CELESTIAL KINGDOM ONLINE FORUMS

[Oznog]

Original thread

Poll on how people have been playing it up until now

Interesting. I had always taken the interpretation that if you have a slung weapon or shield, it is garb and simply cannot take a hit of any kind (except maybe Verbals), as per the Combat Notes #3. This means the item cannot be destroyed (even if you want to) but the player may or may not be hit depending on whether the shot would have hit you if the item was not there.

Brennon maintains that they do not become "garb", because non-engulfing spellballs which specifically say they destroy items (Fireball, SOA, Lightning Bolt, Acid Bolt) will affect slung items but the shot is always blocked from hitting you, even if the shot would have hit you were the item not there. If the item is a Warrior Improve Shield or is Hardened, it can block these spellballs except SOA without penalty, but melee weapons, projectiles, and Magic Bolt still go through as per slung equipment.

There are some other distinct possible responses which I included in the poll.

The poll had some interesting results. Be sure to vote BEFORE reading the results, just so you don't bias yourself. In fact don't reread the rulebook and go through the arguments made. Just, if last week there were no Reeve around and some noob threw it at another noob, hit his slung equipment and asked you how to take it, what would you have said?

This is probably a clarification-worthy case, because if the poll was any indication, there IS a considerable diversity on how people play this.

[Yakamo Owari]

Frankly, i think the whole argument is stupid. It makes NO sense that a slung shield or non wielded weapons will block a spell ball and not a sword. and apparently most of Amtgard agrees on that. It should block both, or neither. Get it 'clarified' and move on.
_________________
Sir Theolanthilis
Overseer of Murky Waters

[Oznog]

Well it's not "blocked" wholly. The nonwielded shield/weapon would be destroyed same as if being held (unless Hardened, in which case it would block without penalty). But the person would be unharmed as well so it did block it. And it's hard to explain why a Lightning Bolt on a slung weapon leaves you alive but a throwing dagger would kill you through it.

[Oznog]

Part of the problem is that the committee members for the last 2 years have been REALLY determined to make sure "throwing shields" or "throwing swords" is a legitimate tactic.

That is, they want to be able to throw or simply let go of a shield or sword when being attacked with an Entangle or Iceball, and not have to take it because it didn't hit them. This is quite effective when trying to run down a spellcaster 1:1 because otherwise there's almost no chance for you to avoid being Entangled/Iceballed if they want to use it on you, but timing to drop the shield is not difficult if you're focused on them.

The rules were modified to say that your item will be damaged/destroyed as normal if the attack does that. BUT, that's contradicted by the predominant interpretation that unwielded weapons cannot be destroyed. Once it leaves your hand as an unwielded weapon the shot is supposed to go through and not count on the shield. So you could in theory block Fireball by dropping the shield and the shield wouldn't be affected, which means you should be affected, except the 2008 rule said you're not affected but the shield will be affected "as normal"- and the loophole is that "normal" says it has no effect on the shield because it's supposed to affect the player.

Unless you want to further separate items into wielded, slung, and discarded (not on the person). I don't see the merit in making up a whole new case simply to allow non-throwing equipment to be thrown intentionally to block things they can't normally block.

[Lord Scorpian]

I'm dizzy now
_________________
Lord Squire Scorpian Grimwullf Goldendragon
Saracen Cheiften Tribe of the sea

[rooksilverstar]

I see it very simply...

If you wouldn't allow a shield to be thrown to block a shot from a melee or ranged weapon, then being thrown to block a spell ball from hitting its mark shouldn't be allowed. The arguments for both are congruent.

It boils down to this. If spellcasters don't want to get hit, they have to learn to avoid shots. So, if melee classes don't want to get nuked with magic balls... they should learn to not chase down a spellcaster with one (or more) charged. This is the equalizing power in spellcasting.

Look at it from this angle. A warrior with a shield, armor, and a long weapon rushes down a healer with an entangle ball charged. As the healer throws the spell ball, the warrior throws his shield, and the entangle ball is denied. From there, the warrior still has armor and reach with his weapon. At that range, the healer has nothing. Unbalanced play is the result.

However, given the same situation WITHOUT the ability to "discard" the shield, the outcome is far different. The warrior has to plan his approach carefully yet can still capitalize if the healer makes a bad throw or starts another spell. The healer still has a way to defend themselves, but still has room for err if they flub the throw or decide to turn and run. Much more level game play. This is still a game, not a sport after all.

Ok, novella done!