Modelling the Pilum

Unit-based, continuous action, fantasy skirmish game

Moderator: underling

yesman
Midshipman
Midshipman
Posts: 18
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2009 4:15 am

Modelling the Pilum

Postby yesman » Sat Aug 07, 2010 3:51 pm

I was thinking of new weapon modifiers to allow for a slightly closer modelling of the Roman Pilum that some of my heroscape figures have. How do these look?

Shieldbreaker (2)
If attacking a figure with a shield, the weapon causes a figure to lose the use of its shield for the rest of the game.

Single Shot (.25)
This weapon may only be used once per game.

Dixon Five
Midshipman
Midshipman
Posts: 11
Joined: Wed Apr 01, 2009 11:09 am
Location: Oakland County, MI

Re: Modelling the Pilum

Postby Dixon Five » Wed Sep 01, 2010 3:24 pm

The only issue I see is that in both cases (attacker/defender) the figure loses something, and you need to mark that somehow. Not to mention that the roman is then unarmed and pretty useless, and I can't see why you would do that.

I would lower the Shieldbreaker to 1.75, and have it only funtion under a circumstance, not be automatic. Not all thrown Pilum bent and became non-removeable after all.

Alex Knight
Lieutenant
Lieutenant
Posts: 102
Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2009 2:49 am

Re: Modelling the Pilum

Postby Alex Knight » Wed Sep 01, 2010 6:52 pm

Dixon Five wrote:The only issue I see is that in both cases (attacker/defender) the figure loses something, and you need to mark that somehow. Not to mention that the roman is then unarmed and pretty useless, and I can't see why you would do that.


Because the Roman also had his gladius for after his pilum is used up?

However, I think utterly destroying the opponent's shield is a bit much. The pilum didn't render it 100% useless, it just made it heavier and more unwieldly, iirc. Not having tried Ares out, is there a trait that would weaken the bonus from having a shield?

Dixon Five
Midshipman
Midshipman
Posts: 11
Joined: Wed Apr 01, 2009 11:09 am
Location: Oakland County, MI

Re: Modelling the Pilum

Postby Dixon Five » Thu Dec 09, 2010 2:47 pm

Alex Knight wrote:Because the Roman also had his gladius for after his pilum is used up?

The Heroscape romans mostly do not have a sword modeled on them, thus the comment. At least mine don't, maybe they changed them.

I would suggest 1.75. "If a figure with a shield successfully defends a Ranged attack by a pilum, that figure is now Borrowing an action."

The shield thus becomes a possible hinderence, taking extra effort to make it useable again, but doesn't remove it entirely.

mj12games
Admiral of the Fleet
Admiral of the Fleet
Posts: 3637
Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2005 9:56 pm
Location: Denver, CO
Contact:

Re: Modelling the Pilum

Postby mj12games » Thu Dec 09, 2010 3:17 pm

Dixon Five wrote:"If a figure with a shield successfully defends a Ranged attack by a pilum, that figure is now Borrowing an action."

One problem with this: what if the figure is already Borrowing?
Daniel Kast
Majestic Twelve Games
www.mj12games.com

underling
Commodore
Commodore
Posts: 561
Joined: Tue Sep 06, 2005 4:37 pm
Location: Wichita, Ks

Re: Modelling the Pilum

Postby underling » Thu Dec 09, 2010 4:52 pm

It looks like you'd have to approach this in a couple of ways.

First of all, I'd consider the pilum a one shot weapon, so there needs to be an appropriate multiplier to reduce the cost of the attack. I'd use something on the order of 0.33.

Secondly, the pilum can affect a target's shield if it imbeds in it. However, it's only going to affect the shield if it "hits" it, which could also very well be considered a miss, in that the target isn't wounded (which in game terms is because the armor and shield die roll is equal to or greater than the attacking die roll).

I think where I'd start is the following:

Pilum:
One shot weapon, with a range band of 1
Special ability of Shieldbreaker.
If a target is attacked and NOT wounded, then the target must roll a d12. On a roll of 7 or greater, the pilum has destroyed the shield.
Weapon cost multiplier (0.50)

My logic here is that with ARES, I've always assumed that a successful attack roll has bypassed any model's weapon skill, and armor or shield effects. Therefore, I'm envisioning the pilum sometimes affecting the target if the defenses in place "work."

The wepaon multiplier reflects the one shot cost (0.33), with the added bonus of affecting a shield 50% of the time, which brings its cost multiplier back "up" to (0.50).
There are certainly other ways in which this could be handled, but I think this is where I'd start.
Kevin

Dixon Five
Midshipman
Midshipman
Posts: 11
Joined: Wed Apr 01, 2009 11:09 am
Location: Oakland County, MI

Re: Modelling the Pilum

Postby Dixon Five » Tue Dec 21, 2010 3:12 pm

cricket wrote:One problem with this: what if the figure is already Borrowing?

Then you have a choice, either there is no additional affect to the figure, or they are now Borrowing an additional action.

I would go with the second, so the figure has more than one Borrowed action. Each Borrow requires one Action to clear, so it would just take longer. We use that for creatures with a freeze or stun ability as well, and it works very nicely.

The only issue I see with the one shot idea is that you then need to mark the figure to note that the weapon has been used, and mark the figures to show that their shield is no longer in use.
If playing a game where the figures cost is important (used as Victory Points perhaps), what happens to the cost if the shield is factored out, or the Pilum has been used?

I'm just asking questions, bringing up thoughts. Anything will work, and will work just fine, which is why I dearly love these rules. :D

underling
Commodore
Commodore
Posts: 561
Joined: Tue Sep 06, 2005 4:37 pm
Location: Wichita, Ks

Re: Modelling the Pilum

Postby underling » Tue Dec 21, 2010 5:25 pm

Dixon Five wrote:
cricket wrote:One problem with this: what if the figure is already Borrowing?

Then you have a choice, either there is no additional affect to the figure, or they are now Borrowing an additional action.
I would go with the second, so the figure has more than one Borrowed action. Each Borrow requires one Action to clear, so it would just take longer. We use that for creatures with a freeze or stun ability as well, and it works very nicely.

I've not used a double borrow, but I can't think of any reason why it wouldn't work either.
Dixon Five wrote:The only issue I see with the one shot idea is that you then need to mark the figure to note that the weapon has been used, and mark the figures to show that their shield is no longer in use.
If playing a game where the figures cost is important (used as Victory Points perhaps), what happens to the cost if the shield is factored out, or the Pilum has been used?

The last thing ARES needs is more markers, but in a game with multiple models with lost shields or one shot weapons I'd probably mrk them as such.
I would also award VPs based on the "total" cost of a model, even if that model paid for a shield and that shield has now been lost. The same would go for a one shot weapon. Regardless of whether a model has been eliminated after expending a one shot weapon, the model paid for that weapon up front, and that is what the model is worth.
Kevin


Return to “ARES”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest