[projectaon] Re: Wolf's Bane Clarification
- From: Ingo Kloecker <projectaon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: projectaon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 28 May 2012 23:41:04 +0200
On Thursday 24 May 2012, Simon Osborne wrote:
> On 23/05/2012 22:21, Chris Neilson wrote:
> > On Wed, 2012-05-23 at 22:36 +0200, Ingo Kloecker wrote:
> >> On Wednesday 23 May 2012, Simon Osborne wrote:
> >>> <http://www.projectaon.org/test/en/xhtml-less-simple/lw/19wb/titl
> >>> e.ht m#sect276>
> >>>
> >>> I would guess the text does mean that you are unarmed (and
> >>> therefore cannot make use of CS bonuses from Sommerswerd and
> >>> (Grand) Weaponmastery) throughout the combat, but it's not
> >>> completely clear. Might this require a footnote?
> >>
> >> Why would this require a footnote. The text reads:
> > I think the lack of clarity is coming from the passage "You hurl it
> > [th breastplate] at him, hoping to buy yourself a few precious
> > seconds in which you can unsheathe your weapon, but the warrior
> > bats it aside and attempts to close his hands around your throat."
> > which would imply you are fighting bare-handed (because you havent
> > bought the few precious seconds to unsheath your weapon).
>
> The "flavour text" is definitely what makes it somewhat confusing. I
> don't recall ever hitting this section before, so I read it 'cold'
> and found it confusing. Perhaps the only penalty is supposed to be
> the -4CS for not possessing Grand Weaponmastery, but whether you are
> armed or unarmed in this combat could be handled more
> consistently...or at least clarified that the only penalty is -4
> even if you are, apparently, unable to unsheathe the Sommerswerd
> during the combat.
>
> > In any event, if its decided to treat this as a bare-handed combat
> > wouldnt it be better to alter the passage to make it clearer rather
> > than adding a footnote? ie "Fight this foe bare-handed. Unless you
> > possess Grand Weaponmastery, ...."
>
> Yeah, I think I prefer that solution to a footnote, if we're sure
> that's what's meant.
The problem is that we can never be sure unless Joe Dever says that
that's what he meant. In fact, I believe that this fight is not to be
treated as a run-of-the-mill bare-handed fight because it's hard to
believe that Joe Dever added specific instructions for bare-handed
fighting to the rules of combat, and then in this section forgot about
them and instead gave the very specific and clear instruction to reduce
your CS by 4 for this specific fight. Maybe Joe explicitly avoided to
name this fight a "bare-handed fight" to avoid confusion with the normal
rules for bare-handed fight. Of course, he underestimated the readers
who are still confused just for other reasons. ;-)
I'd like to think of this fight as a bare-handed fight in which the
standard rules for bare-handed fight do not apply, and thus I suggest to
leave everything as it is.
Regards,
Ingo
~~~~~~
Manage your subscription at //www.freelists.org/list/projectaon
Other related posts:
