Chainsaw = melee weapon?
Andrew B. Kaiser
: kw...@cs.cornell.edu (Alan Kwan) writes:
: While chainsaws aren't melee weapons in real life (they do damage based on how
: that chain goes 'rond the blade, not by how hard you hit with them - using
: the game mechanics of "melee" weapon.), obviously the card is flawed.
No, think about it. If you're cutting a log with a chainsaw, a stronger person
would cut the log faster than a weaker one. Press down on the chainsaw more,
and the chain cuts deeper and harder into said log. Who would you rather have
come at you with a chainsaw: 1) Pee-Wee Herman
2) Arnold Schwartzennegar
Alan Kwan
>If the chainsaw is to be corrected to a melee weapon, what about Talbot's
>Chainsaw?
Arghhh... I looked at my 2 Chainsaw's and 1 Shotgun in the first cards
I've got, and concluded that Chainsaw /has to/ be a melee weapon ...
until I heard about Talbot's. I'm confused.
Maybe Chainsaw is alright and needs no fix; we just have to change the
name of the /game/ to Jyhad: the Gathering (Vampire: the Ethernal Gathering
for revised).
--
"Live Life with Heart."
Alan Kwan kw...@cs.cornell.edu
L. Scott Johnson
>In article <1995Apr1...@omega.ntu.ac.sg> 740926...@omega.ntu.ac.sg (Damian Chang) writes:
>>If the chainsaw is to be corrected to a melee weapon, what about Talbot's
>>Chainsaw?
>Arghhh... I looked at my 2 Chainsaw's and 1 Shotgun in the first cards
>I've got, and concluded that Chainsaw /has to/ be a melee weapon ...
>until I heard about Talbot's. I'm confused.
>Maybe Chainsaw is alright and needs no fix; we just have to change the
>name of the /game/ to Jyhad: the Gathering (Vampire: the Ethernal Gathering
>for revised).
While chainsaws aren't melee weapons in real life (they do damage based on how
that chain goes 'rond the blade, not by how hard you hit with them - using
the game mechanics of "melee" weapon.), obviously the card is flawed.
Perhaps the text should be "once per round" rather than "once per combat".
Making it a melee weapon brings it into play at the cost of game concept,
which isn't necessarily a bad thing. But once per round makes more sense
for a weapon that you can't wield well (isn't balanced for fighting),
opposed to a one-shot weapon like a shotgun, which really does hold only
one shot (unless you have a fancy one, which Jyhad's obviously isn't).
You don't have to reload a chainsaw, just get it ready to strike again.
(Like an AD&D morning star, or a GURPS flail).
Either way would help balance the chainsaw so that it could make a
meaningful addition to a deck.
L. Scott
Damian Chang
Chainsaw?
Damian.
L. Scott Johnson
>L. Scott Johnson (sjoh...@math.scarolina.edu) wrote:
>: kw...@cs.cornell.edu (Alan Kwan) writes:
>: While chainsaws aren't melee weapons in real life (they do damage based on how
>: that chain goes 'rond the blade, not by how hard you hit with them - using
>: the game mechanics of "melee" weapon.), obviously the card is flawed.
>No, think about it. If you're cutting a log with a chainsaw, a stronger person
>would cut the log faster than a weaker one. Press down on the chainsaw more,
>and the chain cuts deeper and harder into said log. Who would you rather have
>come at you with a chainsaw: 1) Pee-Wee Herman
> 2) Arnold Schwartzennegar
Cutting a tree at your leisure and *swinging* a chainsaw in combat are two
markedly different things. I wouldn't want either coming at me with a
chainsaw. Most of the damage from a chainsaw *strike* comes from the chain.
Just try dropping one of those thigs on your arm (as opposed to, say,
a bastard sword, and see which one does more damage from mere gravity).
Why can't Arnold use the chainsaw more than once in a combat?
Shawn Metcalf
Kaiser) wrote:
> L. Scott Johnson (sjoh...@math.scarolina.edu) wrote:
> : kw...@cs.cornell.edu (Alan Kwan) writes:
>
> : While chainsaws aren't melee weapons in real life (they do damage
based on how
> : that chain goes 'rond the blade, not by how hard you hit with them - using
> : the game mechanics of "melee" weapon.), obviously the card is flawed.
>
> No, think about it. If you're cutting a log with a chainsaw, a stronger person
> would cut the log faster than a weaker one. Press down on the chainsaw more,
> and the chain cuts deeper and harder into said log. Who would you rather have
> come at you with a chainsaw: 1) Pee-Wee Herman
> 2) Arnold Schwartzennegar
Well, this is true to a slight extent, but that's about it. If a vampire
(or anyone else with enormous strength) were to push a chainsaw into
something too hard, the chain would snap. Even us non-Arnold types can put
enough pressure on a CS to make it make unpleasant grinding sounds.
However, it certainly makes sense for strong vampires to do more hurtin'
with a CS. It's a game, and makes sense in a game way.
--
Shawn Metcalf DeadB...@aol.com
CEO, Omni Gaming Products
Official Licensee of the Torg Role-Playing Game
Damian Chang
:> markedly different things. I wouldn't want either coming at me with a
:> chainsaw. Most of the damage from a chainsaw *strike* comes from the chain.
:> Just try dropping one of those thigs on your arm (as opposed to, say,
:> a bastard sword, and see which one does more damage from mere gravity).
:>
:> Why can't Arnold use the chainsaw more than once in a combat?
The original point of my question was: if chainsaw changes, will the Talbot
Chainsaw follow? I'm putting game balance concerns into the equation. If the
errata is to be issued for the Chainsaw, I could forsee problems whenpeople
notice the TC.
L. Scott Johnson
No - TC could never be considered "Wallpaper"
But this is another good excuse to use the "Once per round" fix rather
than the "Melee Weapon" fix.
--
-----
L. Scott Johnson (lsc...@crl.com)
Graphics Specialist and Jyhad Rules' Monger