It is currently Sat Nov 18, 2017 11:06 pm


Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 9 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: Grappling Javelins
PostPosted: Fri Feb 26, 2016 10:27 pm 
Underling
Underling
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 25, 2009 8:27 pm
Posts: 87
Started Fighting: 19 Apr 2009
Realm: Thunder Guard
Favorite Fighting Styles: Sword and board, spear
Quote:
3.6.4. Combatants with Missile Weapons (Type 4, bow/arrows) may not initiate Grapples or be Grappled.


Is this rule indicating that only archers can't be grappled, or that both archers and javelin wielders can't be grappled?

If it applies to Javelins, what is the reason behind not allowing grapples with javelin wielders?

_________________
Ranting about the BoW so you don't have to.
(More rants here: http://board.belegarth.com/viewforum.php?f=66)


Top
 OfflineProfile  
 Post subject: Re: Grappling Javelins
PostPosted: Sat Feb 27, 2016 3:01 am 
Gladiator
Gladiator
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2006 2:31 pm
Posts: 981
It says Class 4 missile weapons (bows and arrows).

Javelins are Class 3-4.

_________________
Oderint Dum Metuant


Top
 OfflineProfile  
 Post subject: Re: Grappling Javelins
PostPosted: Sun Feb 28, 2016 10:48 pm 
Underling
Underling
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 25, 2009 8:27 pm
Posts: 87
Started Fighting: 19 Apr 2009
Realm: Thunder Guard
Favorite Fighting Styles: Sword and board, spear
Quote:
1.1.8. Javelin - Thrown Class 4 Weapon.
1.4.7. Javelins must conform to all of the following:
1.4.7.1. Must also pass as a Class 3 Weapon.


I find the wording of the rule in my original post ambiguous as to whether it's intended to apply to javelins or not.

If the rule is meant to only apply to bow and arrow, why does it refer to type 4?

If the rule is meant to apply to all type 4 weapons, why is bow and arrow specifically mentioned?

The definition of the rule feels unclear to me.

_________________
Ranting about the BoW so you don't have to.
(More rants here: http://board.belegarth.com/viewforum.php?f=66)


Top
 OfflineProfile  
 Post subject: Re: Grappling Javelins
PostPosted: Mon Feb 29, 2016 12:16 am 
Gladiator
Gladiator
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2006 2:31 pm
Posts: 981
I initially wrote out my original reply to make it clear that it was classification and then the subset that the rule was applicable to.

But, I made the assumption that "(bows and arrows)" made it clear that the rule applied to bows and arrows.

My apologies. No javelin can ever be classified as a bow and arrows, so you can grapple a javelin-wielder.

Quote:
I find the wording of the rule in my original post ambiguous as to whether it's intended to apply to javelins or not.


I think the "bows and arrows" part makes it clear that it applies to any weapon that is class 4 and bows/arrows. No javelin can ever be classified as a bow and arrows.

Quote:
If the rule is meant to only apply to bow and arrow, why does it refer to type 4?


Because Bows and Arrows are Class 4 weapons.

Quote:
If the rule is meant to apply to all type 4 weapons, why is bow and arrow specifically mentioned?


It doesn't. It applies to Class 4 weapons that are bow/arrow subset.

_________________
Oderint Dum Metuant


Top
 OfflineProfile  
 Post subject: Re: Grappling Javelins
PostPosted: Mon Feb 29, 2016 11:20 am 
Underling
Underling
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 25, 2009 8:27 pm
Posts: 87
Started Fighting: 19 Apr 2009
Realm: Thunder Guard
Favorite Fighting Styles: Sword and board, spear
I feel that this could be written more clearly with
Quote:
"Combatants carrying bows and/or arrows may not initiate grapples or be grappled."


Why refer to type 4, and missile weapons when these are not intended to be included in the rule?

If we had a rule saying that flail wielders can't grapple, would we write it as "Combatants with melee weapons (class 1, flails) can't grapple or be grappled"?

_________________
Ranting about the BoW so you don't have to.
(More rants here: http://board.belegarth.com/viewforum.php?f=66)


Top
 OfflineProfile  
 Post subject: Re: Grappling Javelins
PostPosted: Tue Mar 01, 2016 6:56 am 
Gladiator
Gladiator
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2006 2:31 pm
Posts: 981
Akroth wrote:
I feel that this could be written more clearly with
Quote:
"Combatants carrying bows and/or arrows may not initiate grapples or be grappled."


Honestly, you're the first person in the decade+ I've been fighting that I've even heard of having difficulty with the rule.

Not saying that you're the only one, just you're the only one I've ever heard of/encountered.

Quote:
Why refer to type 4, and missile weapons when these are not intended to be included in the rule?


Because bows/arrows are Class 4 missile weapons and the rules applies to them?

Quote:
If we had a rule saying that flail wielders can't grapple, would we write it as "Combatants with melee weapons (class 1, flails) can't grapple or be grappled"?


For consistency, most likely.

_________________
Oderint Dum Metuant


Top
 OfflineProfile  
 Post subject: Re: Grappling Javelins
PostPosted: Tue Mar 01, 2016 7:59 am 
Only .3% Short Of Perfect
Only .3% Short Of Perfect
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2003 5:03 pm
Posts: 671
Location: Alton, IL
Started Fighting: 0- 8-1999
Realm: Riverbend
Unit: Henneth-Annun
I've heard this come up before. It is not that the current rule is insufficient to convey the original intent, it merely requires some processing of the thought-process behind the rule to obtain its true meaning.

If you had a choice between a perfectly clear rule, and one that requires deep thought that some people find difficult, which one is better? Obviously, the clear rule that cannot be misinterpreted is preferable.

I have never understood the Belegarth community's reluctance to improve its ruleset and move towards unambiguity. In a perfect world, the rules would be overhauled once a year with an eye towards making every rule as clear and concise as possible. Do this for 2 or 3 years, and all of the sudden you've got a ruleset that is trim and efficient, rather than the vague mess that it is now.


Top
 OfflineProfile  
 Post subject: Re: Grappling Javelins
PostPosted: Tue Mar 01, 2016 12:53 pm 
Gladiator
Gladiator
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2006 2:31 pm
Posts: 981
Brutus wrote:
I've heard this come up before. It is not that the current rule is insufficient to convey the original intent, it merely requires some processing of the thought-process behind the rule to obtain its true meaning.

If you had a choice between a perfectly clear rule, and one that requires deep thought that some people find difficult, which one is better? Obviously, the clear rule that cannot be misinterpreted is preferable.

I have never understood the Belegarth community's reluctance to improve its ruleset and move towards unambiguity. In a perfect world, the rules would be overhauled once a year with an eye towards making every rule as clear and concise as possible. Do this for 2 or 3 years, and all of the sudden you've got a ruleset that is trim and efficient, rather than the vague mess that it is now.


Don't get me wrong, I agree with you on that. Trying to make some of the rules coherent when you take into account the common practice causes nothing but headaches.

And I know you've been working on pushing an over-haul. If you want any help with that, let me know.

_________________
Oderint Dum Metuant


Top
 OfflineProfile  
 Post subject: Re: Grappling Javelins
PostPosted: Tue Mar 01, 2016 1:02 pm 
Only .3% Short Of Perfect
Only .3% Short Of Perfect
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2003 5:03 pm
Posts: 671
Location: Alton, IL
Started Fighting: 0- 8-1999
Realm: Riverbend
Unit: Henneth-Annun
I'm pushing for two things: 1) a rewrite of the rules with the goal being to bring the written BoW in-line with the way it is currently played and originally intended to be played (keeping in mind that in some ways it is almost certainly impossible to rectify those two goals). 2) A full annotated line-item re-write of the BoW with suggestions for improvements to the game. I would like to see WC actually debate individual rule changes from the perspect of what would make the game better, rather than the reactionary approach that dominates rule-changes currently.

I know there is an effort underway to handle (1), and I've kind of been wanting to wait to see what comes out of that before I begin any kind of effort in the direction of (2). But with (2), I could see any number of people participating. There could be 4 or 5 options on any given rule. Take anvilling for example. You could have 4 or 5 different proposals for how anvilling should work: (a) no anvilling: if you keep their sword from hitting you, you're fine, unless it is by strapping a weapon to you. (b) If your weapon is hit into you at all, it's a hit. (c) If your weapon is hit into you with 'sufficient force' you have to take it. (d) If your weapon hits into you with some defined fraction of 'sufficient force', say 1/3, you have to take it. etc.

There's no reason these proposed revisions would have to be variations on each other, they could be polar opposites. But I would like to see WC debate the merits of each of them and try to craft a game that is going to be more fun to play, more welcoming for more people, safer, or whatever goals they deem are in Belegarth's interests.


Top
 OfflineProfile  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 9 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 6 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron

Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
GuildWarsAlliance Style by Daniel St. Jules of Gamexe.net. Modified by