Re: [HoE] Templar Gift - Impressions?

["Steve Crow" <crow_steve@hotmail.com>]

Lots of snipping here to keep on track, and so I don't tie up _all_ of 
John's time...  :)

><<Don't know if it's "realistic."  Personally, in HTH combat, my money 
>would
>probably be on the guy with the sword.>>
>
>My money would be on the guy that attacks first. Either weapon is going to 
>do serious harm. The sword requires more motion to get into action; the gun 
>(if it's a pistol) is a trigger pull...
>

The rules don't really discern between longarms and pistols.  Such a 
modifier as you proposed later would be fine.  Although we had one question 
concerning that which I will address in a separate ? type post...

> >>However, even in HTH, a non-HTH
>weapon is better!  That's the peculiarity, IMO.  I've seen enough RPGs that
>go with that assumption of HTH being best for HTH that it strikes me as 
>hard
>to believe that common sense _always_ dictates a gun is superior to a
>knife/sword in all instances.  >>
>
>Well, from experience, I can say that any fight where one guy has a gun 
>becomes a gunfight. Even if the other fellow's toting a chainsaw. It's 
>called weapon superiority and it's a fact of life. :-)
>

Real-life experience, right?  I guess that's where we're getting somewhat 
confused.  The Templar PC in question probably has a more "theatrical" 
vision in mind for his character, and combat in general.  It's hard to point 
and say, "Oh, HoE is a 'realistic' game combat-wise so you can't do this & 
that." because...well, it's not really clear where HoE is coming from, 
combat-wise.

See my separate comments about how in "theatrical" swordfighting, even 
against armored opponents, the HTH fighter and the Firearm-equipped fire are 
evenly matched.

> >>Which means probably the threat and the
>nature in which it must be overcome is poorly designed.  <<
>
>I have to disagree strongly. Part of the idea of HOE is that the heroes are 
>going to be outclassed. If you provide a method for the players to 
>consistently use their strongest attack against any opponent, you're going 
>to remove some of the fear of combat.
>

I guess I would disagree there.  Unless the main threat has some "weakness" 
to a lesser attack, your players are still going to use their strongest 
attack (as you note, why bring a knife to a gunfight?).  The trick is to 
make the creature powerful enough that their strongest attack isn't that 
effective, and they should fear combat on that score.

Either that, or I'm not understanding.  I guess I'd need a better example of 
what you mean.  The "main threats" in the two published adventures of yours 
(Killer Clowns and Boise Horror) I've read don't seem to really meet the 
criteria you state above.

Sure there are a few exceptions (don't let the Doomsayer Nuke at will!), but 
they seem to be few and far between.  If a Templar's strongest attack is his 
sword, it's going to serve him pretty well through most of Killer Clowns for 
instance, since all the creatures there use HTH.

>
> >> Or did 2081 soldiers just not
>find a use for AP HTH weaponry...?<<
>
>This is pretty much the case, I'd wager. See knife-gun argument above. :-)
>
>As the technology of war develops, the combatants move further and further 
>from HTH combat. Sure you've got battlesuits, but the big attack those 
>things are packing are the guns--or the ability to heft big weapons. HTH is 
>going to be used in the rare instance where stealth or desperation dictate. 
>Who, in their right mind, is going to charge a main battle tank with a hand 
>weapon, even if it can penetrate the armor? Especially when they've got a 
>remote-guidance missile to use.
>

Did Medium and Heavy Can Cyborgs need the Samson boosters just to carry 
weapons...?  The strength-augmenter is prerequisite gear for them.

It seems like a Cyborg would have needed AP HTH weapons just because...well, 
they were going up against heavily armored Cyborgs (and folks with 
Battlesuits) on occasion.

Still, it seems like there would have been a market for pre-war AP bayonets, 
if nothing else.  As you noted later, folks are going to carry HTH weapons 
anyway, and it's not like the military couldn't afford to make them and 
equip their soldiers with them.

Again, if it's not too late, I would suggest such things might be (briefly) 
listed in the Wasted Warriors SB (or whatever the "soldier sourcebook" is 
going to be called).

>A>>nd...as you noted above, the knife is universally _uneffective_ compared 
>to
>a gun.  From a rules point of view (and the problem to some degree exists 
>in
>Deadlands as well, where ammo isn't as rare a commodity so ammo-rarity
>doesn't seem to be the issue), why would anyone (except perhaps the most
>heavily muscled of individuals, and even then the strength is useless if 
>the
>weapon base damage can't get through the armor) _ever_ take a HTH attack, 
>or
>skills, or anything related to the knife/sword/whatever HTH?>>
>
>Same reason you'd do it today. Given a lawless environment where you could 
>carry any weapon possible and your opponents can too, who's really going to 
>pick a knife or even a sword as his first weapon? If so, when they pick 
>post-Apocalypse survival teams, I've got a feeling he'll get picked last. 
>:-)
>

*ding* Ummm, according to pretty much all of Pinnacle's source material, 
Templars _do_ pick a sword as their first weapon, correct?  There's a reason 
(I assume) Fightin'/Sword is a prerequisite for them and not Shootin'/SMG, 
Pistol, or whatever.  And they have "blessed" HTH weaponry.  And more Gifts 
focussed around strength and HTH fighting then ranged combat.  And so on, 
and so on.

I certainly don't have a problem with the idea of a Templar using a gun.  
The player in question does, but I think he's more concerned that the gun 
_usurp_ the sword for his character.  And I'd have to agree in part that 
that does _not_ seem appropriate for a Templar.

Seemingly guns are a backup for Templars, based on the source material and 
your comments above.  But as I noted elsewhere, as threat levels go up, 
swordfighting becomes seemingly less useful.

> >>One suggestion I would make for a future (hopefully) edition of HoE 
>would be
>to make the rules a bit broader as far as allowing folks to do damage based
>on their strength even if the weapon damage is reduced down to 0 by armor.
>Even if you've got armor 4, I'd kinda think being hit in the head with a 
>2d8
>sword would do _something_.  Maybe expand the "larger size/non-lethal
>damage" thing.  Anybody here could do that, but it would be nice to see it
>published...<<
>
>Me, I'd reduce them both. That might seem harsh, but...
>
>Under the system you've just described, a peon with 1d4 Strength is going 
>to penetrate armor when a 9mm round won't. 1d4+2d8 vs. AV 4: reduces to 1d4 
>+ 0d4. 9mm 3d6 vs: AV 4: reduces to 0d4.
>
>

Except the damage would also be non-lethal in this case.  And may in some 
cases be irrelevant (for creatures w/o Wind).  This wasn't proposed as a 
fix-everything solution, but at least to give the Templar/HTH fighter some 
input in certain cases, not all cases.

> >>Sure.  But in the example I cited below with the Wormlings, even when he
>brings a knife to a knife-fight, his opponents (when they have an option)
>realize that using ranged attacks _in_ knife fighting is better.  
>Apparently
>you shouldn't bring a knife to a knifefight either!  :)<<
>
>That's a case of a highly defensive character fighting in his area of 
>specialty. Why would they choose to fight him on his own ground?
>

Why does anybody bother to fight Templars on their own ground?  Which was my 
point.  Avoiding HTH combat (the Templars' apparent "own ground") is much 
easier than avoiding, say, a Doomsayer's "own ground" (HTH _and_ ranged 
nuclear miracles) or a Syker's "own ground" or a Junker's "own ground."

Which means that it seems like the Templar's "own ground", the thing they're 
known and feared for (swordfighting) will not _be_ their own ground any 
more.  That they have to _focus_ on firearms rather than just use them as a 
back-up.

Maybe it's just us.  However, in combat with major threats this seems 
very...well, un-Templar like.  Firearms as back-up, sure.  As you note 
later, that's what Deadeye is probably there for.

Oh dear, does that make sense?

> >>If a knife isn't good in a gunfight (understandable), _and_ it isn't the
>best weapon in a knife fight (unless your opponent is willing to stick with
>an inferior knife himself), ummm...what's the point of anyone using
>knives/swords/whatever?<<
>
>They don't run out of bullets. :-)
>

A weapon that doesn't run out of bullets is a moot point if it won't harm 
your major-threat opponent.  :)

>If you choose not to seriously limit the ammuntion available in your 
>campaign, you are going to run into these dilemmas. The gunslingers are 
>going to have a better time, but the HTH types are going to suffer. The 
>same arguments you're posing hold true for pit fighters and other HTH-heavy 
>characters.
>

I believe I'm using the ammo "limits" as established by various archetypes 
throughout the various books.  They do tend to be a little on the high side, 
though...

> >>_If_ they encounter armored opponents, they are typically about an 
>average
>of 4-7.  I don't throw a lot of armored human-type goons at them, which is
>where you tend to see the low-end armor (Kevlar and Infantry Suits).<<
>
>Jeez--that is pretty darn high. In that case, let him run with it. Those 
>levels of armor are usually the _high_ end...
>

Well, again, note my qualification I mentioned somewhere.  I was talking a 
major end-of-adventure threat.  Sure, a Templar is going to cut through a 
bunch of Black Hat goons or Wormling goons pretty readily.  The 4-7 seems to 
be consistent with your own "end of adventure" threats (although 3-4 might 
be more accurate, but there are other "major types" in MMM that makes 4-7 
about right).

But, to take an example from your own works, look at the major nemesis from 
Killer Clowns.  To defeat it, a Templar has to either decide to become a 
circus acrobat (and have the appropriate skills), or switch to a back-up 
weapon.  Either way, he is not really fighting on his "own ground."  Quite 
simply, if he fights it in the standard Templar way, he cannot do 
_anything_.

(Note:  Yes, an ingenious and skilled GM might come up with ways for the 
Templar to defeat the KC major threat using HTH and called shots.  However, 
no such guidelines are provided there and I have never seen anything saying 
that that adventure, and Pinnacle material in general, are only marketed to 
high-end skilled GMs.)

Hmmm, to sum it all up:  it seems like the Templars' reputation in general 
is built on being able to defeat _major_ threats (not just chopping up 
grunts) using the preferred weapon of the Templars ("on their own ground", 
as it were).  But...the rules as printed don't support that (Killer Clowns 
doesn't really support that!), and thus my player's disappointment.

This only becomes noticeable as experience increases and the threat level 
(and its armor) increases.  As you can appreciate, the player doesn't want 
to get a new character just because he's found after a year of skill and 
character development that the rules don't support the background material 
and "reputation" presented for Templars.

I think some of your statements above support the inconsistencies we're 
seeing.  You say that folks relying on swords wouldn't be chosen in a 
post-Apocalypse setting...yet Templars not only are chosen, but the 
background material presents them as among the most feared and respected of 
such types!  You see the dichotomy we're facing here...?

> >> Quite
>frankly, it just makes for more in-combat calculations ("Did I hit the 
>head?
>   The arm?  Did I hit the 50% of the leg that the Duster covers? Okay, you
>know the dice you normally roll for damage - well, roll something 
>different! <<
>
>So you don't use hit locations? I'm not clear here...
>

I use them.  But I don't use variable armor like a Duster, and I try to 
stick to giving opponents the same armor in all locations.  Your suggestion 
was concerning, say, the head being less armored then the rest of the body.  
IMO, I'd rather just say, "Okay, they have the equivalent of -2 armor on 
every location," rather than "Okay, they've got AV 1 on their head, and 
Kevlar (which works different against ranged and HTH attacks), and a Duster, 
and..."  My way is simpler and perhaps not "accurate", granted, but it's 
much less of a headache and speeds things up during combat.

> >An odd statement.  It's true Syker and Doomsayer stuff requires a single
>action (typically), but requiring an Aptitude roll is hardly a hardship.
>Geez, even most of the archetypes in the books max out the appropriate
>stat/skill, and the TNs are relatively low enough (mostly 5s in non-opposed
>cases) that your chance of failure is pretty minimal.>>
>
>Until you add in modifiers for Wound Levels, lighting, or other situational 
>ones.
>

The same modifiers apply to Templars using their "own ground" technique of 
swordfighting, correct?

> >>But anyway...I assume you mean restraint with _new_ Templar Gifts - 
>there's
>not much one can do about printed ones other than to outright ban them
>without some significant designing effort.  Actually, it strikes me that
>Pinnacle might have shown some restraint with a few of those published
>ones...  ;)>>
>
>Such as? I think the Templars are one of the better balanced of the lot.
>

Darn, forgot to bring my Templar book today.  But...as I mentioned Guardian 
Angel is a major pain.  I don't recall the Greater Reward right off hand, 
but having five levels of the lesser one is a pain.  Which leads to a 
vicious circle.  Between his HTH skill and Guardian Angel, forget hitting 
the Templar in HTH! (typical TN to hit him = about a 17 or so - I don't roll 
like my players :( ).  So nobody attacks him in HTH.  Which means his 
primary swordfighting skill, that thing the Templars are known and feared 
for, becomes more and more irrelevant.  You tend to confirm this, John, when 
you note above about how HTH specialists probably aren't too popular choices 
in survival teams.

That may seem like a contradiction on our part, that the Templar is hard to 
hit but we're still complaining that he's useless.  But being hard to hit 
doesn't really give you a benefit in defeating those major threats.  The 
Templar is reduced to drawing fire (at least until the opponent(s) figure he 
can't do much offensively).  Which doesn't seem very...well, Templar-like, 
based on the source material.

> >>Also, we raised that question before, but AP effects other then ammo are
>_not_ less effective against soft targets, right Presumably any pre-war AP
>Swords or Junker-built material (or grenades, or shells or whatever) I have
>the party scrounge would not suffer from the "soft target" modifier,
>correct...?  We've never been quite clear on that.>>
>
>I would say most are just as effective. The AP effect from a bullet comes 
>from it's hard/dense nature. As a result, it passes through a soft target 
>without imparting as much of its energy as a standard softer one. An AP 
>Junker sword, OTOH, is going to tear just as much flesh; for that matter, a 
>HEAT round is going to burn just as much of your torso to cinder if you're 
>wearing a Kevlar vest or not. :-)
>
>

Well, there was some discussion on that point a couple of weeks ago, as I 
recall.  I didn't really have an opinion one way or another (my players do, 
but that's another story).  However, I recall some folks on this mailing 
list disagreeing with you.  Plus, a literal reading of the rules suggests 
your statement above is incorrect, since the rules _only_ talk about AP ammo 
rounds.

Not that I'm disagreeing with you - just pointing out the various points of 
view.

> >>Well see my comment on the whole "restraint" thing of the published 
>material
>above.  Was it really Pinnacle's intent to let Templars become these kind 
>of
>turtles?  Guardian Angel (even without the Greater Reward) has been a thorn
>in my side for quite some time... :(<<
>
>Yep. They're primarily defensive in nature if you've noted (which you have 
><g>). That's why I balk at giving them offensively oriented gifts. IMO, 
>they're intended to survive and fight the smart way. The swords are nice, 
>but if it takes a different approach, then use it.
>

As I noted above, and as my player has noted, this seems to be at the heart 
of the dilemma.  The majority of the time, when the source material talks 
about Templars, it doesn't talk about them being hard to hit and using guns. 
  It talks about them being powerful and vicious HTH swordfighters, able to 
deal with all manners of threats.

But...the rules don't seem to support this.  Thus the proposed "Cutting 
Edge" gift.

>However, that does bolster the argument that limiting oneself to a sword is 
>not necessarily what the order intends...
>

Again, I don't think it's a matter of limiting oneself.  But the Templars 
are best known, and feared, and renowned, _for_ their swordfighting.  I 
think we've reached a point where we both agree that against major threats, 
the Templars should use something else.  Fine.  But this does seem at odds 
with Pinnacle's narrative take on Templars.

>Found it! Thanks--I never look a review in the mouth. IMHO, a review that 
>pans a product is better than no review at all. :-)
>
><<SNIPPED Review comments>>
>

[snipped John's response]

Agreed.  Being a published RPG author myself, I understand your point of 
view completely.  And certainly your comments in the whole discussion seem 
to reflect your design approach.  That, more than anything, was what I was 
trying to get at with my summarized comments.  That, and to get more folks 
to read azraelonline, since I'm going to continue to get HoE material up 
there.  :)

Thanks for your time.  Again, I agree with your statements in general.  But 
the player's opinion, and I can't say I totally disagree with him, is that 
the rules themselves tend to undermine the "Templar approach" as is 
presented in the source material.  It really is hard to believe that their 
rep as swordfighters is as renowned as it is, when every time they run up 
against someone with Armor 4 (i.e., most major threats, and more every day 
as the stakes go up as it were) they whip out a gun and start shooting.  
Maybe they should start getting blessed SMGs...?  :)

Or are there plans to have the Templars' rep go down as Wasted Westers 
realize they're less and less useful against the big dudes?  Between that, 
and the final events of Boise Horror, _that_ would be an interesting 
meta-plot approach...

---

Steve Crow

"Worm Can Opener Extraordinare"

Check out my website at:  http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Stargate/4991/

________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com