Weapon Focus + Easy Breakdown = ? Options

[Umidori]

Just toying around with a character concept, but I'm not sure I've ever run across this situation before, so here we are.

Can you turn a large melee weapon which has been modified for Easy Breakdown into a Weapon Focus? I'm thinking like a spear whose head comes off and whose shaft separates into two or three pieces for less cumbersome transport. Is this doable?

Some obvious questions and concerns. Would taking apart the weapon affect the magical construct of the focus? Would it destroy the focus? Maybe just deactivate it? Or maybe have no effect at all? If the latter is the case, would the individual weapon components still act as weapon foci, albeit with appropriately modified stats? (Say, using the spear head as a knife for reduced damage?)

~Umi

[phlapjack77]

Interesting idea!

I would rule, the weapon focus can't actually be "broken" down, as in, made into separate pieces. This would, imo, "break the pattern" (my EarthDawn-love is showing through).

BUT I would allow a sort-of-breakdown, where for instance the spear is able to be snapped apart into a few smaller-yet-still-connected pieces, like a tent pole or something. The spearhead could retract it's hurty surfaces to be more safe and less obviously a spear, etc.

I have a character with a stun staff with mechanical breakdown, and I picture it in my head like a telescoping staff that starts out about small baton-sized, and telescopes out to full length. I would think something like that would work, as it's always still just one "thing".

[IridiosDZ]

For a spear, I would make the head the focus so that the magic is not disrupted by breaking it apart. If your GM rules that contact is needed, design it so that there is a light rope the winds down the shaft while assembled.

[Mach_Ten]

I can see either of the above, working

but I'm all for the "SPEAR OF DESTINY" type device

that each broken part retains a magical signature or minor ability

but only functions properly when fully assembled.

would make for some interesting story hooks too, in finding malfunctioning parts of a whole device and then having to hunt the other parts..

[Neraph]

Some people tend to forget about spears and stun staves mentioning that they can come with telescopic bodies. The way I've always handled it is that you pay the extra cost for a Telescopic Staff on top of your spear and now your spear can telescope as well. As an additional House-Rule I say that when the spear is telescoped down it functions like a dagger. This approach would solve a few issues with the spear-focus thing, as would Mach_Ten's idea (which I also like and was going to mention).

[Umidori]

Here's a secondary question, tangentially related...

How would one best represent a Naginata? Given their size, they should have a reach of 2 and a concealability of +6. But the only weapon stats that match those parameters are the Spear, Claymore/Combat Axe, Nodachi, and Pole-Arm.

The stats for a spear don't seem right, because a spear has a much smaller head than a naginata. In my view, with a head more like a sword than a spearpoint, a naginata should do more than a mere STR/2 + 2P damage (especially since swords are STR/2 +3P).

Claymores aren't quite a good fit because they aren't pole-based weapons (and consequently couldn't be collapsible). Of course, their stat-twins, Combat Axes, do have hafts which could fit the bill for being collapsible, but is that high damage code appropriate for a naginata?

Nodachi are even more powerful than combat axes, and being giant swords like claymores, even less capable of being "collapsible".

I personally like the stats for the Pole-Arm, with the damage of a spear but a much higher armor penetration feeling very apropriate for a naginata, but the fact that it's treated as an Exotic Melee Weapon makes it incredibly undesireable.

~Umi

[Sendaz]

I would say Polearm comes closest as at is most basic handling you would use it much the same way. It is just that masters of it can get a lot more love out of it, but that is more down to their training than the device itself.

It would pretty much come under an Exotic Weapon skill regardless due the difference in handling than from other weapons, so it may seem undesirable from having to get another exotic skill, but hey then you have a NAGINATA.

Slap a vibroblade with a pink Mohawk frill on the end, replace the staff portion with a high strength alloy and some built in gadgets (directional jammer, popout blade or stun baton on the blunt end0 and carve out a legend with it.

[Umidori]

A naginata actually handles very much like a spear or a bo staff, though, and neither of those use exotic weapon skills.

Hence my complaint regarding defaulting to a "Pole-Arm" - the addition of spears as Blades skill weapons came in Arsenal, well after (and directly contradicting) the core book's establishment of all "Pole-Arm" weapons as exotic. It doesn't make much sense that you can use a spear with the Blades skill, but not other similarly handled weapons like halberds and pole-arms.

~Umi

[Sendaz]

I think we are going to have to agree to disagree on this.

If you want to get technical, it IS an oriental polearm. Where as your Bo and most conventional spears fall under the 2m mark, Nagis can range well up to the 3m mark. Yes there are 3m spears as well, but again those would also be handled as polearms.

It was designed to help fend off angry guys with swords and knock same angry guys off their horses at a distance thus providing a measure of safety to the wielder. It could chop and poke quite nicely.

Yes you can use it is a manner similar to a spear or staff, but with a 30-60 cm blade on one end again it can be used for cutting attack results you couldn't get with a smaller spear head end.

I call it exotic because it is a bit of a fusion device and so rather than saying I need several skills to cover all the things I can do with it, I get exotic instead so I can do all of it's bits equally.

As for Spears under blades skill, it was an odd choice given the plethora of different types of spears and how they can be used, but I can not guess at the devs minds and going down that route would be futile.

But end of the day it's your table so pick what feels the most right for it.

[Neraph]

Expand polearms. Make it its own weaponskill in the Close Combat skill group, with the Bladed, Hammer, and Piercing specialties, move spears over to it, and alter the stats of the polearm a little to account for a guisarm, halberd, bec-de-corbin, and maybe a few others - at least two for each specialty. Maybe put the staff over there under the Hammer specialty as well, along side the Stun Staff.

[Umidori]

A solid idea, actually. Two-handed weaponry is used in an entirely different manner than one-handed. Your body moves in entirely different ways, and you make different use of the the leverage and balance available.

~Umi

[phlapjack77]

Expand polearms. Make it its own weaponskill in the Close Combat skill group, with the Bladed, Hammer, and Piercing specialties, move spears over to it, and alter the stats of the polearm a little to account for a guisarm, halberd, bec-de-corbin, and maybe a few others - at least two for each specialty. Maybe put the staff over there under the Hammer specialty as well, along side the Stun Staff.

Disagree strongly. We don't need more CC weapon skills - we need fewer. It's such a niche as it is, introducing umpteen skills for CC just makes it even more niche.

[Umidori]

Does it really, though?

I mean sure, if you're gonna go melee, you're already specializing. But with that in mind, how does another melee weapon skill category actually hurt anything? I mean, how many melee specialists actually bother to take more than one or two melee skills anyway?

A swordsman will put their points into Blades, and maybe a few into Unarmed or Blunt so they can still be somewhat effective if disarmed or whatever. And since they're pretty much never going to use things like halberds or warhammers when they already specialize in one-handed weapons, the addition of a Pole-Arms skill doesn't hurt anything.

More importantly, when you stop and think about it, all this is doing is changing the Pole-Arms category from an Exotic Melee skill to a regular one (and moving some items like spears out from other, less reasonable skill categories). If you were already going to play a halberdier or whatever who also had a backup knife or something, then you were already going to have to split your skills. The only difference is that with Exotic Weapon skills, you can't specialize. This makes sense for things that are already highly specialized - like Laser Weapons or Whips - but the proposed Pole-Arms skill would not be inherently specialized, and in fact would be more varied than any of the other melee skills.

In fact, that variety would be one of the primary reasons to even consider taking the skill over others - you'd have the versatility of being able to use different kinds of weapons that all employ much the same movements and attacking styles. Piercing polearms would have high Armor Penetration but reduced Damage, blunt polearms would have high Damage but reduced Armor Penetration, and bladed polearms would fall somewhere inbetween.

The downside? They're big weapons - they're hard to conceal, they're hard to use in tight quarters, and they're very attention grabbing and memorable - it's one thing to try to find "a big ork with a club", it's another to find "a big ork with a halberd".

~Umi

[Neraph]

Disagree strongly. We don't need more CC weapon skills - we need fewer. It's such a niche as it is, introducing umpteen skills for CC just makes it even more niche.

... Because three is too many? My Polearms skill would be a fourth, not including Exotics. Hand to Hand, Blades, Blunt.

Firearms, on the other hand, have a lot. Automatics, Longarms, Pistols, Gunnery, Heavy Weapons. Then Archery and Throwing, as less conventional choices. So you think that three close combat skills is too many (even when some simply don't fit - you cannot use a spear like you would a sword), while ranged weapons are fine having seven skills?