|
Post by WildKnight on Feb 10, 2009 11:52:54 GMT -5
I think reach is a good idea. IMO, this is why Thing picks up a lamp post and swings it around.
|
|
|
Post by takewithfood on Feb 10, 2009 12:07:45 GMT -5
Yeah, to be honest, Thing is a good advocate for weapons as effects. Nobody says "Did you hear about the time Thing punched my skeleton out of my body? Good thing he didn't have a baseball bat too or I would have been in real trouble!"
How should reach work, though? What benefit does it really confer?
~TWF
|
|
|
Post by soban on Feb 10, 2009 12:44:55 GMT -5
Range 1?
|
|
|
Post by WildKnight on Feb 10, 2009 12:50:32 GMT -5
Range 1 is "close combat"... you can already hit anyone within 10' of you via the rules (short dashes and reaching being just a normal part of fighting, I would guess is the logic they used)
The problem is that Range 2 jumps to... 30 yards. That'd be one heck of a lamp post you're swinging.
Personally I'd work it something like this (and yes I realize that this relies on some GM/player cooperation more so than using a hard and fast rule)...
The player selects one target within the reach of whatever he's holding, and smacks that guy. So if you've got a telephone pole (maybe 30' long? I have no idea), you can hit a guy up to 30' away with your usual Close Combat
In addition, anybody standing between you and the target is "collateral damage" and suffers an attack at half the stones.
|
|
|
Post by takewithfood on Feb 10, 2009 13:33:21 GMT -5
I was going to suggest +1 stone of defense against opponents attacking you without a reach weapon. Some weapons (like a telephone pole) could be considered "huge", and grant double the bonus (+1 against a normal close combat weapon, or only +1 against a reach weapon). Because honestly, the problem with Thing and a telephone pole is not so much that its easy for him to hit you (its always easy for him to hit you) but that it's hard to get inside his reach to hit him.
EDIT: Really not sure I love what I just wrote, but it's an idea.
EDIT EDIT: The collateral damage idea is neat, but it doesn't really apply for more normal-sized reach weapons, such as whips and spears, which aren't as outright destructive. Hell, I'd be tempted to give a telephone pole an Area 1 effect.
~TWF
|
|
|
Post by WildKnight on Feb 10, 2009 13:59:09 GMT -5
Actually I kind of like the defense bonus idea. Its not perfect but it certainly works.
The telephone pole would have a strange sort of "area" since it would be a cone in front of the attacker (unless you spun it all the way around I guess)
|
|
|
Post by takewithfood on Feb 10, 2009 14:09:34 GMT -5
Yeah, thought about it more while I was in the car (just ran an errand) and archaic warfare came to mind. I thought of knights on horseback employing lances in a charge, and how the height and reach advantages kept them relatively safe.. until the pike was invented to negate the reach advantage.
A spear is definitely an advantage in a fight if you know how to use it. But its crap against a gun. lol
~TWF
|
|
|
Post by WildKnight on Feb 10, 2009 14:23:53 GMT -5
Guns (in the real world) are sort of an ultimate equalizer. There used to be a saying in the Wild West "God made man, but Samuel Colt made man equal."
That said, I think that comic books don't really handle guns with full respect for their lethality... which is fine by me, because its a fantasy, and Spider-Man isn't bulletproof. Some handguns out there these days wouldn't fire a round through a man's shoulder... they'd blow a man's arm off at the shoulder. I don't want that kind of realism in my comic books though (unless its that kind of comic book) and I don't think we need it for these rules, either.
In comic books, not only are guns not as uber-destructive as they are in real life; they often seem to be inferior to swords and even throwing weapons (knives, stars, etc)
|
|
|
Post by Manticore on Feb 10, 2009 14:31:11 GMT -5
Not to mention that in real life its pretty hard to shoot someone without causing permanent damage. There's no place on the body where it is "safe" to shoot someone.
But in comics, if someone gets shot and doesn't immediately die from it they'll be up and about with no problems in just a few days.
|
|
|
Post by WildKnight on Feb 10, 2009 14:40:38 GMT -5
Theres something to that... but in my case, I'll take the time I was shot over most of the other injuries I've sustained, because of the lifelong suffering associated with my other wounds.
I was shot and it was what they call a "through and through"... it passed through my arm and some of the flesh of my back, but didn't hit any bone or important organs. The pain was incredible... at the time I was sure I was dead. But I only spent a few days in the hospital and I have no lasting problems from it.
By contrast, my shoulder wound (caused by someone sawing into my collarbone & shoulder with the serrated edge of a survival knife) healed with so much scar tissue that if not for laser surgery (which can remove scar tissue from muscle) I'd have extremely limited mobility in my right arm was much more severe. And don't get me started on the constant knee and lower back pain I suffer from fighting MMA (at least partially my own fault since I refuse to take any pills).
Of course, thats totally anecdotal. I'm sure that statistically people die or suffer lifelong debilitation from gunshots than from fist or knife fights.
|
|
|
Post by Manticore on Feb 10, 2009 14:51:21 GMT -5
Well, I didn't say that wounds from any other kind of weapons were any better... just that it bugs me when I see someone on TV or in a comic book get shot and then shrug it off as a flesh wound.
Come to think of it; most comic book superheroes should be in constant, debilitating pain from all the times they've been beaten up, shot, had bones broken, been stabbed. That they don't is testament to the fact that they all have remarkable powers of healing, even the ones that aren't supposed to have healing factors.
|
|
|
Post by WildKnight on Feb 10, 2009 14:53:00 GMT -5
That was one thing the Daredevil movie did that I think it deserves credit for; they showed Daredevil as scarred and bruised, and popping copious amounts of pain killers.
|
|
|
Post by Dionon on Feb 10, 2009 15:26:27 GMT -5
Close Combat at Range says it all... You were right in your last sentance. If someone has to spend movement stones to get to you, you're at range.
|
|
|
Post by vjcsmoke on Feb 12, 2009 1:08:28 GMT -5
If we strip away all bonuses from weapons, what happens to Captain America's shield, Thor's hammer, etc.? Do they lose all their bonuses and just become indestructible?
|
|
|
Post by Dionon on Feb 12, 2009 1:16:21 GMT -5
Not EVERYTHING is getting stripped... Just off the counter stuff... Though Cap's Shield and Thor's Hammer will have less (Probably half if I have my way) The modifiers they did before.
|
|