Topic: Shields, off hand, and ambidexterity

[Marc R]

First, shields are not just passive cover, you use them to block and parry actively.

OK, generally you have your weapon in your primary hand, and the shield in your off hand.

Now, the shield gives the listed DB bonus, and the weapon OB is normal.

If you swap the shield to the primary hand, and the weapon to the off hand.

The Weapon is at the -20 off hand penalty (unless your character is ambidextrous).

Does the shield work better in the primary hand?

Would an ambidextrous character, where both hands are primary . . .would that give a shield a bonus?

[markc]

 IMHO no extra bonus is gained because of how a shield is used in combat.
MDC

[Marc R]

The weapon is at a penalty in the off hand, why not the shield?

If you learn TWC sword-n-shield, and use the shield to bash people. . .it's at -20 as a weapon in the off hand (unless you're ambidextrous).

[markc]

The weapon is at a penalty in the off hand, why not the shield?

If you learn TWC sword-n-shield, and use the shield to bash people. . .it's at -20 as a weapon in the off hand (unless you're ambidextrous).

 IMHO and it is just a rationalized guess on my part as I am not a shield user is that a lot of shield work is done by the body besides the arm do to the fact how the shield is held. Now I might rule it differently for a very small hand held shield like a dinner plate with a strap on the back as it is more arm motion. But to keep the rules simple I would say no.
 I would change my mind if there was a shield skill as IMHO it gives the ambidexterity talent more effect and places to be used. Right now IMHO it is not used to many places in most games.


MDC

[Cory Magel]

You are not attempting complicated moves with the shield, you are merely putting it in the way of incoming attacks.  Considering the simplicity of the maneuver and the fact that it IS your main hand I can see why no penalty.  Try to attack with it and that would be a slightly different story.

Having performed the sword-fight at the top of the cliff between the Man-in-Black and the Spaniard from Princess Bride I can say that it's slightly difficult to switch from your main to your off hand at first, about two weeks of practice (give or take) will give you a decent ability with an off hand - but would not match your 'main' hands ability without nearly the same amount of practice you have in it.  A shield however would be a much easier, especially if changing from you off to your main hand.

Think of it this way... I can make a hammer swing in order to hit a wall just as easily and effectively with either hand. But now try to pound a nail into that wall with each hand.  It's a more precise, if not deliberate, action.

[Grinnen Baeritt]

The thing is, since there isn't a "skill" involved in the use of a shield then any use of the shield at the moment would be subject to the -30 penalty (less Stat and Profession bonuses) in addition to off-hand penalties if you were trying to use it, which perhaps IS the situation. Thus, I would say that the shield DB would be increased by 20 IF used in the primary hand... since the character now transfers the penalty to his weapon hand.

If there was a skill for the shield to represent an active attempt to improve on it's passive "obstacle" DB then the problem would be solved... and it would be treated like any other weapon with respect to OB.

Then again, what would you suggest the improvement in the shield's DB would be if used in an active "parrying" mode anyway?... my guess would be the "shield OB dedicated to the parry".... much like a weapon, except the parry bonus starts off higher and it's use as a weapon is more restrained...

However, if the character was also intending to attack with the weapon in his other hand, that might necessitate the use of the two-weapon rules.

Personally it reinforces my opinion that the "two-weapon" rules in RM need a reworking

[Old Man]

Hey folks,

I would apply the -20 to the off-hand if a skill, shield bash or other, is developed in that hand. If the shield is just used for DB cover value, the -20 does not apply (and any Shield parry skill could not be reduced below the basic shield cover value).

As for switching skills between hands (the Princess Bride example), how would you handle that other than requiring DP spend for the other hand?

Regards,
Old Man

[markc]

 IMHO a shield skill would have to have a strange an unusual progression that is not natural to RM in any version to keep it balanced.
 The other way that just came to me is that you have a table to look up the skill value that tells you the DB value of the shield. And maybe the OB value now that I think about it also. That is unless you have a different skill for each type of shield.


MDC

[Cory Magel]

Too much over-thinking.  The lack of rules specifically for a shield is because it was supposed to be simple and if you create rules for it than that same logic carries over to a bunch of other stuff that doesn't need skills.  By all this reasoning you should have a -30 penalty to 'Parry' unless you develop skill in it.  Or a -30 penalty to dodging because you haven't developed a skill in it.

There is no shield penalty if you are simply using it as a shield.  Use it as a weapon and that's different.

[markc]

Too much over-thinking.  The lack of rules specifically for a shield is because it was supposed to be simple and if you create rules for it than that same logic carries over to a bunch of other stuff that doesn't need skills.  By all this reasoning you should have a -30 penalty to 'Parry' unless you develop skill in it.  Or a -30 penalty to dodging because you haven't developed a skill in it.

There is no shield penalty if you are simply using it as a shield.  Use it as a weapon and that's different.

 I agree and like having somethings be very basic but there also has been a call for a shield skill for a time and from many others. I am torn on the idea but like the simple better and a skill as an non official rule.
MDC

[Cory Magel]

I think that if you create a skill for shields it should be a 'specialization' skill and would likely develop as Perception does.

I personally have my own idea for shields and some of it has always just been assumed by our various groups and GM's.  For example in RM you're only supposed to be able to apply your shield bonus to one combatant... we apply it to anyone (or anything) in your forward arc.  A good portion of minor maneuvering is assumed with us and I am somewhat liberal with shield bonuses due to that.  This means if you are fighting two foes you can apply it to both of them, sometimes even three depending on maneuvering and spacing.

1) If you get into a fight with three foes and have greater movement capability the shield will apply to all three.  If you do not have greater movement capability then two foes will be in your shield arc while one has no shield to go through and a rear bonus.
2) If you get into a fight with four foes you will either have one foe with no shield to go through and a rear bonus or two with no shield to go through and flank bonuses.
3) All ranged attacks that can be seen will allow shield DB to be used.  In the rare case where someone is shooting at you while you are in melee combat then it's a bit more of a judgment call, but generally just uses the same rules as melee shield use.

[markc]

Cory;
 I agree with the special progression but IMHO +1 DB per rank is a little high. But I guess it can work out if people want to try it.


 I am prep-ing for a Modified RM 3-6 session game and I might try it out with the other mods I have in mind.




 Also about shield bonus multiple foes:
 1) It is an option for combat styles that specialize in the shield to affect another person with the shields DB, from the MAC and I believe the CC.


MDC

[Old Man]

Given that weapons give a DB when parrying (from 5 to 15 for Main Gauche and Sai), is an off-hand Shield skill that much different than off-head weapon?

The parry allocated comes off of the main hand as well. The base DB is just higher and unless the PC is using 1-H crush in main hand, the DP cost tends to be worse...

[rdanhenry]

Weapons in the off-hand used for DB only are not using a skill, do not involve the Parry mechanics, and do not take an adjustment for being used in the non-dominant hand. If you want to actually use the parry mechanics, you need to use TWC, make an attack, and lose that shield bonus from the weapon (unless you do a 100% parry).

[Old Man]

Weapons in the off-hand used for DB only are not using a skill, do not involve the Parry mechanics, and do not take an adjustment for being used in the non-dominant hand. If you want to actually use the parry mechanics, you need to use TWC, make an attack, and lose that shield bonus from the weapon (unless you do a 100% parry).

Well, that's the assumption - TWC (if required by the edition) or a pair of weapon skills - one of which might or might not be a 1-Hand Crush skill using a Shield-like-object.

[Marc R]

The instance in the RAW, as in the first post, where a shield would definitely be affected by the off hand penalty is if you are using:

TWC Sword (1HE) and Shield (1HC)

Say you have 100 OB in both weapons, and in the TWC set up. . . You go 50 DB.

The sword would be 50/50 OB/DB, and the shield would be 30/50 OB/DB due to the off hand penalty (or the reverse if you had shield in primary hand for some reason).

I guess, what it comes down to, is that using a skill to make a shield a weapon pays off fairly early for small shields with low "passive DB" bonuses, and takes longer to pay off with larger, high "passive DB" bonuses. . .though of course there's always the pay off that you can now actually make an attack with your shield.

And an ambidextrous person would hit that payoff point ~4 ranks faster, since they don't have the off hand penalty to buy off.

That kind of makes sense, in that the small shields actually are used more actively than the large shields.

Though the point made above makes me think. . .if you buy ranks in the shield as 1HC, then go full parry so you ALSO get the shield bonus itself. . .even a non ambidextrous character will get a DB benefit out of it past 4 ranks (less if they have any stat or professional bonus).

[Grinnen Baeritt]

Hmmm.

When I suggested a "shield skill" I had actually considered the implications of actually wearing a shield on an arm as well as using it, since the RAW don't apply any real penalties (apart from Encumberance) on the ability of characters to do things...which for the larger shields, I think would be quite substantial. So for these purposes, I'd have made the "shield skill" an armour skill, with the ability to go past simply cancelling a penalty. Once the penalty has been overcome the remainder becomes potential "OB"

I.e. In order to actually use the shield for anything other than the purpose of an obstacle, the weilder would have to develop the skill to a point where any penalty had been imposed to it's use as a skill had been nullified.

Yes, regardless of the existance of a skill to use it, whichever hand it is in, the shield WILL provide an element of DB to the wielder.. in much the same manner as standing behind wall. So, in most cases, the character will recieve the base DB benefit, regardless of thier skill with it's active use.

Now, if the character is disarmed(perhaps even having his primary arm lopped off), no spare weapons to draw/recover and only has the shield to use... what would the character do? My guess, this is where the "skill" would come in, and thus also where the "off-hand penalty" would also kick in when he tries to use it.

Up to that point the character should have the option to either use the weapon as normal, or the shield actively, or attempt to do both (which is where the problem lies..).

I would suggest that the shields actually cause a MM penalty equal to the (melee) DB provided, make the Shield Category the same points cost as developing medium armour. AG/ST/ST. The various shield types are treated as different skills.

[Marc R]

As is, learning shield as a weapon, then using it for parry, would take more ranks to work for a large shield than a small shield.

Once you had enough OB to offset the off hand penalty, your use of the shield in full parry would be better than it's passive use.

The only real oddity is that TWC shield-sword vs dagger-sword offers the same amount of DB for dagger off hand as shield off hand, except when you go full parry.

[markc]

The only real oddity is that TWC shield-sword vs dagger-sword offers the same amount of DB for dagger off hand as shield off hand, except when you go full parry.

 I might have a House Rule that says you get 1/2 DB from a shield if used to attack, but I want to think on it more. In my games in the past people have mostly used the combat style ability that allows you to use the shields DB vs a 2nd opponent and I have an ability for people trained in the same style that use shields to defend each other. IE one adds to the Db of the other. I get the idea when watching one of the many films on the Roman Legion and how they said they depend on each other for defense and openings for attacks. 


MDC