Curdog's page

13th Warrior is based on Eaters of the Dead by Michael Crighton- better by far than the movie.

For a nordic adventure, how about a voyage to the distant shores of Arcadia, covered in spruce forests and mammoth dung....

As a DM, I will not be using these options in the near future. It feels like old school 3.5 bloat...

That being said, interesting options will sell product, and that is good for the hobby.

Possible weapons for your game...

Clubs
Throwing sticks
spears
javelins
atlatls and darts
axes
greatclubs
Bone daggers
slings
bows
meteor hammers
maces with ground stone heads- like a bagel
spiked clubs- morning stars

Don't forget daylight-sensitive trolls! Can't wait for the movie...

More animals- Moose, Jaguar, Roe Deer,

Cryptos- the Nandi Bear, Sasquatch, Wild Men,

Extinct Mega Fauna- Unitherium (what a war beast!) Smilodon, etc.

Honestly, the template system makes it pretty easy to home-brew anything one would want...

I started sometimes in the late seventies... I remember saving up for quite a while to buy the AD&D DM guide...

Remember how illustrations of gamers (as opposed to characters) had awesome feathered mullets? :) Thank you Errol Otis!

"need a 13 strength to weild dwarven war axe. A player led DM mistake now house rule."

I do that with using a falchion one handed-

also, a spear may be wielded one-handed with a shield as a MARTIAL weapon.

Blueluck wrote:
Also, D&D/Pathfinder is not a particularly roleplaying heavy RPG, and book adventures lend themselves less to roleplaying than home made adventures.

I agree here. That is not to say drama is impossible with Pathfinder, it is just not the focus of the game. To a large extent that influences players' expectations. Everyone recognizes you get rewards to killing things and taking their stuff. Roleplaying can be its own reward, but it is difficult to focus on that when everyone else focuses on the tactical aspects and your attempts get marginalized.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++

I have to disagree with this- PATHFINDER is as roleplaying oriented as the DM and players want it to be. The focus of the game depends entirely on style of play. If ya want to role-play more, then do it, the system does not limit you.

I would like to take a small issue with the idea that torture is ineffective. If this was the case, there would be no official torture. I am not talking about sadism- torture for the sake of causing pain only- but torture as part of interrogation. It is used as part of a program of information gathering in lots of dark places, and if it did not work, why would elite soldiers be taught how to resist? In fact, skilled interrogation that includes physical and mental duress is generally thought to be almost guarnateed to get what the interrogator wants. Read about Escape and Evasion courses and POW memoirs...

I am not talking about a victim just saying anything to make it stop-I mean the victim gives it all up. That is what a talented interrogator does- dividing the truth from the attempts to feed the captors what they want to hear.

Curdog wrote:

fechtbuchen

Fencing beeches? Is that something for giants? ;-P

Sorry about that- Fechtbucher is correct I believe

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fechtbuch#German_Fechtb.C3.BCcher

Note picture of two men practicing with what appear to be greatswords.

Great Swords were often used in conjuction with massed pole arms. They were there to sunder opposing pole arms and to kill enemies that got inside the reach of their sides pikes. Quite a few old training manuals (fechtbuchen) still exist for these tools.

Lvl 12 Procrastinator wrote:

Scylla, hands down.

I dunno, I'm stuck between Scylla and Charibdis.

AHAHAHAHAHA! I appreciate that!

Good morning! First post here...

At the risk of coming off like an arrogant douche, let me say that I am a historian, specializing in military history. I am a long-time (20 years +) instructor of primitive and traditional skills. I have made traditional bows for a long time, and currently own at least 15 slings....

Slings are NOT easy for most people to use. Try to hit a paper plate two out of three times at 25 yards after a day of training. Slinging cultures, like those in the Middle East and the Inca, trained since CHILDHOOD. That is why they were effective. Slings are cheap, portable, easy to hide, and light. They do take a lot of practice however.

Bows won out in battle because they penetrated armor better and were easier to learn to use. The ease of use in formations is also imoportant. Slings are at their best in skirmishing or in static defense- a group of slingers on a fortified wall are nothing to sneeze at.

Crossbows tended to crowd out bows because they were easier still, not because they had an advantage in price or effectiveness. Later on, the same thing happened with eary firearms. In fact, there were arguments published even in the 1700's that an elite corp of longbow armed troops might be a superior fighting unit...