> >> I have still to look up weapon ranks, edges, and armour
> >Broken record: don't bother. They frequently cancel out anyway, and
> >IMO they add nothing to play.
> Must be a nice world where poleaxes are no more effective than
> pillowfights. Still, saves carrying all that heavy armour and all
> those nasty weapons around, since they're totally ineffective anyway.
Yup, the world of heroic fiction.
I asked my players, specifically the most rules-intensive minimaxers, if they wanted to use the weapon ranks. They said no. I think that's pretty conclusive: they add nothing to play. Add this to the fact that edges slow down the game (based on our experience), and you're best off not using them.
Halberds and heavy armor certainly make an appearance in heroic fiction, but their weapon ranks don't come into play. Shields are meant to be broken dramatically*, and the only halberd I recall is Gunnar Hamundarson's (which he used in one hand with a sword in the other!). As near as I can tell, the halberd was just as effective as the sword (in fact, shortswords cut off limbs as easily, according to Njal's Saga). This despite the fact that the halberd had originally been enchanted, and gave off a loud ringing noise when it was about to kill someone.
Gunnar didn't win battles because he used a halberd. He won because he had a couple masteries: "He was a tall, powerful man, outstandingly skilful with arms. He could strike or throw with either hand, and his sword-strokes were so fast that he seemed to be brandishing three swords at once. He was excellent at archery, and his arrows never missed their mark. ... It has been said that there has never been his equal." Against this, his halberd is just a prop, not something that gives an edge.
David Dunham <mailto:dunham_at_...>
Glorantha/HW/RQ page: <http://www.pensee.com/dunham/glorantha.html>
Imagination is more important than knowledge. -- Albert Einstein
Powered by hypermail