Author Topic: Some Clarifications...  (Read 3760 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Karizma

  • Seeker of Wisdom
  • **
  • Posts: 236
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Some Clarifications...
« on: September 24, 2009, 09:20:49 AM »
So now that I'm going to be playing HARP for the first time ever instead of running it, I've rolled up my Harper (I have a thing for bards.  A big thing.).

I've wanted to make sure he'll stay alive, so I gave him Instinctive Defense, and from Martial Law the Swashbuckler talent, as well as picking up Shielding Weapon (Longsword/Dagger).

Swashbuckler says I need no armor heavier than soft leather, no shield larger than buckler, and no weapon requiring more hands than two.

But does Swashbuckler work with Shielding Weapon?

As a GM, I'm ruling yes because it doesn't expressly say that Swashbuckler won't allow dual-wield, and I really want it because it'd be so awesome.

Offline Ecthelion

  • ICE Forum Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,497
  • OIC Points +0/-0
    • Character Gallery
Re: Some Clarifications...
« Reply #1 on: September 24, 2009, 09:54:19 AM »
But does Swashbuckler work with Shielding Weapon?
I'd say yes, Swashbuckler works with Shielding Weapon.

Offline Rasyr-Mjolnir

  • Inactive
  • *
  • Posts: 0
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: Some Clarifications...
« Reply #2 on: September 24, 2009, 09:56:13 AM »
Quote
and no weapon requiring more hands than two.
Actually, it says no two-handed weapons...  ;D



Considering that a Dagger weighs less than the smallest buckler, I would say that you could use the Swashbuckling talent with the Shielding Weapon style in this instance.

The idea behind the Swashbuckler talent was to allow for Errol Flynn type characters - agile, quick, lightly armed and armored. I think the Longsword/dagger combo fits within that theme.

I wouldn't allow it for a Longsword/short sword combo though...

 ;D



Offline Karizma

  • Seeker of Wisdom
  • **
  • Posts: 236
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: Some Clarifications...
« Reply #3 on: September 24, 2009, 10:26:52 AM »
Quote
and no weapon requiring more hands than two.
Actually, it says no two-handed weapons...  ;D
Semantics! ;D

Quote from: Rasyr
Considering that a Dagger weighs less than the smallest buckler, I would say that you could use the Swashbuckling talent with the Shielding Weapon style in this instance.

The idea behind the Swashbuckler talent was to allow for Errol Flynn type characters - agile, quick, lightly armed and armored. I think the Longsword/dagger combo fits within that theme.
Which fits my Bar--Harper perfectly!

Offline Rasyr-Mjolnir

  • Inactive
  • *
  • Posts: 0
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: Some Clarifications...
« Reply #4 on: September 24, 2009, 10:31:39 AM »
Quote
and no weapon requiring more hands than two.
Actually, it says no two-handed weapons...  ;D
Semantics! ;D

No! Genetics! :D

The way you phrased it, it sounded like you were talking about weapons needing 3 hands or more to use.  :D

Offline masque1223

  • Initiate
  • *
  • Posts: 154
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: Some Clarifications...
« Reply #5 on: September 24, 2009, 11:18:23 AM »
But does Swashbuckler work with Shielding Weapon?
I'd say yes, Swashbuckler works with Shielding Weapon.
The rogue in my game uses this setup, has swashbuckler and fights with a rapier and a main gauche.

Offline jasonbrisbane

  • Senior Adept
  • **
  • Posts: 660
  • OIC Points +0/-0
  • Darkeen's Battlefield - still going strong.
    • Darkeen's Battlefield
Re: Some Clarifications...
« Reply #6 on: September 24, 2009, 11:09:55 PM »
YAY!
HARPERS RULE!!!!


Just Ask Pat, and Sazen!!!


Dont they, hey? hey?  8)  8)  8)

My "try a new character Harper has survived three levels and three Very dangerous campaigns that I didnt expect him to survive...and he is still going! (although Now Im a GM, hes an NPC....)

And I read your post the same way as Rasyr! And I was wondering how a PC gets more than two arms!





--------
Regards,
Jason Brisbane
HARP GM & Freelancer
Author of "The Ruins of Kausur"
http://roleplayingapps.wordpress.com

Offline Pat

  • Adept
  • **
  • Posts: 322
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: Some Clarifications...
« Reply #7 on: September 24, 2009, 11:36:31 PM »
Yea, Harpers are always useful in campaigns. Someone needs to catch those pesky arrows with their heads or sword thrusts with their chests  :D

Offline SamwiseSeven

  • Adept
  • **
  • Posts: 369
  • OIC Points +0/-0
  • Tim
    • Tim's RPG YouTube Channel
Re: Some Clarifications...
« Reply #8 on: September 25, 2009, 05:59:03 AM »
I'm a Harper.  :)
https://www.youtube.com/samwise7rpg

Offline Karizma

  • Seeker of Wisdom
  • **
  • Posts: 236
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: Some Clarifications...
« Reply #9 on: September 25, 2009, 02:05:23 PM »
I'm a Harper.  :)
Harper by name, Hero by trade?

Offline Sazen

  • Neophyte
  • *
  • Posts: 41
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: Some Clarifications...
« Reply #10 on: September 25, 2009, 08:07:27 PM »
Or get eaten by demonic bunnies...

Offline masque1223

  • Initiate
  • *
  • Posts: 154
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: Some Clarifications...
« Reply #11 on: September 25, 2009, 08:50:15 PM »
I'm partial to clerics, myself, which works out since no one else seems to dig them.  Of course, my clerics tend to be dwarven priests of forge gods, so they can lay some serious smack down, as well as providing the party with masterwork weapons and what not  ;D.

Offline jurasketu

  • Seeker of Wisdom
  • **
  • Posts: 219
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: Some Clarifications...
« Reply #12 on: September 25, 2009, 09:05:05 PM »
Confusion, Charm and Beguiling Voice ROCK. Solitary foes are almost helpless against a party equipped with a Harper. Excellent for actual like 'role-playing' too...
It is better to be lucky than good, but it is *best* to be both.

When in fear, when in doubt, run in circles, scream and shout!

Offline Karizma

  • Seeker of Wisdom
  • **
  • Posts: 236
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: Some Clarifications...
« Reply #13 on: September 25, 2009, 10:22:10 PM »
In the first HARP campaign I ran we had a Harper.  The party realized that he was the perfect erm... Perfect individual for committing acts in which he engages in particular activities with a more-often-than-not unwilling participant without said participant's true "consent".  He never DID this, but it's quite easy to do.

Offline Sazen

  • Neophyte
  • *
  • Posts: 41
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: Some Clarifications...
« Reply #14 on: September 28, 2009, 05:46:06 AM »
However what Jason is failing to tell you is how when he plays a Harper he fails every Preform check. Almost caused a riot in the pub he was playing and has had party members trying to kill him...

Yes role-playing a Harper can be fun, but remember to watch out for lynch mobs if you fail those Public Speaking checks...

Offline Karizma

  • Seeker of Wisdom
  • **
  • Posts: 236
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: Some Clarifications...
« Reply #15 on: September 28, 2009, 01:08:22 PM »
Of course he won't.  Traditional Bard/Harper code is to boast your successes and ignore your failures.

How else do you think we get away with egos larger than our swords?

Offline jasonbrisbane

  • Senior Adept
  • **
  • Posts: 660
  • OIC Points +0/-0
  • Darkeen's Battlefield - still going strong.
    • Darkeen's Battlefield
Re: Some Clarifications...
« Reply #16 on: September 28, 2009, 08:42:14 PM »
<rolls public speaking>
<rolls 02>
<Rolls for Failure Table>
<rolls 01>


"Yeah, What He said!"
--------
Regards,
Jason Brisbane
HARP GM & Freelancer
Author of "The Ruins of Kausur"
http://roleplayingapps.wordpress.com