Re: CWT Draft:More Thoughts

["dbarrass_2000" <david.barrass@ed.ac.uk>]

--- In dq-rules@yahoogroups.com, Esko Halttunen <esko.halttunen@l...> 
wrote:
> Lance breakage should be automatic or nearly so, I'd reverse the 
> breakage chances from normal. Unless the lance was made of metal, 
of 
> course, but such things would be very special things indeed (e.g. 
made 
> of mithril or something like that) and very, very rare.
> 

Yes you're right the lance is too robust as writen. From what I've 
read a knight would be lucky to get more than one or two charges out 
of his lance (this is not jousting lances that were designed to 
break, and so lesen the force of the blow). On the other hand a man 
running in with a pole arm I don't think should break the weapon all 
that often so I think 99-5 (ie brakes on a roll of >=94) is about 
right for a man where as 99-10 (brakes >=89) is too low for a mounted 
knight.  
So how about:-
GI hit: the weapon is stuck in the oponent and it takes a pulse to 
remove if dead, if alive hold on or drop (unless its that GI where it 
says it gets stuck and breaks)
Endurance hit: weapon does not break (maybe this for a GI also to 
avoid too many extra rules)
Normal hit below 99-TMR: weapon breaks but full damage is still done
Greater than 99-TMR: weapon breaks and does no damage

Of course there is that implication that fatique hits arn't real 
hits, just strains and tirednes or glancing blows that reduce FT.  If 
this is the case then the lance should not break with a normal hit as 
the blow was not delived with full force or avoided.  I still think 
it should break if the roll is >=99-TMR). I feel another thread 
comming on (has this been discussed already)?.

David