FinalHavenLarp.com

I have to agree with Wayne and Eric. Pikes are one of the easist weapons to block espicaly if you have a shield. A long spear and pike are nasty when used in team tatics, aka you have a shiled and sword blocking and the spear/pike doing the damage. Work great, but pike is in trouble when going one on one against 2 claws or a sword and board. Even if they can get off the 5 vorpal. So it balances out.

*chime* yeah, i think impale really should only work for polearms, since they leave a nice big hole when they go through ya, whereas a sword would only leave a slot.

I will make a camercial like the anti drug comercial and it will have two dead people, one stabed with a sword, the other with a pike, and then the man will say "you tell me witch one is more dead"

But what im saying is this abillity is already available with a sword, so why have two abillitys that do the same thing but have to use a specific weapon, its been made and its called weapon focus, the pikeman can still do it even if its made available to all bladed weapons, all we would be doing is improving its versatility.

Also if were going to talk about why certain weapons can do that i find that flawed, someone has a tiny dagger and swings 1, someone else has a 10 foot axe and also swings 1, does that seem balanced? should the guy with the huge axe be able to swing 2 because its a big axe, should the guy with the spear be the only one that can stab people?

Heres my two cents...

I agree that the spear/pike should be the only weapon that should be able to impale, simply because that was why they were created to do....a pike/spear line was pretty much made to take care of mounted calvary.....so the whole idea of impaling someone on a pike/spear is right there.

The ability you speak of to do it with a sword is mechanical only, it isnt the "same" thing as you put it, it only works as impale for simplicity sake so we dont have redundant rules is how i see it. The technique is totally different in my eyes as one is a well trained lightning fast slash and the other is a brute force impalement...

I just dont think we should resrict abillitys to certain weapons, what if you could only use the assassins poison with a dagger, or critical strike to a short sword, it would restrict what can do what and thats why i think unrestricting the skill would help

and yes it is the same mechanicly, how people choose to RP is up to them

while were at it im sure its in the rule book but i cant find it, if you are immune to poison or disease, and something is swinging 1 poison or 1 disease, are you immune to just the poison/disease, or the whole call?

The whole call...i believe...

The reason certian weapons can do certian abilities is to keep the rules balanced to to prevent rule breaks. If you start allowing all weapons to do all the cool abiltites, than you create loop holes in the rules and breaks. That is why the rules are set up as they are.
As for impale with a sword, that must be a hidden disapline. I'm assuming the disapline is balanced to allow a sword to do impale. I would have to look at the disapline to know.

Sheogorath wrote:The whole call...i believe...

Yeah I've never really liked this rule but if you can resist anything in the call you can resist the entire thing so you would be immune to someone carving you up because you are immune to the poison. It's for simplicity sake, it just doesn't feel right to me.

There are specialized rules all over the game, they'll never go away completely.

An axe is a headed weapon so yeah, there is a way to swing 2 with an axe. And yeah, the guy with the big spear should be the only one that can stab through your armor and put a huge hole in you because that's how the weapon was designed.

Assasin's vorpal is limited to tiny weapons, florentine has size resrictions, crush and vorpal both have type restrictions, and the weapon focuses are restrictions as well so I don't really see your line of logic. One type of restriction is ok but the other is not?

Ark wrote: But what im saying is this abillity is already available with a sword, so why have two abillitys that do the same thing but have to use a specific weapon,

That is a hidden discipline that is being reworked.

Ark wrote:Also if were going to talk about why certain weapons can do that i find that flawed, someone has a tiny dagger and swings 1, someone else has a 10 foot axe and also swings 1, does that seem balanced? should the guy with the huge axe be able to swing 2 because its a big axe, should the guy with the spear be the only one that can stab people?

I am sorry, I am not going to have this argument again. You are six years late to the party.

celegar wrote:impale? whats to know? when the pointy end goes in them then their impaled.

let me break it down into java script terms for all the techheads

if:you=shanked
then:impaled.

Dood, I didn't notice the if: = then statement, they still use that in programming? Do they still use goto? That makes me flash back to the early 80's and middle school.

I am sorry, I am not going to have this argument again. You are six years late to the party.[/quote]

I know its not my fault, if i could have been i would, i will give up the argument, but in the end everythin usually comes down to player skill, knoledge of abilitys, and so on, some say spears suck, yeah until you find someone who beats the crap out of you with one, some people are better at certain things

Also for note, last I remember it being argued.. Resist and Immunity to Poison or Disease meant you could Resist the effect of a Poison or Disease call, but you still take any number damage call from the attack.. These two skills work differently than all other resists.. The same for the immunities last I saw.. you can ignore the effect call but not the damage.

unless of course something was decided somewhere that I missed. But I remember this discussion last year.

see, theres two different answers and i need to know wich one is right, especially when it comes to taking damage

Aidan_Mcpryde wrote:Also for note, last I remember it being argued.. Resist and Immunity to Poison or Disease meant you could Resist the effect of a Poison or Disease call, but you still take any number damage call from the attack.. These two skills work differently than all other resists.. The same for the immunities last I saw.. you can ignore the effect call but not the damage.

unless of course something was decided somewhere that I missed. But I remember this discussion last year.

Well that's changed then because that's not how it used to be it used to be that if you could resist or are immune to any part of the call then it didn't affect you. The only exceptions to this used to be vorpal and crush which became normal damage. GM's? This is probably a good thing for the FAQ too.