a single weapon, but hugely broad skills that cover entire classes of weapons or even entire ideas of weapons. Narrowly arguing how many inches a historical spear had before it was classed as a pike by this army or that army is utterly irrelevant. This is not a history thesis on weaponry and those things don't matter in the game. No seriously they don't. Unless you can find something in the books that talk about how they are limited like that arguing that your pet historical definition is superior to the books definition of a weapon is not just irrelevant, it is trying to replace canon with your personal fanon!
The rules are not a bludgeon with which to hammer a character into a game. They are a guide to how a group of friends can get together to weave a collective story that entertains everyone involved. We forget that at our peril.

Edmund Burke wrote:The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."
User avatar
Killer Cyborg
Priest
Posts: 27954
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2001 2:01 am
Comment: "Your Eloquence with a sledge hammer is a beautiful thing..." -Zer0 Kay
Location: In the ocean, punching oncoming waves
Contact:

Re: Do staves get W.P Blunt bonuses and W.P. Staff bonuses?

Unread post by Killer Cyborg »

Discussing real-world contexts is quite useful in forming opinions about what RAI might be.
Annual Best Poster of the Year Awards (2012)

"That rifle on the wall of the laborer's cottage or working class flat is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there." -George Orwell

Check out my Author Page on Amazon!
User avatar
eliakon
Palladin
Posts: 9093
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 9:40 pm
Comment: Palladium Books Canon is set solely by Kevin Siembieda, either in person, or by his approval of published material.
Contact:

Re: Do staves get W.P Blunt bonuses and W.P. Staff bonuses?

Unread post by eliakon »

Killer Cyborg wrote:Discussing real-world contexts is quite useful in forming opinions about what RAI might be.

It is only useful if
1) there is a question of intent.
and
2) the real world context is relevant to the game

I don't see any possible way that either of those apply here.
I really don't

Since
1) The game is explicit in stating that it intends for the W.P. skills to cover these various weapons there is no possible way to question if that was intent.
and
2) The real world context being cited is examples that run counter the published rules (which have not changed in what? 37 years?)

I mean sure, its neat to see how people in the real world would train to use a weapon, or how they would classify different weapons...
...but we are told, rather explicitly, that those classifications are NOT the classifications that the game uses, which is made abundantly clear by the fact that these same break downs are used every single time.
At this point trying to claim that there was some sort of hidden "intent" to secretly intend that the weapons not be divided up the way that they are listed and actually be divided up a different way is untenable and pure fanon.
The rules are not a bludgeon with which to hammer a character into a game. They are a guide to how a group of friends can get together to weave a collective story that entertains everyone involved. We forget that at our peril.

Edmund Burke wrote:The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."
Post Reply

Return to “Rifts®”