dang, this looks fun from a conceptual perspective, but I dont know if I like the control point system

I do not use FDG, CP etc but one of my players came up with the "Shield Bind" as he's doing it in his HIMA-like group. So I houseruled this: On the turn immediately after a successful block, you may attempt to bind your attacker's weapon if your choice of attack can bring you within one yard of him (i.e. move & attack; all out attack; attack + step) This counts as an attack; roll vs. Shield skill -3 or the Weapon-Binder Technique to hit. If successful the opponent's weapons becomes unready even if it normally would never do so. Do not apply the off-hand penalty. This can be used in conjunction with another weapon for a Dual-Weapon Attack (B230) at the usual penalty of -4 The rules for dual weapon attacks (B417) otherwise fully apply. Weapon Binder Technique - Hard Defaults: Shield-3 Prerequisite: Shield (cannot be used with force shields or bucklers) Cannot exceed prerequisite skill.

@dungeonsandgurps

Жыл бұрын

Sounds like a nice option, thanks!

I don't know why I ended up on this video since I haven't touched GURPS in a very long time. But, I feel like commenting on binds themselves in systems like HEMA and a couple thoughts on game design mechanics. Feel free to ignore me. A bind is when two weapons have longer than fleeting contact. Binds have two primary purposes in my experience: 1. a chance to control your opponent's weapon. 2. it allows you to know where your opponents weapon is without having to look at it. In general, a shield is just a weapon with more defensive utility than offensive utility. The worst injury I've sustained in HEMA came from a shield slaming into my helmet. When I say weapon, sheilds are included. Shields can be grappled just like baseball bats, but unlike grappling a baseball bat away from someone, the person with a shield usually has a shiny stabby thing or maybe a smacky beaty thing to dissuade you. In an actual fight, using significant force in a bind is rarely a good idea. No one holds their blade rigid while someone else is basically pushing them with theirs. A twist of the wrist and you can just cut the opponent instead of a mindless pushing match. If you bind shield to shield for too long, you run the risk of the opponent reaching their weapon over your shield and hitting your head or stabbing down into your neck, a tactic the scutum and gladius was excelled at. Don't try to hard map these rules onto real world mechanics. They rarely reflect the accurately and rules that did would probably be difficult to implement and play. Might still be fun for the right kind of player though. Binding a shield with a spear in the real world is a very silly thing to try to do. It's probably going to cost you the spear's primary advantage. The second a spear is in the bind against a shorter weapon and the spear's momentum is lower than the shorter weapon, the spear loses due to leverage. The spearwielder is holding the short end of a very long lever. If the spear weilder is strong enough to not lose control of their spear in the bind against a shield, they are also probably strong enough to just smash their opponent into meatpaste, shield or not. I don't think the concept of binds works very well. Unarmed binds would likely be a grapple or a shove of some sort. There are usually pre-exisiting mechanics for those sorts of intentions. I only really see a reason for having special rules surrounding them if they allow you to express an intent in a new and interest way that benefits gameplay. I could see generalizing binds to include things like grappling maybe. Then all of these methods of controlling an opponent's weapons, shields and body get grouped into one consistent system. I think the reason most systems don't bother with binds, is you can express that type of behaviour with other parts of the system rather than having to specifically do it with binds. Either that, or having extra bind mechanics becomes too much cognitive load for the players. I think a system that specialized in melee and technical combat might be interesting and place where complex bind mechanics would work pretty well. Anyway, I hope something in there was interesting at least.

@dungeonsandgurps

Жыл бұрын

Judging by what you've written, I understood what binds are correctly, and GURPS models them pretty well. Perhaps, the way it allows to spend Control Points to decrease the opponent's attack roll in a shield bind should be extended to cover weapon binds as well. Thanks!

@jsmxwll

Жыл бұрын

@@dungeonsandgurps Here's a pretty basic video that breaks down the nuts and bolts of the sword bind from a HEMA perspective. kzread.info/dash/bejne/k5eVy9qdda7Kc7g.html I wasn't able to find any easy to understand shield bind videos. Most of them were fairly technical, but I didn't look very long either. You might like the channel I linked, if you don't know it already.