Melee Weapons

All for racial advantages here, folks, but I must admit I'm a little annoyed by the fact that Klingon melee weapons are in every single way superior to every other melee weapon listed.

Bat'leth. Better damage, better parry chances, and the free-attack-after-parry possibility.

A Mek'leth, which is basically just a big, heavy sword, does *equal* damage, parries better (as well as a staff) and has the free-attack possibility as above.

Look at human weapons: sword, knife, club, staff. Oh, wow, a staff reduces the multiple action penalty for parries (even though it doesn't parry nearly as well as a bat'leth in the hands of someone /of equal skill/)! Color me excited! :P

Can the writer-types give me some insight on to how this was validated in playtesting? I must admit it concerns me enough to rewrite *all* the melee weapons in the book, and I'd rather not do that if I'm overlooking something.

Mind you, this is coming from one of the biggest Andorian fans you'll ever find, and I'm sure Andorian weapons will be equally potent, or nearly so ... it's just disconcertingly unbalancing to me, at first glance.


BJ

Hadn't noticed that. I would say that, if you don't agree, change the damage to suit you. Just my two coppers.

If you really need there to be a difference in the weapons, make up rules for weapons of different quality. A cheap, mass produced weapon will not be as good and a weapon made by a weaponsmith.

Not so much playtesting as reality checking methinks...

I think this falls into the same category as those games that give katanas a bonus over other swords simply because they're Japanese :rolleyes:

I have a friend who consistently points out that the bat'leth is completely impractical anyway (it would twist in your hands all the time and never hit edge on), otherwise some Earth culture would have invented it!

I have to admit, I'd consider rescaling it, then ramp up martial arts bonuses for those who really know how to use a given weapon. That would allow the likes of Worf to continue to flatten Jem'hadar with a single blow, while keeping things a little more equal!

A true Katana is much better than a mass produced blade. If a race, any race, spends time learning to specifically build an item, it will be better than someone who just started. Consider the Japanese, they forged metals for hundreds of years before the English and Spanish started. Therefore, a true Katana would have that much more experience behind the crafting.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Silverthorne
A true Katana is much better than a mass produced blade.

---

Yes. This has to do with the way they're made, rather than what they look like -- the steel is "folded" hundreds of times and hammered out. The result is a far stronger blade. There are stories told of soldiers during World War II, who encountered Japanese wielding katanas. The soldiers tried to block the blade with their rifles, and the blade sheared through the rifle and still retained force sufficent to kill.

It might be that, instead of extra damage, these weapons should gain certain other bonuses, such as "extremely hard and strong", "won't break when struck", "hard to parry" and so forth.

I've never understood how one would use a Bat'leth correctly, it doesn't seem to be a very practical weapon, for a number of reasons. I suppose you have to be a Klingon to appreciate it :)

The process of folding the blade while still hot in the forge was also used in Damascus. Kings and noblemen of Europe would pay a handsome amount (hell a whole estate would sometimes not be enough) to have a weapon forged by these smiths.

Being Japanese or not has nothing to do with it. Find a Damascus blade from Europe and one of equal quality from Japan, two proficient wielders and you'll have one hell of a fight. I've always hated that about D&D games, the belief that it being oriental automatically makes it better somehow.

The thing with Japanese blades was that those used by the Samurai serving the Emperor were ALL made that way, meaning that most of the time soldiers would encounter these guys. Those European blades made to that level were either no longer used by their families and were very rare to start with.

I suggest for the Klingon Bat'Leth, tone down the damage if you like or make it somehow linked to the skill by adding damage based on skill while toning down the base damage of the weapon. This way an unskilled user will do very little and fumble with the weapon while a Worf-like character will chop his foes into confetti.

Thanks Khrys ;)

Folks, I am well aware of the differences between Japanese and European blades in their manufacture, but the simple fact is that without the right skills, such differences make no difference in combat. A well-sharpened sabre will do just as much damage as a katana in a simple blow for blow comparison, and will penetrate armour better.

Any bonus comes about because the average Japanese samurai trained much more thoroughly with his weapon, and was more precise in his target choices, although even that comparison falls down when you discuss the equivalent sabre masters of 19th century Germany, or the fencing masters of 16th and 17th century Europe.

A katana was tougher and held an edge much better, but that's about as far as its superiority holds out. I don't know about the steel folding, but the Spanish swordmakers of the 16th century had access to techniques which had a similar effect (that's why Toledo blades became so famouts). English blades were never very impressive :(

20th century Japanese officer's swords were mass-produced by the way. They were no better than those carried by European officers in the 19th century. Only a very few were produced in the old style.

It's all in the reflexes ;)

Quote:

---

This way an unskilled user will do very little and fumble with the weapon while a Worf-like character will chop his foes into confetti.

---

Shouldn't this be true not only for bat'leth, but for any hand to hand weapon?

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Imagus
Not so much playtesting as reality checking methinks...

I think this falls into the same category as those games that give katanas a bonus over other swords simply because they're Japanese :rolleyes:

I have a friend who consistently points out that the bat'leth is completely impractical anyway (it would twist in your hands all the time and never hit edge on), otherwise some Earth culture would have invented it!

I have to admit, I'd consider rescaling it, then ramp up martial arts bonuses for those who really know how to use a given weapon. That would allow the likes of Worf to continue to flatten Jem'hadar with a single blow, while keeping things a little more equal!

---

I think the designers are looking more at the relative skill of using the weapon with training. Klingon children are trained at weapon use from the time they are old enough to pick each weapon off the ground. The training can at times be described as brutal.

Japanese Katana use, as well as some other specific cultures, is as much an art form as a skill. Many cultures went up against Japanese swordsmen, and very few lasted long enough to make an impression.

Actually the Bat'leth is a derivation of a Chinese weapon. I have seen a weapon on my Kung Fu master's wall that looks very close, and I recall reading something about that somewhere.

Being a Klingon fan and owning two different types of Batleth, I have learned that they are not quite as unbalanced as one might think and these are mostly prop types. If it were genuinely created and forged to proper balance, it would be a very deadly tool. I have created demonstrations for shows that are really quite impressive against a variety of different weapons and it has proven very effective. My training is negligible compared to the type of training listed above. I would hate to meet a trained Klingon in a dark alley that has been using a Bat'leth for years.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by METH
I think the designers are looking more at the relative skill of using the weapon with training. Klingon children are trained at weapon use from the time they are old enough to pick each weapon off the ground. The training can at times be described as brutal.

---

Which would be fine if it weren't for the fact that a human with basic training (1 pick) could pick it up and use it to do just as much damage... There is a definite division between weapon quality and skill - the bonus for one shouldn't be part of the other!

The bat'leth never struck me as unbalanced. The main problem I've seen (and heard about from martial enthusiasts who've played with it) is that it would be very difficult to parry with. It relies on you keeping the edge towards the enemy, which is difficult to do with a basic grip - the weapon would tend to twist in your hands. It's one of the reasons axe use was so limited in later history.

I believe the Chinese equivalent is a double-ended spear with a crescent blade in the middle? (Called a crescent moon staff or something similar?) It probably doesn't use the centre blade to parry!

It seems to me we're back to the old problem of the weapon doing dice damage independantly of the hit result or of the skill of the user.
An alternative house rule to that could be to reduce the damage if the degree of success is not high enough, to reflect the fact that the Bat'leth is a difficult weapon to master. For instance, for a simple success, you could top the damage by limiting the result of the dice (like considering that every die rolling more than 3 has rolled a 3). A complete success would inflict damage as normal, and for dramatic success, either you apply the rule of maximum damage, or you limit the result of dice the other way round (a result less than 3 is a 3).

That way, only someone with a good skill (or constantly lucky ;)) will be able to use a Bat'leth to its full power, while a sword will do less damage indeed, but the skill of the user will be less crucial.

My 0.02 €...

Quote:

---

Originally posted by C5
It seems to me we're back to the old problem of the weapon doing dice damage independantly of the hit result or of the skill of the user.

---

I don't know jazz about the Coda rules as I don't have the PG yet, but one possible way to represent the skill of the weapon wielder in game terms might be prerequisites. Like, for example, have them take a certain skill level with a staff or sword or whatever before someone can learn to wield a bat'leth.
That way you'd end up with a bat'leth wielding Klingon who as a very good weapon that gives him lots of advantages in combat. OTOH someone else could be more skilled with another weapon he invested the same total number of 'skill points' in, leveling the playing field between the two.

Or maybe invent an edge (IIRC that's what they call 'advantages' in Coda) called "Bat'leth Training" that has to be taken before this particular skill can be learned. After all, a Klingon who trained all his youth to wield a bat'leth would have had less time to pick up other usefull stuff.

Would this solution mesh with the Coda system ?

Another thing came to my mind : this hasn't to be realistic. This is the ST universe, where the Klingons are one of the best warrior races of the known Galaxy. So their swords are better, no matter how we judge them; after all, in the ST universe at least, Terrans never developped such a warlike culture.
So I'm OK with the bat'leth being more effective than a sword - it reflects the fact that the bat'leth comes from a culture who elaborated war much more than the one using sword. Though I don't remember the damage for the Andoran weapons - on that account, they too should be higher.

Apart from that, what really bugs me is that, from the damages, it seems a standard human can stomach two or three successful bat'leth strikes and still be alive and even on his feet. Hope there are some optional rules in the NG about that.

Also - all the above about material science and steel is going to be a moot point in ST time frame. While one could have a replicated weapon be actually inferior than a crafted one - for role playing reasons - there is no "real" reason that this would be the case. Any mass produced melee weapon could be the equal of the best crafted historical weapon. The specs on a sword (or whatever) are going to be a lot less specific than those on a warp coil.

Even today material science has come to the point that you can make a "better" sword than any medieval/pre-industrial weapon. Based upon any physical characteristic. It is just that very few people would be willing to pay for the finished product.