STR Minimum: somewhat overcooked?

[Lucius]

Re: STR Minimum: somewhat overcooked?

 

Well, GA obviously skipped over my page references.

 

JoeG

 

Yeah, but he's a resident expert; I may disagree with him on interpretation sometimes, but I have come to expect that he knows the rules as if he'd written the index.

 

It's like he walks around with a briefcase full of rules.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

Keeping my rulebooks in the palindromedary's saddlebag

[Hyper-Man]

Re: STR Minimum: somewhat overcooked?

 

I agree with ghost-angel's sentiment on this one.

 

As has already been pointed out from 6e2 page 60:

 

To Brace, a character must take a Zero Phase Action (not an Attack Action) to steady himself — in effect, it “tacks on” to another Combat Maneuver, allowing a character to Brace and then make an Attack Action all in the same Phase. This gives him a +2 OCV that only offsets the Range Modifier. Additionally, Bracing reduces the STR Minimum for using a Ranged weapon by 5. However, the character’s DCV is halved because he stands still to Brace. If a character is Stunned while Bracing, he loses the effects of the Maneuver.

The key is that no mention is made about HTH weapons.

[CrosshairCollie]

Re: STR Minimum: somewhat overcooked?

 

Probably because there's no point to bracing a melee weapon.

[Lucius]

Re: STR Minimum: somewhat overcooked?

 

Okay, if anyone said Brace was useful in hand to hand, I missed it.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

The palindromedary suggests I re-read the thread to make sure.

edit: I checked. I'm sure. No one said to use Brace with melee weapons.

[Naanomi]

Re: STR Minimum: somewhat overcooked?

 

Besides, in weightlifting competitions you would expect the performers to push or haymaker or whatever-you-can-do to make that extra bit of lift, right?

[ghost-angel]

Re: STR Minimum: somewhat overcooked?

 

I simply may have misinterpreted a chain of comments that came along as being one successively answered to another - the downfall of the non-threaded reply structure of message boards.

 

And I did miss the reduction of STR Min. My point still stands - STR Min of melee weapons is overinflated by at least 3, possibly even up to 5 points, across the board. And I'm not comfortable with the idea that you have to use combat maneuvers to successfully use weapons in a game system emphasizing Heroic Action.

[Ternaugh]

Re: STR Minimum: somewhat overcooked?

 

I simply may have misinterpreted a chain of comments that came along as being one successively answered to another - the downfall of the non-threaded reply structure of message boards.

 

And I did miss the reduction of STR Min. My point still stands - STR Min of melee weapons is overinflated by at least 3, possibly even up to 5 points, across the board. And I'm not comfortable with the idea that you have to use combat maneuvers to successfully use weapons in a game system emphasizing Heroic Action.

 

Most PCs won't. They tend to be made of "sterner stuff", and have generally paid the points to raise characteristics so that they won't get the penalty with their chosen weapon. It is sometimes interesting, however, to see heroics when the deck isn't completely stacked in the PC's favor. For example, a STR 10 thief, attempting to defend the unconscious fighter with the only weapon handy--his longsword, which is just a little too awkward for her to wield efficiently. The heroic action is still there, even if (or because) the thief does so at a disadvantage.

 

Of course, YMMV,

JoeG

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: STR Minimum: somewhat overcooked?

 

Well, GA obviously skipped over my page references.

 

For most characters with most weapons, the penalty is -1 OCV and -1 DC to the damage. I consider it the "Limitation" part of STR Min. Then again, with all of the ways to add to OCV or damage, this really isn't much of an issue.

 

The -1 DC tends to be offset by the larger weapon having more DC's to begin with than the smaller weapon. It tends to even out, rather than reduce damage done. -1 OCV moves a 62.5% chance to hit down to 50% if CV's are otherwise equal. Its significance depends on the CV spread between the combatants. I don't think a weapon imposing 1 iteration of STR minimum losses would be that big a stretch. It depends on the desired results, of course. The problem is that players generally don't just want to barely be able to use the weapon at its own effect, they want to be adding significant DC's, pushing their perceived STR requirement even higher.

 

Besides' date=' in weightlifting competitions you would expect the performers to push or haymaker or whatever-you-can-do to make that extra bit of lift, right?[/quote']

 

By the rules, you can't Push in an athletic competition (no Heroic Action involved) nor can you Haymaker (no drawback to a -5 DCV). However, I suspect Olympic Hero would have Sports Maneuvers to differentiate various stances, etc. A trained weightlifter knows techniques for lifting, and does not simply walk in off the street and perform his lift without having trained since his last competition.