Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Simon and Fiona sfuller@******.com.au
Subject: [OT] Interesting bit of D&D trivia
Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2000 15:57:56 +1000
You probably all know this already, but I think it is ineresting. Clerics in
D&D can't use edged weapons (except for the cleric of the god of bloody big
swords caveat), they have to use maces. This isn't just a limitation to make
them less like warriors.
Back in the middle ages the church got a lot of power. One way the hungry
nobles could get even more power was to become high ranking members of the
clergy, which they did basically by just naming themselves archbishops etc.
A problem came about because one of the favorite pursuits of many of these
nobles was to go out on the battlefield and wreak havok. Rome decided that
it was ungodly, and so put a ban on any clergy spilling human blood. It
probably took about five minutes for the more warlike overlords to realise
that maces and war hammers didn't spill blood (theoretically) and so the
slaughter continued.
Message no. 2
From: Rand Ratinac docwagon101@*****.com
Subject: [OT] Interesting bit of D&D trivia
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 01:02:39 -0700 (PDT)
--- Simon and Fiona <sfuller@******.com.au> wrote:
> You probably all know this already, but I think it
is ineresting. Clerics in D&D can't use edged weapons
(except for the cleric of the god of bloody big swords
caveat), they have to use maces. This isn't just a
limitation to make them less like warriors. Back in
the middle ages the church got a lot of power. One way
the hungry nobles could get even more power was to
become high ranking members of the clergy, which they
did basically by just naming themselves archbishops
etc. A problem came about because one of the favorite
pursuits of many of these nobles was to go out on the
battlefield and wreak havok. Rome decided that it was
ungodly, and so put a ban on any clergy spilling human
blood. It probably took about five minutes for the
more warlike overlords to realise that maces and war
hammers didn't spill blood (theoretically) and so the
slaughter continued.

Actually, that one's news to me, Simon.

Going back to the D&D thingy, though, that no longer
holds in D&D3. Now weapons are grouped by how easy
they are to use (clubs, maces, crossbows and knives
are comparatively easy (simple weapons), while swords,
bows, polearms and axes are a bit harder (martial
weapons)...and then there are the weird ones (exotic
weapons)). Clerics can use all simple weapons without
any extra learning, so they can use crossbows now. A
weapon which, oddly enough, the church tried to ban in
Europe at one point (I don't think they were
successful). They thought the crossbow was a...well, I
can't recall exactly how they described it, but they
said it was inhumane, or something like that.
Strangely enough, the crossbow was one of the most
effective anti-knight weapons of the time. :)

====Doc'
(aka Mr. Freaky Big, Super-Dynamic Troll of Tomorrow, aka Doc'booner, aka Doc' Vader)

.sig Sauer

Can you SMELL what THE DOC' is COOKIN'!!!

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail – Free email you can access from anywhere!
http://mail.yahoo.com/
Message no. 3
From: Gurth gurth@******.nl
Subject: [OT] Interesting bit of D&D trivia
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 10:54:32 +0200
According to Rand Ratinac, at 1:02 on 22 Aug 00, the word on the street
was...

> They thought the crossbow was a...well, I
> can't recall exactly how they described it, but they
> said it was inhumane, or something like that.

IIRC, it went along the lines of "the deadly art, hated by God, of
crossbowmen and archers."

> Strangely enough, the crossbow was one of the most
> effective anti-knight weapons of the time. :)

Makes you wonder why they felt the need to ban them... :)

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Imagine doing just what the Big Bang did
-> NAGEE Editor * ShadowRN GridSec * Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://plastic.dumpshock.com <-

GC3.1: GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+@ UL P L+ E? W(++) N o? K- w+ O V? PS+
PE Y PGP- t(+) 5++ X+ R+++>$ tv+(++) b++@ DI? D+ G(++) e h! !r(---) y?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998
Message no. 4
From: Curtis Askren vykar@*****.com
Subject: [OT] Interesting bit of D&D trivia
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 17:30:26 -0700 (PDT)
<snip history leason ;-)>
> Going back to the D&D thingy, though, that no longer
> holds in D&D3. Now weapons are grouped by how easy
> they are to use (clubs, maces, crossbows and knives
> are comparatively easy (simple weapons), while
> swords,
> bows, polearms and axes are a bit harder (martial
> weapons)...and then there are the weird ones (exotic
> weapons)). Clerics can use all simple weapons
> without
> any extra learning, so they can use crossbows now. A
> weapon which, oddly enough, the church tried to ban
> in
> Europe at one point (I don't think they were
> successful). They thought the crossbow was a...well,
> I
> can't recall exactly how they described it, but they
> said it was inhumane, or something like that.
> Strangely enough, the crossbow was one of the most
> effective anti-knight weapons of the time. :)
>
> ====> Doc'


Actually, the church did not -try- to ban the weapon,
they DID ban the weapon. They were succesful.

And here's a grip from me... Crossbows are easy to
use? eh? to me, crossbows should be in the sword
catagory, if not exotic. I mean, here's fighting with
a crossbow in those times....

*crank crank crank crank*
*load arrrow*
*aim*
*fire*
*crank crank crank crank*

reapeat until you hit the target, or target dies.

a mace or club?

*bludgeon*

boom. head caved in, end of story.

sword?

*hack hack hack*

boom.

sorry, just my .02¥. ;-)

Dr.Vyk

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - Free email you can access from anywhere!
http://mail.yahoo.com/
Message no. 5
From: Sean Edwards edwars2@*******.com
Subject: [OT] Interesting bit of D&D trivia
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 20:36:15 EDT
>*crank crank crank crank*
*load arrrow*
*aim*
*fire*
*crank crank crank crank*

>reapeat until you hit the target, or target dies.

Time consuming? Yes. Strenuous? Yes. Difficult to learn? I don't think so.
Now, I haven't read the 3rd edition rules, so I don't exactly know if
they're classifying these weapons based on the difficulty of learning or the
difficulty of using, but the concept of a crossbow is not difficult.

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

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
http://profiles.msn.com.
Message no. 6
From: Rand Ratinac docwagon101@*****.com
Subject: [OT] Interesting bit of D&D trivia
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 19:58:51 -0700 (PDT)
<snipt!(TM)>
> Actually, the church did not -try- to ban the
weapon, they DID ban the weapon. They were succesful.

For how long?

> And here's a grip from me... Crossbows are easy to
use? eh? to me, crossbows should be in the sword
catagory, if not exotic. I mean, here's fighting with
a crossbow in those times....
>
> *crank crank crank crank*
> *load arrrow*
> *aim*
> *fire*
> *crank crank crank crank*
>
> reapeat until you hit the target, or target dies.
>
> a mace or club?
>
> *bludgeon*
>
> boom. head caved in, end of story.
>
> sword?
>
> *hack hack hack*
>
> boom.
>
> sorry, just my .02¥. ;-)
> Dr.Vyk

Sure, but that's FIGHTING with it, not just USING it.
Reloading comes under a different heading and can get
you killed if you're trying to do it while there's an
enemy close to you. USING a loaded crossbow is little
more than point and shoot. It's not QUITE as simple as
a pistol (trajectories come into it more at longer
ranges), but it's not far off.

I dunno...but I can see their reasoning. After all,
it's a rather simple process compared to the dodging
and blocking and striking of a melee. All you have to
do is learn how to crank the crossbow, fit the bolt,
pick it up, aim and shoot. Repeat ad infinitum.
Considering that the heaviest crossbows were usually
used from behind the cover of a castle wall, it really
is quite a simple process.

Of course, it's a bit more complex than tipping a
cauldron of boiling oil on people...

*Doc' comes up with a new innovation for siege
warfare...hot chocolate. If you're going to boil
someone to death, why not at least make their last
moments taste good?*

====Doc'
(aka Mr. Freaky Big, Super-Dynamic Troll of Tomorrow, aka Doc'booner, aka Doc' Vader)

.sig Sauer

Can you SMELL what THE DOC' is COOKIN'!!!

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - Free email you can access from anywhere!
http://mail.yahoo.com/
Message no. 7
From: k guito@*****.dhs.org
Subject: [OT] Interesting bit of D&D trivia
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 23:41:01 -0400 (EDT)
On Wed, 23 Aug 2000, Sean Edwards wrote:

> Time consuming? Yes. Strenuous? Yes. Difficult to learn? I don't think so.
> Now, I haven't read the 3rd edition rules, so I don't exactly know if
> they're classifying these weapons based on the difficulty of learning or the
> difficulty of using, but the concept of a crossbow is not difficult.

the concept of _any_ of these medieval weapons are difficult, but compared
with the others i'd say that yeah, a crossbow is pretty difficult. :)


--
The leading distinction of magnets is sex... The kind that is found
in Troas is black, and of the female sex, and consequently destitute
of attractive power.
-Pliny The Elder (23-79)
Message no. 8
From: Paul Collins paulcollins@*******.com
Subject: [OT] Interesting bit of D&D trivia
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 16:09:32 +1000
<Snippers>

> And here's a grip from me... Crossbows are easy to
> use? eh? to me, crossbows should be in the sword
> catagory, if not exotic. I mean, here's fighting with
> a crossbow in those times....
>
Well, it was/is. Simple to use, any idot can load and cock one if they have
the crank, and it was the first point and shoot weapon, and could put a
serious hole in plate armor, wheras archers took lots of training before
they could hit something, and lots of strength to use a bow with any power
to it. (Although modern compunds and pully systems change this)

Annachie
Message no. 9
From: Michael Schmidt Michael.Schmidt@****.uni-hannover.de
Subject: [OT] Interesting bit of D&D trivia
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 12:55:23 +0200 (MET DST)
On Wed, 23 Aug 2000, Sean Edwards wrote:

> >*crank crank crank crank*
> *load arrrow*
> *aim*
> *fire*
> *crank crank crank crank*
>
> >reapeat until you hit the target, or target dies.
>
> Time consuming? Yes. Strenuous? Yes. Difficult to learn? I don't think so.
> Now, I haven't read the 3rd edition rules, so I don't exactly know if
> they're classifying these weapons based on the difficulty of learning or the
> difficulty of using, but the concept of a crossbow is not difficult.

I think Doc is right. In mediaval Britain they replaced archers which
where faster and more accurate with crossbow archers (or how is it called
in English) because they were faster to train.

Michael Schmidt

icewolf@stud.uni-hannover.de/Crowley@*******.de
Message no. 10
From: Nimster nimster@*********.net.il
Subject: [OT] Interesting bit of D&D trivia
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 08:19:05 +0200
(>) Sean Edwards Left this message on the BBS at 08:36 PM 8/23/2000
>>*crank crank crank crank*
>*load arrrow*
>*aim*
>*fire*
>*crank crank crank crank*
>
>>reapeat until you hit the target, or target dies.
>
>Time consuming? Yes. Strenuous? Yes. Difficult to learn? I don't think so.

Might not be but sniping is. It takes years of practice. You know how hard
is hitting a target 50 meters away, moving, through a forest, carrying a
crossbow? unlike guns they have a much more mortarish trajectory for
greater ranges, forcing you to aim above he target just the right amount.
They're heavy, and on top of that very likely to rust, break, etc.
You are acting like weapons are a thing any child can be tought! That's not
true.

>Now, I haven't read the 3rd edition rules, so I don't exactly know if
>they're classifying these weapons based on the difficulty of learning or
>the difficulty of using, but the concept of a crossbow is not difficult.

(>) Nimster
There is no spoon.
Message no. 11
From: Nimster nimster@*********.net.il
Subject: [OT] Interesting bit of D&D trivia
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 08:14:32 +0200
(>) Curtis Askren Left this message on the BBS at 05:30 PM 8/23/2000

>a mace or club?
>
>*bludgeon*
>
>boom. head caved in, end of story.
>
>sword?
>
>*hack hack hack*


Unfortunately, what you say shows real lack of knowledge in medieval
weapons. If only it was so easy. The art of sword fighting, yes, even
barbarian type of sword fighting is learned for many years. A sword is a
lot heavier then you might think, and those "show" swords you get in
HappyTie and other are not even half the weigh of real ones. add to that
parrying/defending from other blow, skillful returns of the sword to a
power position (ready to slash) using your own or enemy's power, are not as
simple as you might think. Good sabre (I think that's the name in English
:( /me not know much ) takes about a year to learn, and years to practice
to be a good enough sword player. And on that I can tell you from
experience. Position, fixture, moves, thrusts, parries, defenses, dodging,
feinting, combo moves... and that's from about the lightest sword, on an
even ground, and with rules.
I think clubs have some sort of fighting art as well, because with a
baseball bat you have no chance of beating an ogre unless you're real
practiced in knowing stuff like where to hit with the club (places that
hurt, and I don't mean the groin, but joints, places with not much skin on
them, etc.), how to dodge other hits and so on.

>boom.
>
>sorry, just my .02¥. ;-)

Here's your change.
(>) Nimster
There is no spoon.
Message no. 12
From: Yiannakos yiannako@*******.edu
Subject: [OT] Interesting bit of D&D trivia
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 11:47:01 -0400
'Doc wrote:

> I dunno...but I can see their reasoning. After all,
> it's a rather simple process compared to the dodging
> and blocking and striking of a melee. All you have to
> do is learn how to crank the crossbow, fit the bolt,
> pick it up, aim and shoot. Repeat ad infinitum.
> Considering that the heaviest crossbows were usually
> used from behind the cover of a castle wall, it really
> is quite a simple process.

Especially since (I think) that it was "heavy" crossbows that needed to
be cranked. Lighter crossbows had a stirrup at the front of the bow that
you put your foot in, and then yanked it up/back.

Or maybe I'm just talking out of my ass. I don't know. I just woke up.

---Dave ('s not here man)
*kickin' it John Woo style with an arbolast in each hand...*
Message no. 13
From: Steve Collins einan@*********.net
Subject: [OT] Interesting bit of D&D trivia
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 00 14:05:03 -0500
On 8/23/00 9:58 pm, Rand Ratinac said:

><snipt!(TM)>
>> Actually, the church did not -try- to ban the
>weapon, they DID ban the weapon. They were succesful.
>
>For how long?



Not sure how long this lasted but the were never quite banned. All armies continued to use
them but what happened was that crossbows were indeed deemed an inhumane weapon by the
church and anyone who used one against a human was guilty of a crime against the church
and could be excomunicated (and frequently were). In fact is a cruel twist of Fate a Ruler
would conscript an army of Peasants and equip them with Crossbows and then if they
survuved the campaign turn them in to the church where they would have to pay and
expensive Pennance to avoid Excomunication.

The real reason for this happening is that Knights were becoming quite peeved that a bunch
of half trained peasants could now shoot through their prescious Plate Mail with little
difficulty. Longbowmen could at least be respected because it took as long to train a good
bowman as it did to train a knight (infact Welsh Longbowmen could frequently command as
high of a fee as a Mercenary as a Knight)


>
>> And here's a grip from me... Crossbows are easy to
>use? eh? to me, crossbows should be in the sword
>catagory, if not exotic. I mean, here's fighting with
>a crossbow in those times....
>>
>> *crank crank crank crank*
>> *load arrrow*
>> *aim*
>> *fire*
>> *crank crank crank crank*
>>
>> reapeat until you hit the target, or target dies.

It still takes very little skill and you can become traned to be very proficient with it
in just a few weeks compaired to the years it takes to train a Sword or Bowman. Heck it
even takes about a year to train a spear/pikeman to be able to fight in a phalanx.



>>
>> a mace or club?
>>
>> *bludgeon*
>>
>> boom. head caved in, end of story.

Much harder than that when your target is armored, moving, and trying to do the same to
you in return. In fact the fighting style for a club is remarkably similar to fighting
with a longsword (not the same but similar)

>>
>> sword?
>>
>> *hack hack hack*
>>
>> boom.

Same as above. That process works just fine against incapacitated/unaware targets but it
is considerably more complex to use in combat.


>>
>> sorry, just my .02¥. ;-)
>> Dr.Vyk
>
>Sure, but that's FIGHTING with it, not just USING it.
>Reloading comes under a different heading and can get
>you killed if you're trying to do it while there's an
>enemy close to you. USING a loaded crossbow is little
>more than point and shoot. It's not QUITE as simple as
>a pistol (trajectories come into it more at longer
>ranges), but it's not far off.
>
>I dunno...but I can see their reasoning. After all,
>it's a rather simple process compared to the dodging
>and blocking and striking of a melee. All you have to
>do is learn how to crank the crossbow, fit the bolt,
>pick it up, aim and shoot. Repeat ad infinitum.
>Considering that the heaviest crossbows were usually
>used from behind the cover of a castle wall, it really
>is quite a simple process.

In fact the reason for the rise of the Crossbow in use was that it was the only weapon you
could give a half trained peasant that would make him dangerous to a knight wearing heavy
plate. Remember Crossbows had been around since at least Roman times and were not commonly
used in warfare because of the long reload times, but when Armor got good enough in the
late middle ages that Peasants weilding pitchforks and other improvised weapons could no
longer hope to harm a heavily armored knight they began to be seen on the battlefield. Of
course their age was short lived because it was not much more than a hundred years from
the begining of their widespread use in battle to the deployment of Muskeeteers.


Steve
Message no. 14
From: baburabi baburabi@********.com
Subject: [OT] Interesting bit of D&D trivia
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 16:21:27 -0400
> >*crank crank crank crank*
> *load arrrow*
> *aim*
> *fire*
> *crank crank crank crank*
>
> >reapeat until you hit the target, or target dies.
>
> Time consuming? Yes. Strenuous? Yes. Difficult to learn? I don't think so.
> Now, I haven't read the 3rd edition rules, so I don't exactly know if
> they're classifying these weapons based on the difficulty of learning or
the
> difficulty of using, but the concept of a crossbow is not difficult.

just bought the book myself and it is difficulty of learning

baburabi ....... maurading lurker
Message no. 15
From: Rand Ratinac docwagon101@*****.com
Subject: [OT] Interesting bit of D&D trivia
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 19:03:27 -0700 (PDT)
<snipt!(TM)>
> Unfortunately, what you say shows real lack of
knowledge in medieval weapons. If only it was so easy.

<BigSNIP(TM)>
> (>) Nimster

The boy's right.

I think Annachie hit on the crux of the matter. The
considerations for the groupings is NOT had physically
taxing a weapon is to use, or how artful and dexterous
the style of combat associated with it is (as Nimster
made plain), but how much training is required to use
the weapon effectively.

Some examples. The crossbow can be used effectively by
any schlub. Pick up, point, shoot. The weapon itself
provides the power and aiming is not difficult
(compared to other weapons of the time). As Annachie
said, reloading is a simple, if taxing process, and as
I pointed out, reloading is something that gives an
enemy who's close to you the chance to chop you good,
so the difficulties in that area of the process are
addressed. The actual USE of the weapon, however, is
simple.

Clubs and maces are relatively easy to use
effectively. Just whack the guy. Of course, whacking
him good and not getting yourself killed is a
different matter, but to hit someone and hurt them is
simple.

Swords, battleaxes, warhammers and the like are a bit
more complex (they're classed as martial weapons, a
step up from simple weapons). Why? Because they have a
specially designed point which you have to hit the
enemy with to be used effectively. For swords and
axes, it's the edge. For warhammers, it's the...well,
what do you call it - point? Front? Let's call it the
front. Sure, you can flail around with those weapons
as if you were using a club, but it's not going to be
as effective as if you hit them with the correct part.
There isn't enough weight behind most swords to hurt
someone in armour if you only hit them with the flat -
you need to slice them with the edge to do damage. An
axe has a heavier head, so you might hurt someone by
hitting them with the flat, but you're going to do the
most damage if you hit them with the edge. Same with a
warhammer. The weapon is designed to focus the most
force (and thus cause the most damage) behind the
front of the hammer, so that's what you want to hit
them with. So a bit more training is required.

A rapier is also classed as a martial weapon. To use
it in the swashbuckling fashion requires a lot of
training, sure - but you don't need that much training
just to skewer someone. It's definitely more complex
than just pummelling someone, though, so it's not a
simple weapon. Btw, has anyone noticed that the
illustration of the rapier in the PHB is actually a
sabre? :)

Bows are all classed as martial weapons. As Annachie
pointed out, they require training if you want to hit
anything that you aim at - more than a crossbow, for
certain.

I could go on, but I won't. I have to go talk to
someone. I hope I've made my point, though.

*Doc' picks up an arrow and strikes himself down with
a flurry of wild blows...

"See! I TOLD you it was a simple weapon!"*

====Doc'
(aka Mr. Freaky Big, Super-Dynamic Troll of Tomorrow, aka Doc'booner, aka Doc' Vader)

.sig Sauer

Can you SMELL what THE DOC' is COOKIN'!!!

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - Free email you can access from anywhere!
http://mail.yahoo.com/
Message no. 16
From: Rand Ratinac docwagon101@*****.com
Subject: [OT] Interesting bit of D&D trivia
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 19:32:27 -0700 (PDT)
<snipt!(TM)>
> > Time consuming? Yes. Strenuous? Yes. Difficult to
learn? I don't think so. Now, I haven't read the 3rd
edition rules, so I don't exactly know if they're
classifying these weapons based on the difficulty of
learning or the difficulty of using, but the concept
of a crossbow is not difficult.
>
> I think Doc is right. In mediaval Britain they
replaced archers which where faster and more accurate
with crossbow archers (or how is it called in English)
because they were faster to train.
> Michael Schmidt

Hmm? I never...oh, I get it!

Michael, I said crossbows were EASIER to use than
bows. You see, we're talking about two different uses
here. Btw, it's crossbowmen. :)

See, it's harder to learn to use a bow if you're
trying to hit what you're aiming at. On an individual
level, that is. Think of Robin Hood and the archery
tournament situation. It requires a lot more training
to use a bow than a crossbow for target shooting, or
for hitting someone on the run etc. As Nimster said,
sure, it isn't exactly EASY to hit someone moving, but
it's a comparitive thing, not an absolute one. If you
compare a bowman and a crossbowman, the bowman would
require greater training to pull off a shot like that.

Now, what you're thinking of, Michael, is the use of
bows in war. Massed archery, rather than individual
archery. In that situation it IS quicker to train a
bowman than a crossbowman, because all you train them
to do is take out an arrow, fit it to the bow, pull it
back, lean back and release. You don't have to worry
about training them how to operate a winch etc. The
difference there wouldn't have been very significant.
The MAIN difference is cost (average bows were cheaper
than average crossbows and many commoners would have
owned their own bows already) and speed (bows can be
fired MUCH faster than crossbows). In massed archery,
you're not aiming at anything. You're just trying to
put as many arrows in the air as you can. As long as
you shoot in the direction of the enemy, you're likely
to hit SOMETHING, because you were dealing with packed
formations of troops. As bowmen could fire between
three and six volleys (depending on their level of
training) in the time it took crossbowmen to fire a
single volley, that made a HUGE difference. Crossbows
were more effective siege tools, because you had to
pick your targets and you wanted to kill what you hit
and crossbows were better for punching through armour.

So that's the difference. One arrow, versus an entire
volley. If you don't really care WHAT you hit, you
don't need a lot of training. D&D deals with a lower
level of conflict, however, where you need to hit
exactly what you're aiming at for your shot to make a
difference. That requires a fair bit of training, and
definitely more for a bow than for a crossbow.

Anyway, what are we talking about this for? This is a
Shadowrun list, dammit!

====Doc'
(aka Mr. Freaky Big, Super-Dynamic Troll of Tomorrow, aka Doc'booner, aka Doc' Vader)

.sig Sauer

Can you SMELL what THE DOC' is COOKIN'!!!

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - Free email you can access from anywhere!
http://mail.yahoo.com/
Message no. 17
From: Nimster nimster@*********.net.il
Subject: [OT] Interesting bit of D&D trivia
Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 20:42:59 +0200
<bigsnip back at you>
Doc'
>(aka Mr. Freaky Big, Super-Dynamic Troll of Tomorrow, aka Doc'booner, aka
>Doc' Vader)

Man, you don't need "training" to just understand where the weigh of the
weapon goes. It does *not* take loner to understand how to use a sword then
how to use a club both take less then 10 seconds, the just know how to
"whack" with like you gently put it. And that, does not require a proficiency.
It does (take longer with sword then mace) to perform well with it. and if
we're talking of performing well with it the whole point shifts to what I
said. It's hard with a xbow as it is with a sword. X-bow has aiming, Swords
have al the feinting/defending etc.
(>) Nimster
There is no spoon.
Message no. 18
From: Rand Ratinac docwagon101@*****.com
Subject: [OT] Interesting bit of D&D trivia
Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 20:31:56 -0700 (PDT)
> Man, you don't need "training" to just understand
where the weigh of the weapon goes. It does *not* take
loner to understand how to use a sword then how to use
a club both take less then 10 seconds, the just know
how to "whack" with like you gently put it. And that,
does not require a proficiency. It does (take longer
with sword then mace) to perform well with it. and if
we're talking of performing well with it the whole
point shifts to what I said. It's hard with a xbow as
it is with a sword. X-bow has aiming, Swords have al
the feinting/defending etc.
> (>) Nimster
> There is no spoon.

Sure, but a) it takes a lot less time to learn how to
aim well with a crossbow (yes, this I know) than it
does to learn to use a sword well, and b) like I said,
it's relative. It's harder than learning to use a
pistol, but easier than learning to use a bow.

It might not the ENTIRELY realistic, but there's only
so far you can go with realism in a game like this.
And I think it's more realistic than it would be to
make a crossbow a martial, or (perish the thought!) an
exotic weapon.

====Doc'
(aka Mr. Freaky Big, Super-Dynamic Troll of Tomorrow, aka Doc'booner, aka Doc' Vader)

.sig Sauer

Can you SMELL what THE DOC' is COOKIN'!!!

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - Free email you can access from anywhere!
http://mail.yahoo.com/
Message no. 19
From: Raveness Ravensbane ravenessravensbane@*****.com
Subject: [OT] Interesting bit of D&D trivia
Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2000 10:22:23 -0700 (PDT)
<snip>
> I think clubs have some sort of fighting art as
> well, because with a
> baseball bat you have no chance of beating an ogre
> unless you're real
> practiced in knowing stuff like where to hit with
> the club (places that
> hurt, and I don't mean the groin, but joints, places
> with not much skin on
> them, etc.), how to dodge other hits and so on.
<snip>
> (>) Nimster

I don't know about that. I took a martial arts class,
and the instructor was showing us how to hurt people
if they try messing with you, just by grabbing a
finger or twisting the hand a little. I had already
learned these from personal experience when I fell,
what hurt, or a bully picked on me and I dropped him
to his knees just by pulling his thumb this way... No
one had "taught" me before, but I was able to make my
partner do the "tap out" in under 3 seconds each time.
I did take him a little longer, maybe it's something
inborn to women, we just know how to inflict pain or
something. *shrug*
To summarise: I knew what hurt before anyone had to
tell me that it hurt.

====~Raveness

http://www.sova.net/trish/roleplaying/shadowrun/pocketsecretary/

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - Free email you can access from anywhere!
http://mail.yahoo.com/
Message no. 20
From: Raveness Ravensbane ravenessravensbane@*****.com
Subject: [OT] Interesting bit of D&D trivia
Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2000 10:24:18 -0700 (PDT)
<snip>
> I think Doc is right. In mediaval Britain they
> replaced archers which
> where faster and more accurate with crossbow archers
> (or how is it called
> in English) because they were faster to train.
>
> Michael Schmidt

I saw a thing on the History Channel about
this...cross bow bolts could also punch through armor,
where a regular archer had to try to aim for
un-armored parts. Less skill required.

====~Raveness

http://www.sova.net/trish/roleplaying/shadowrun/pocketsecretary/

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - Free email you can access from anywhere!
http://mail.yahoo.com/

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about [OT] Interesting bit of D&D trivia, you may also be interested in:

Disclaimer

These messages were posted a long time ago on a mailing list far, far away. The copyright to their contents probably lies with the original authors of the individual messages, but since they were published in an electronic forum that anyone could subscribe to, and the logs were available to subscribers and most likely non-subscribers as well, it's felt that re-publishing them here is a kind of public service.

Thwap!