Doing shields right in the game, bigger = better? No.

[rjshae]

You'd almost need a GURPS-like combat system to implement this level of detail.

[Sylvius the Mad]

You'd almost need a GURPS-like combat system to implement this level of detail.

GURPS-like is an excellent standard toward which to strive.

[Oerwinde]

What we need is separate deflection and damage reduction stats for armor. Bucklers would have a higher deflection bonus, while larger shields would have more damage reduction. As bucklers were more for deflecting blows away, while larger shields were meant to absorb damage.

 

So deflection = chance to hit

Damage reduction = damage taken on a hit.

 

So for instance, a buckler could have a deflection value of 3 with a DR of 1, while a tower shield has the opposite and medium shield is 2/2. Range would have modified bonuses, say tower shields having bonuses to range deflection while bucklers have penalties.

Edited September 28, 2012 by Oerwinde

[Tale]

What we need is separate deflection and damage reduction stats for armor. Bucklers would have a higher deflection bonus, while larger shields would have more damage reduction. As bucklers were more for deflecting blows away, while larger shields were meant to absorb damage.

 

So deflection = chance to hit

Damage reduction = damage taken on a hit.

 

So for instance, a buckler could have a deflection value of 3 with a DR of 1, while a tower shield has the opposite and medium shield is 2/2.

Well, if we're entertaining complication, then a buckler would probably be a multiplier off something like the dexterity stat. A dexterous character would be able to put it to better use than a slow/lumbering character would.

 

Maybe that wouldn't be such a bad idea. Like how dual wielder get two attacks, buckler users get a second defense check based on dexterity.

[Oerwinde]

Anything to make different fighting styles actually feel different

[Shadenuat]

[weeabo ramble about mass of the hit tied to mass of shield and it's area, deadzones and other worthless **** for RPG] blablabla [/end]

 

In my opinion, first thing you do is you treat shield, at least something as classic as medium round shield, as a second weapon, not +2AC ballast. Then you proceed with special attacks, combos, knockdowns, feints ect. from there. I think everyone should be able to make hits with the shield, but only fighters who learned special feats should get the most of it.

Edited September 28, 2012 by Shadenuat

[mikayel]

Unless the game system is to be modified to involve damage soak, damage deflection, and general dodge (Armor Class) this time of argument is mostly unnecessary. A buckler won't do anything against a direct hit from a bludgeoning weapon -- it is useful for piercing and light-slashing weapons. The game most likely will have a much more simplified or abstracted system in which armaments give either a direct soak threshold (damage resistance) a general dodge (armor class) or a combination of both, in which case things will be represented with concept like bigger numbers are better.

 

After all, in D&D games a buckler+4 is better than a tower shield +0, and can be used in tandem with a two-handed weapon or dual-wielded weapons, but that boils down to a magical enhancement -- I guess the shield magically flies and deflects damage or something. None-the-less, this is all represented by a simple "get hit" and "don't get hit" mechanic, there is no "get hit, take no damage because you deflected, step in closer" mechanic.

 

Secondly; just because a very small and easy to carry armament was used very commonly does not mean that it is a superior defensive armament than a larger one. All knights carried daggers as well, does that mean that daggers are better than long swords or arming swords?

 

I mean, after all, look at those paintings of knights with daggers on their belts but no swords...

Edited September 28, 2012 by mikayel

[wbn]

However in terms of melee combat, the buckler was by far the best shield for one on one melee fighting.

 

 

HAHAHAHAHHA.......nope

 

 

Good point!

[draft1983]

Unless the game system is to be modified to involve damage soak, damage deflection, and general dodge (Armor Class) this time of argument is mostly unnecessary. A buckler won't do anything against a direct hit from a bludgeoning weapon -- it is useful for piercing and light-slashing weapons. The game most likely will have a much more simplified or abstracted system in which armaments give either a direct soak threshold (damage resistance) a general dodge (armor class) or a combination of both, in which case things will be represented with concept like bigger numbers are better.

 

After all, in D&D games a buckler+4 is better than a tower shield +0, and can be used in tandem with a two-handed weapon or dual-wielded weapons, but that boils down to a magical enhancement -- I guess the shield magically flies and deflects damage or something. None-the-less, this is all represented by a simple "get hit" and "don't get hit" mechanic, there is no "get hit, take no damage because you deflected, step in closer" mechanic.

 

Secondly; just because a very small and easy to carry armament was used very commonly does not mean that it is a superior defensive armament than a larger one. All knights carried daggers as well, does that mean that daggers are better than long swords or arming swords?

 

I mean, after all, look at those paintings of knights with daggers on their belts but no swords...

 

Yeah that was what i was the point i was trying to make at first. They were great for mobility, for use with light weapons for the speed and protect the sword hand. One piece of text doesnt mean it was the unmovable object. It was good at what it was used for and that wasnt for blocking heavy weapons... but sometimes soem peopel can not be swayed from their view

[Longknife]

Just something more realistic and not "bigger = better."

 

Dunno if this has been said before and slightly off topic, but on that note can we NOT have that god damn "SSSSSCHING!!11!1" noise every time someone draws a blade? I have kitchen knives in this holder thingy and I'm pretty sure they don't go SCHIIIING when I pull them out. Pretty sure the neighbors would call the cops if they did.

 

Another note of realism would be spears, not swords, being the go-to weapon for basic combat.

[Stiler]

Unless the game system is to be modified to involve damage soak, damage deflection, and general dodge (Armor Class) this time of argument is mostly unnecessary. A buckler won't do anything against a direct hit from a bludgeoning weapon -- it is useful for piercing and light-slashing weapons. The game most likely will have a much more simplified or abstracted system in which armaments give either a direct soak threshold (damage resistance) a general dodge (armor class) or a combination of both, in which case things will be represented with concept like bigger numbers are better.

 

After all, in D&D games a buckler+4 is better than a tower shield +0, and can be used in tandem with a two-handed weapon or dual-wielded weapons, but that boils down to a magical enhancement -- I guess the shield magically flies and deflects damage or something. None-the-less, this is all represented by a simple "get hit" and "don't get hit" mechanic, there is no "get hit, take no damage because you deflected, step in closer" mechanic.

 

Secondly; just because a very small and easy to carry armament was used very commonly does not mean that it is a superior defensive armament than a larger one. All knights carried daggers as well, does that mean that daggers are better than long swords or arming swords?

 

I mean, after all, look at those paintings of knights with daggers on their belts but no swords...

 

Yeah that was what i was the point i was trying to make at first. They were great for mobility, for use with light weapons for the speed and protect the sword hand. One piece of text doesnt mean it was the unmovable object. It was good at what it was used for and that wasnt for blocking heavy weapons... but sometimes soem peopel can not be swayed from their view

 

 

I'm not arguing with you anymore, if you want to ignore facts and can't understand bucklers were'nt restricted to being used with rapiers or only by pirates or something like you think.

 

I never said they were unmovable objects and you're just putting words in my mouth. I have presented you with facts, details from both art, excerpts from FIRST HAND accounts of people that actually lived during those times and you are going by a youtube video of two guys in modern times sparring with rubbertipped weapons and no armor.