> this may seem a too simple approach to the problem,
> but I always rule stuff like two-handed-weapon-use, beheading
> feats according to the circumstances and the opponenent[s] as
> well.
>
> if your fighter uses two weapons in an attack, I'd rule that
> his foe gets a TN-penalty when defending with only one weapon,
> or the attacker gets an edge. this ruling includes the
> advantage of 2-weapon-use and will maybe even force the
> defender to change his tactics.
>
> differences in fighting styles ["daran happan sword
> techniques vs. old-school stormbull-bashing"] can be nicely
> done this way, if you don't mind the additional numbers that
> will arise.
>
> so, no set rules, but improvisation on the spot [same fighter
> would face a penalty when chasing the fleeing enemy through a
> mob, because of the fact that the weapon hinder him when
> running], although some situations will occur so often, that
> you'll have to rule it once and can stay with it afterwards.
>
> in my game, the choice and changing of abilities is most
> important for players to succeed over opponents that are as
> skilled as they are.
In our group, if the players description of what they are attempting is sufficiently amusing, audacious or otherwise interesting, the player will (occasionally) get an improvisation bonus or a free attempt to augment. We absolutely insist on the description coming first and work out the bid/aument size from our consensus on the risk that they are taking.
Fairly regularly, we forget to state the bid before rolling but we have never yet failed to agree what size the bid was even after seeing the roll result.
This approach encourages each player to tell the group how their player is using their environment (weapons choice/fighting style is just one part of the environment) to advance their goals. The mechanics becomes only the means of keeping the score.
The rules heavy approach (RQ, RoleMaster etc) does give many players
and GMs a feel for what is "actually" mechanically going on (but it
is all in our heads anyway). In my opinion, this comes at two major
costs.
1 - all of the table lookups and other book-keeping.
2 - Unless there are already rules for for what a player/character
wants to do, you either can't do it, the GM has to work out a new set
of mechanics beforehand (and record it so it can be re-used, yeah, I
bet ;-) or just wing it.
Guess which I prefer!
"With the longsword in my right hand I attempt to feint to the villains heart, slash my intials on his forehead and finally stab him in the gut! Meanwhile, with the shortsword in my left hand, I stab each of his three henchmen through the heart as they try to surround me. Bid all of my AP!"
regards,
Charles
Powered by hypermail