Re: (TFT) Spear vs. Shortsword maneuvers

[Rick Smith <rick_ww@lightspeed.ca>]

In my campaign, anyone who wants to use pole weapons picks up
running sometimes.  Makes sense.

Warm regards, Rick.


On 2015-10-20, at 2:25 PM, David O. Miller wrote:
> Because I can do it in one turn. Back away from a fallen foe one hex, 
> then charge back in. It makes winning initiative important to fallen 
> figures vs pole weapon users. They need to stand up first.
> 
> In the system of running three hexes I now have to back up further, and 
> by doing so I can't charge back in because I'll use more than half my 
> movement doing all this running around. This changes the tactics of the 
> game from what SJ meant as far as I'm concerned. Unless you let people 
> simply run around in some sort of weird three hex loop, and then charge 
> someone. Which to me just seems almost comical.
> 
> But I hear you Rick. Different tastes huh? Me, I stick with the lunge 
> concept. It's the best solution I've found without extra padding of the 
> rules.
> __________________________________________ 
> David O. Miller
> Miller Design/Illustration
> www.davidomiller.com
> 
> 2 Dean Court
> East Northport, NY 11731
> (631) 266-6875
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Oct 20, 2015, at 5:04 PM, Rick Smith <rick_ww@lightspeed.ca> wrote:
> 
>> I don't see how backing up so you can charge forward reduces the
>> tactical maneuvering of the game.
>> 
>> If by "chess like" you mean that the units don't back up before moving
>> forward sure.
>> 
>> Anyway, if you do not like people charging forward for more damage,
>> that is fine, but I won't play that way - I'm happy with the both the 
> 
>> extra damage from charges and the 3 hexes charges (tho I don't 
>> require the 3 hexes to be on the hex grain).
>> 
>> Warm regards, Rick
>> 
>> 
>> On 2015-10-20, at 1:54 PM, David O. Miller wrote:
>>> I have always felt that the issue was with the nomenclature of the 
> word 
>>> "charge". It sets up a precedent in your mind that the physics is off 
> 
>>> and that you've got to build up speed in a run, or "charge" to get 
> the 
>>> extra damage.
>>> 
>>> I prefer the word "lunge". The way I see it is that you about 5 feet 
> 
>>> from your opponent (in game terms one hex away), and you throw your 
> body 
>>> weight behind a sudden forward lunge. All of that force behind the 
> lunge 
>>> is concentrated on a small, sharp point which can now penetrate chain 
> 
>>> mail, slide off of plate and find a joint to penetrate, or simply 
> punch 
>>> through leather.
>>> 
>>> Once past the armor your victim is then impaled on basically a long 
> 
>>> spike and takes a very nasty, deep, puncture wound that plays havoc 
> with 
>>> his internal organs, which to me warrants the extra damage.
>>> 
>>> As many of you know I always felt that it was the doubling of the 
>>> damage, especially in the two larger pole arms, that was the real 
>>> problem. That's why our group came up with the +1d6, rather than the 
> 
>>> doubling. It keeps the smaller pole arms basically as written, while 
> 
>>> having the added bonus of making the two larger ones slightly less 
>>> devastating. If you start adding in rules such as moving 3 hexes in a 
> 
>>> straight line then you give up some of the chess like, strategy 
> elements 
>>> that the game has. For example I want to move first so that I can 
> back 
>>> away from a fallen foe and lunge at him again, before he stands up. 
> That 
>>> kinda thing.
>>> 
>>> David
>>> __________________________________________ 
>>> David O. Miller
>>> Miller Design/Illustration
>>> www.davidomiller.com
>> 
>>> Post to the entire list by writing to tft@brainiac.com.
>> Unsubscribe by mailing to majordomo@brainiac.com with the message body
>> "unsubscribe tft"
> 
> 
> Post to the entire list by writing to tft@brainiac.com.
> Unsubscribe by mailing to majordomo@brainiac.com with the message body
> "unsubscribe tft"
> 

=====
Post to the entire list by writing to tft@brainiac.com.
Unsubscribe by mailing to majordomo@brainiac.com with the message body
"unsubscribe tft"