New Weapon: Sling

[Otaku-sempai]

A review might be in order:

Brawling Attacks
A character attempting a close combat attack without a proper weapon (either unarmed or wielding an improvised weapon) can make a brawling attack:

Brawling attacks are made using the Dagger weapon skill, causing 1 Endurance point's worth of damage on a successful roll, and additional harm equal to the attacker's Damage rating on a great or extraordinary success. A brawling attack cannot result in a Piercing blow.

Throwing Attacks
A character attempting a ranged attack using a stone or another object not specifically designed for throwing makes a throwing attack:

Throwing attacks are rolled using the Dagger weapon skill, and inflict 1 Endurance point's damage on a successful role, and additional loss of Endurance equal to the attacker's ranged Damage rating on a great or extraordinary success. A throwing attack cannot result in a Piercing blow.

I'm trying to adhere to these guidelines, which would not normally apply to a weapon such as a sling or stave (or a sling-staff, for that matter). Or, if it does apply, does not allow for normal damage or any Injury from matching or exceeding the weapon's Edge. The weapon must be treated as an improvised weapon until the bearer is trained in that specific weapon-type's use. Without such training the weapon can never do more than 1 point of Endurance damage on a normal success. This is regardless of how you think the weapon should be statted.

Now, maybe you are trying a home-brewed rewrite of the above rules that negates what I wrote and I just don't understand your version. But, if so, you haven't convinced me that we need such a revision or that it works well. I'm willing to pay attention if you want to try to clarify your position.

[Falenthal]

Now, maybe you are trying a home-brewed rewrite of the above rules that negates what I wrote and I just don't understand your version. But, if so, you haven't convinced me that we need such a revision or that it works well. I'm willing to pay attention if you want to try to clarify your position.

Well, I must admit I can't explain any better my intentions here (and Glorelendil's, for all I know, but I can't speak for him).

I'm centering on the fact that a single skill (Dagger) includes weapons that don't do Wounds (brawling and throwing attacks), weapon(s) that do (dagger), weapons only for melee (brawling and dagger) and weapons for ranged attacks (throwing attacks). ALL OF THEM WITH A SINGLE SKILL.

What I'm trying is, IMHO, not to negate or rewrite this rules, but to expand on them. I'm adding a weapon that is ranged and does wounds (slings) and another one that is for melee and doesn't do wounds (quarterstaff). There are already weapons with this characteristics in this group, I'm only trying to define them more.

Maybe the concept it's a bit like the (Swords) group: I don't think someone that practices and trains with a 2 handed long sword does, automatically, become equally skilled in a short sword. But the game works this way. We use the same group skill for a Hobbit's long knive as for an ancient noldorin long sword.

Or we reduce the capabilities of a full grown hunting hound to "roll the Feat die twice on an Awareness roll". Not very realistic, but it works in TOR.

[Glorelendil]

You don't need a "a home-brewed rewrite of the above rules." You took two specific rules and surmised a general rule: "When the Dagger skill is used it does 1 point of damage and can't get a Pierce, unless it's actually with a Dagger." Which is fine; that's consistent with the text, if a bit contrived. (If I use a totally unrelated skill when using a non-weapon, why can't I use my highest skill?)

But you could equally conclude: "When using weapons that don't have a specific skill, use the Dagger skill. Improvised weapons do 1 point of damage and can't get a Pierce." That's also consistent with the text, and although it's a matter of personal preference, I find it less contrived. (Basically it means that "Dagger" is actually a catch-all for simpler weapons.)

And, yes, I agree with Falenthal, who typed faster than I.

EDIT: Note that I did not write "When using weapons for which you don't have a skill rating." It would only apply to weapons that don't have their own skill, so as long as that only includes weapons that are inferior to normal weapons it should be fine. Basically you're giving players a choice (for equivalent XP) between being good with one deadly weapon, or with several weaker weapons.

[Otaku-sempai]

Okay, I see that where we differ here is how we define a 'proper weapon'. The intent of the game, from what I see, is that a proper weapon is anything that is written up and statted as a weapon and is intended to be used primarily as a weapon. This would not only include those weapons intended for Adventurers, but also those used by monsters and other Adversaries,not including their natural attacks.

If you pick up a long piece of driftwood and use it like a quarterstaff, you should treat it as an improvised weapon. You attack with it using your Dagger skill. It only does 1 point of Endurance damage unless you roll a great or extraordinary attack, and cannot strike a Piercing blow.

An actual quarterstaff should have ratings for Damage, Edge and Injury. Someone trained in its use should be able to score normal damage and is capable of doing Injury with it. What we can do is say that an untrained individual can pick up the quarterstaff and use it, but can only use it as an improvised weapon unless the wielder becomes trained in its use. Also, a quarterstaff has mass and weight just as does a spear or other object of similar size. It should have a reasonable Encumbrance rating commensurate with similar objects. Even the driftwood in the previous paragraph should have some Encumbrance.

Likewise, say that you lose your spear in battle and, out of desperation, pick up an Orc-spear. You can use it as an improvised weapon and even throw it, but you will only get the improvised weapon damage and cannot strike a Piercing blow. And your Dagger skill is used when you wield it. Afterwards, you decide to keep that Orc-spear, reasoning that it sends a message to potential enemies or just because it strikes your fancy. You can remain untrained in the weapon, using your Dagger skill to wield it and only doing damage with it as an improvised weapon. Or you can spend the points to become skilled in its use: You get a skill ranking in Orc-spear; get the normal Damage (4) on a normal success; and now the Edge (9) and Injury (14) can be applied.

Objects not specifically intended to be weapons--a rock, a piece of driftwood, a table-leg, a frying pan--are always considered to be improvised weapons if used for attack or defense.

[Glorelendil]

Funny, in one of zed's games my character did exactly that: he took a shield and spear from an orc he humiliated in single combat (it's how we resolved the "what do we do with the prisoner after questioning" conundrum...unfortunately the rascal ran for it and we all failed our Athletics rolls to stop him. He eventually gets eaten by Shelob.)

Because I took them for trophies and wasn't using them as personal gear, Zed didn't make me increase Encumbrance. We both thought that was in the spirit of the game, even if it didn't model reality. Honestly I wouldn't have taken them if I had to add 5 encumbrance, and we all would have missed out on some of the fun storytelling that ensued.

What would you do? Add the 5 Encumbrance because it's "realistic"? Or leave it out because it's not in the spirit of the rule?

If I *had* used the spear I imagine Zed would have let me use normal Spear skill (which was the same as my Dagger skill anyway...). Why not? Since an Orc spear is worse than a normal spear anyway, where's the potential for abuse?

[Otaku-sempai]

Actually, yes, if it is a weapon--even if you are not using it--it should count towards your war-gear. If it has a total Encumbrance rating of 5 then maybe you should just leave it behind or at least strapped to your pack-beast. If you lose your mounts and other animals then you have to make choices over what you want to carry. That is how I would have ruled (and still would rule).

[Glorelendil]

Actually, yes, if it is weapon--even if you are not using it--it should count towards your war-gear. If it has a total Encumbrance rating of 5 then maybe you should just leave it behind or at least strapped to your pack-beast. If you lose your mounts and other animals then you have to make choices over what you want to carry. That is how I would have ruled (and still would rule).

Well, putting gear on a pack-beast doesn't reduce Encumbrance, according to RAW. Traveling with pack-beasts only reduces your Fatigue gains due to failed Travel rolls.

That aside, your ruling would be fair and consistent. But it would also mean the loss of some great storytelling opportunities. To each his own, I guess.

Your versions/interpretations are all a valid way of playing RPGs. My sense, though, is that it's an approach more common in other RPGs, and TOR was designed explicitly to abstract away a lot of the details that concern you.

[Otaku-sempai]

If I *had* used the spear I imagine Zed would have let me use normal Spear skill (which was the same as my Dagger skill anyway...). Why not? Since an Orc spear is worse than a normal spear anyway, where's the potential for abuse?

Sorry, I shouldn't have overlooked this part of your post. The matter about the spear is debatable. The skill might be directly transferrable, though I don't think that is supposed to be the case (I'm having trouble finding a citation). Your mileage may vary. A better example would be if you lost your spear and attempted to use the Orc's broad-bladed sword when you have no ranking in sword or (swords). Do you use the weapon with no skill rating but with normal effect(s)? Or is it treated as an improvised weapon with all of those limitations enforced? Or is there something in-between?

[Glorelendil]

If I *had* used the spear I imagine Zed would have let me use normal Spear skill (which was the same as my Dagger skill anyway...). Why not? Since an Orc spear is worse than a normal spear anyway, where's the potential for abuse?

Sorry, I shouldn't have overlooked this part of your post. The matter about the spear is debatable. The skill might be directly transferrable, though I don't think that is supposed to be the case (I'm having trouble finding a citation). Your mileage may vary. A better example would be if you lost your spear and attempted to use the Orc's broad-bladed sword when you have no ranking in sword or (swords). Do you use the weapon with no skill rating but with normal effect(s)? Or is it treated as an improvised weapon with all of those limitations enforced? Or is there something in-between?

I don't know, I've never seen a rule for it either. "Improvised weapon" seems too weak. I don't see a good solution in RAW for this situation. "You can't use a weapon you have trained with" seems to lead to loss of player agency.

[Otaku-sempai]

I don't know, I've never seen a rule for it either. "Improvised weapon" seems too weak. I don't see a good solution in RAW for this situation. "You can't use a weapon you have trained with" seems to lead to loss of player agency.

Found it Adventurer's Book page 92):

A weapon skill can only be used with the named weapon. A hero cannot use the skill to fight with a different weapon, no matter how similar it may be.

So, an Orc's spear does not equate to a normal spear. Sorry.

Now, that last bit we can both agree on. If a foreign weapon is treated as an improvised weapon then the player should abide by the rules for such.

The alternative is to attempt to use the weapon as unskilled with no skill ranks (no Success die, unless it comes from another source). That may be the better (and correct?) option. That also precludes substituting the Dagger skill when using an unfamiliar weapon; it shouldn't be done. The good news is that it probably should allow for Piercing attacks, so Edge and Injury should still apply. However, you need at least one Success die to be able to score a called shot.

I may be wrong, but I think we may have made a breakthrough here!