Equipment Suggestion: Pommel

[M1C4A3L]

So, I propose a new piece of equipment - In theme with how Shield Boss and Shield Spike modify an existing item;

Pommel - Can be attached to any Sword Family that does Slashing and/or Piercing. Adds 1 Bulk to the Weapon. Gives weapon Versatile (B)
Maybe swap between +1 Bulk and/or decrease the Versatile (B) strike dmg die one step?) - I would love an elaborate handle on a sword that you could use to bash, that wasn't tied to a class feature, feat, or locked out of already using a weapon. I think personally, the Bulk restriction is an adequate trade-off for bashing with a sword.

Thoughts?

[Fuzzy-Wuzzy]

The clan dagger is P versatile B; AFAICT the B is hitting them with the pommel. The whole dagger is L. Also 1 Bulk just seems like a lot to have stuck on the end of your sword. Upshot is, I wouldn't have it change the weapon's Bulk. Just charge some money to add a bulkless feature, like shield boss/spikes.

[Wheldrake]

Any properly made sword is going to have a pommel as a matter of course. It helps balance the blade, for one thing. Sure, there are a few types of sword with little discernable pommel, but in those cases I can't see adding one could help matters much.

You could use the improvised weapons rule to make your longsword do a "B" attack, just take -2 off your attack roll. Dropping the damage die a step is also well within this rule's purview.

Conceptually, I already have a problem with "adding" a shield boss to a shield. Shields with shield bosses are built around the boss - it isn't a feature that you can add on later. Same thing with a sword pommel. You could encrust your pommel with gems, in order to boost your ego, but the smith will have properly weighted and positioned the thing before it ever reached your hand, so there is nothing to "add on".

[Goblin Guard]

Given the nature of a pommel - far less lethal, not really intended for combat, less reach, etc.
I think you could always go with resolving a pommel attack as an unarmed strike.

[Castilliano]

Can't see the pommel of a greatsword doing 1d10 damage.
It'd be more along the lines of a club or mace for damage so I'd put pommels in the improvised weapon category.
And what about the old concept of using the flat of the blade? Seems like that'd be better suited, and moreover it should be able to use the same Runes (if applicable to blunt weapons). Again improvised, but I'd think for more damage.

Separately, it seems many current weapons could be built with a Versatile element, i.e. the spiked head & bladed back of a warhammer. Except Versatile has value so would have a mechanical cost which may break verisimilitude (or just lead to a ridiculous amount of variants).

[Tender Tendrils]

I think it's safe enough to abstract it to the point where pommel strikes are incorporated into normal attacks - for example, you can flavour a critical strike with a sword as you striking them with the pommel, then while they are reeling from the pommel strike you run them through - all of the damage is still calculated as if it was the piercing or slashing damage of your sword, but the flavour is slightly different.

[graystone]

M1C4A3L wrote:

So, I propose a new piece of equipment - In theme with how Shield Boss and Shield Spike modify an existing item;

Pommel - Can be attached to any Sword Family that does Slashing and/or Piercing. Adds 1 Bulk to the Weapon. Gives weapon Versatile (B)
Maybe swap between +1 Bulk and/or decrease the Versatile (B) strike dmg die one step?) - I would love an elaborate handle on a sword that you could use to bash, that wasn't tied to a class feature, feat, or locked out of already using a weapon. I think personally, the Bulk restriction is an adequate trade-off for bashing with a sword.

Thoughts?

I'd counter with Basket Hilt Simple Weapon, +1 L, 1d4 B, attached to most one handed weapons [no reason an axe/hammer couldn't have one], Brawling Group, Agile. Treat it as a separate attached weapon [like a boss/spike].

[Claxon]

From what I know, striking an enemy with your pommel was not uncommon when a knight faced another armored knight. The blade of their sword could not easily pierce the armor, not could it be as easily maneuvered around the joints to pierce them. But you could use it as a improvised mace to knock someone's skull in after you had bashed them enough with the sword to knock them down.

[TheWarriorPoet519]

Claxon wrote:

From what I know, striking an enemy with your pommel was not uncommon when a knight faced another armored knight. The blade of their sword could not easily pierce the armor, not could it be as easily maneuvered around the joints to pierce them. But you could use it as a improvised mace to knock someone's skull in after you had bashed them enough with the sword to knock them down.

Yup--HEMA teacher here. Pommel strikes are a big part of Harnisfechten (armored fighting). As is grabbing the blade midway up and using it like a short spear to get at the gaps and weak points in the armor.

Also just grabbing the blade and swinging the hilt at them like a poleaxe.

[Wheldrake]

But the point is, you don't need to add a "pommel" option to the weapons list, since nearly all swords will already have one. And the improvised weapons rules handles a pommel attack nicely.

[TheWarriorPoet519]

I would agree with that.

[AnimatedPaper]

Wheldrake wrote:

But the point is, you don't need to add a "pommel" option to the weapons list, since nearly all swords will already have one. And the improvised weapons rules handles a pommel attack nicely.

Now I have a mental image of a shoonie that can't use the sword you gave him to actually stab someone, but can whack someone upside the head with it to decent effect.

Improvisational Warrior

[HumbleGamer]

I'd rather prefer not to have a weapon able to do B/P/S + eventually other traits ( a short sword will become B/P/S Finesse Agile ).

But I am ok to allow a character to use the pommel to make some actions

"ok, since the prisoner doesn't want to talk I put it to sleep with the pommel of my sword".

No need to roll anything.
Just for the flavor.

[ArchSage20]

indeed we need pommels as a first priority to counter enemy fighters only then can we end then rightly

[M1C4A3L]

graystone wrote:

Thoughts?

I'd counter with Basket Hilt Simple Weapon, +1 L, 1d4 B, attached to most one handed weapons [no reason an axe/hammer couldn't have one], Brawling Group, Agile. Treat it as a separate attached weapon [like a boss/spike].

I like this idea - since my ultimate goal was to provide 'some' kind of opportunity cost for added versatility/flexibility. As mentioned before, if you were just 'throwing out' that you wanted to do an improvised pommel attack, like having a rapier and you're fighting a skeleton, so you go that route, that does work well, but as TheWarriorPoet519 pointed out, what if it is in your style? then PF2.0 flexibility says something that you want to make a 'cost' for, should also be available. to that end, having a 'combat pommel' as a part of the weapon makes sense, and treating it like a separate attached weapon helps keep theme, without breaking too much mechanics, and not forcing fighters dedicated to that 'tactic' to always soak the -2, or always have separate DM determinations on exactly what kind/how much dmg etc.

I would also argue that the greater doubling rings could be used to make the 'attached' weapon gain as if standard doubling rings (fundamental runes only) - Since the die dmg is already adjusted, it should scale well enough, but still require lvl 11 - and a choice between investing in the same handed weapon, vs different hand weapon transference.

[breithauptclan]

ArchSage20 wrote:

indeed we need pommels as a first priority to counter enemy fighters only then can we end then rightly

Yeah. That was my first thought when I read the thread title.

I would probably rule it as an improvised ranged weapon that deals mental damage.

[Claxon]

breithauptclan wrote:

ArchSage20 wrote:

indeed we need pommels as a first priority to counter enemy fighters only then can we end then rightly

Yeah. That was my first thought when I read the thread title.

I would probably rule it as an improvised ranged weapon that deals mental damage.

I think people we're mostly referring to striking someone with the pommel with it still attached, though I have seen the youtube video of the person who demonstrates a technique of removing (unscrewing) the pommel and then throwing it at them. But I think the agreement was such a thing was almost certainly a joke, while striking someone with the pommel was a way to inflict less lethal damage, possibly knocking them out instead of killing them.

[shroudb]

Yeah, i can't see a "pommel strike" being anything else than an imrovised attack.

Not only hitting with the wrong end of your weapon, without any sort of balance, but also being a few magnitutes "shorter".

It would take an extraordinary "Feature" (a.k.a Feat) for me to see it going diferently.

That said, I'm perfectly fine with using a pommel to give someone a non-lethal bludgeoning attack if you have them in a position that wouldnt require an attack roll (a bound captive and etc)

[Megistone]

The fact that an attack with the pommel was referred to as "murder strike" should tell something about its effectiveness.
In that case you gripped the sword from the other side, though, so you did have leverage.
Just don't try that without metal gauntlets!

[Claxon]

It is true that knights would half blade (to have better control of the point) or even hold the sword "backwards" in order to use the pommel as a bludgeoning device, i.e. improvised club.

But I think ultimately we don't need the pommel to be a separate weapon/upgrade to weapon, it's just an improvised bludgeoning weapon (club).