Body Weaponry (Any)

[Bond]

When a monster card indicates "Body Weaponry (Any)", the implication is that any weapon type that the character has skill with can be utilized as a body weapon. Normally, this just means one or two-handed melee weapons, but is there an actual distinction between melee and projectile weaponry used as body weaponry? Can a character with Weapon Master, Style Master, Archery and Thrown weapon utilize any of these weapon types(assuming they have an appropriately colored phys-rep) as body weaponry? If so would a body weaponry bow or crossbow expend normal ammunition or would they be imbued with the normal carrier designated on the card, or both? Could the character utilize body weaponry thrown weapons?

 

[most_precious_blood]

Bloody Weaponry (Many)

First off, I'm not a marshal

Second off... as for the question of range, I think it's perfectly appropriate to have a monster (like a manticore) that fires quills, but I would rather have the physrep be something defined (like a quill-shaped throwing weapon) over using a bow physrep and ribboned packets. Just like "Natural armor", it should say somewhere on the card "reps must be carried"

There are some situations where body weaponry has been used as a skill representing a weapon "bolted in"... attached in such a way it can't be disarmed, but that's been more common with undead in my experience. (and it hasn't ever explained why the object suddenly can't be shattered)

Now, as for GOLEMS, which is so clearly the subtext of your post
I think an arm or shoulder-mounted crossbow would be appropriate on those kinds of monsters, even if PC's get to play them.

Ammo and physrep sizing should be as appropriate for the archery type in those cases, and the "draw action" with packets should be similarly unaffected.

Players who store into a golem can still use a bow, but if you were an acher with celestial formal, you would most certainly install some suppressing fire before your first test drive.

With thrown weapons, I could see them being "ammo" as well. A golem that can fire a certain amount of spines/ claws/ blades/ shuriken/ annoying roommates per day "from within" as it were.

Third off, I am a rules gnome, not a lawyer, so while this may all make sense to me, and have a logical structure to it.... it may be the "gnomeness" that makes me think that way about my own ideas, who gnows?

And that, Nick Bond, is what you call a disclaimer sandwich.

Always helpful, except in emergencies,
-Gideon

 

[jpariury]

"Body Weaponry" is not a standard selection for the "Weapons or Claws" field in the monster database, which suggests that someone put it in locally. Maybe they could clarify their intent? The rulebook simply equates all "body weaponry" with "large claws or fists" (pg 68). In general, though, I think the intent is to say "hey, this is a part of the creature and cannot be shattered or disarmed".

From a personal perspective, I would suggest that despite our shared geek-culture references, the intent of golems is probably not to create mage-punk mecha/boomers.

 

[Bond]

Haha, the shoulder mounted crossbow wasn't my intent, I was more interested in body weaponry thrown weapons. That got me thinking about bows and crossbows, though. If that would even be legal and how ammo/carriers would be handled. I've seen physical attacks delivered via arrow packets plenty of times used to represent a body weaponry/natural ability, but never a claw thrown weapon.

 

[jpariury]

For my own stuff, the intent is to use an attack that mimicked normal weapon rules (could be blocked, had to do body damage to deliver it's carrier effect, etc.), but threw an object that neither the creature from which it originated nor anyone else could pick up and throw back. The "Arcane", "Magic", and "Elemental" carriers represent something specific in the world of Alliance, (that the creature is magical, elemental, etc. in some fashion) and didn't real fit the feel and theme of what those creatures were doing. None of those are blockable with a shield, etc, and don't have the feel and flavor I want for those types of monsters.

As a similar note, some of my monsters have a "base carrier" but also have access to additional carriers as appropriate to the monster-type, and what they're representing. "Death carrier" is rough. "Death carrier 5x" is significantly less-so, for instance. If and when I put out creatures with body weaponry ranged attacks, I may specify the carrier to be used on the monster card, if it is fitting, otherwise, normal carrier rules apply. In general, if there are two things that look like they don't conflict, it means they can be combined (i.e. "PTD Shatter 1x, Carrier: Charm 1x" could be combined for "PTD Charm Shatter 1x" if the NPC felt it was appropriate.)

So I guess the questions to ask are "What is the intent of the person that created the monster?" and "What existing mechanics fit that particular intent?". If you really wanted there to be a creature that had a bow as part of its body and could hurl normal ammo and imbue normal arrows with it's own specialness, I don't see any good reason why you couldn't or shouldn't write the card to reflect that. i.e. Body weaponry:bow - may apply Shun Poison carrier with any arrow tags used.

Body weaponry thrown weapons are bit weirder, in my opinion. If you throw a "spike" that does "20 Sleep", and it bounces off of my shield and I try to throw it back at you, does it get to have the Sleep carrier? How much of that 20 is based on Strength, how much is based on something specific to the object, and how much is neither?

 

[Bond]

Body weaponry thrown weapons are bit weirder, in my opinion. If you throw a "spike" that does "20 Sleep", and it bounces off of my shield and I try to throw it back at you, does it get to have the Sleep carrier? How much of that 20 is based on Strength, how much is based on something specific to the object, and how much is neither?

I don't think the "how much does this do?" question would be complicated any further by body weaponry thrown weapons. If a player threw a thrown weapon at you for 20 silver and you returned fire with the same weapon I think you would assume the weapon itself was un-augmented and that anything that contributed to the damage value of that attack was either specific to the character making that attack or was expended during it's use, though you night throw it for silver.

 

[jpariury]

I don't think the "how much does this do?" question would be complicated any further by body weaponry thrown weapons. If a player threw a thrown weapon at you for 20 silver and you returned fire with the same weapon I think you would assume the weapon itself was un-augmented and that anything that contributed to the damage value of that attack was either specific to the character making that attack or was expended during it's use, though you night throw it for silver.

Fair point, though the carrier question would still be in play. Creatures with a carrier attack may use their innate carriers with any weapon they use in addition to whatever carrier the weapon may naturally have, so it still wouldn't be clear if the carrier was necessarily part of the object itself, or the creature's "creatureness", I would think. You could probably make some overt declaration ahead of time though (event, mod, whatever).

 

[jpariury]

So I guess the questions to ask are "What is the intent of the person that created the monster?" and "What existing mechanics fit that particular intent?". If you really wanted there to be a creature that had a bow as part of its body and could hurl normal ammo and imbue normal arrows with it's own specialness, I don't see any good reason why you couldn't or shouldn't write the card to reflect that. i.e. Body weaponry:bow - may apply Shun Poison carrier with any arrow tags used.

So, bouncing through the rulebook, most of this is handled already (special cases being the exception). If the creature has a defined carrier, it may apply that carrier to any weapons it uses OR the carrier normally accessible via that object. i.e., if your monster swings Death carrier, it may pick up a Normal longsword and swing Death or Normal. By the same token, my assumption for a body bow is that if you load it with silver arrows, you may call Silver or whatever intrinsic carrier the monster may have. If the arrows are also "natural" to the creature (i.e. doesn't use tags), it's entirely up to the person who created the critter.

 

[elliotbay]

Body weaponry thrown weapons are bit weirder, in my opinion. If you throw a "spike" that does "20 Sleep", and it bounces off of my shield and I try to throw it back at you, does it get to have the Sleep carrier? How much of that 20 is based on Strength, how much is based on something specific to the object, and how much is neither?

I wouldn't think you could use body thrown weaponry if it bounces off your shield, in the same way you can't cut off a creature's claws and use them for attack.

 

[jpariury]

Body weapon claws are attached. Body weapon thrown weapons, not so much.

 

[Bond]

Body weapon claws are attached. Body weapon thrown weapons, not so much.

Certainly, but you wouldn't pick up a body weapon and use it if you didn't have the skill anymore than you would pick up a polearm and start swinging it if you only had one-handed edge.

 

[jpariury]

That's where it gets wonky. A body weapon thrown weapon is a thrown weapon, in any incarnation, and in the dark can be fairly indistinguishable from anything else. If the intention is to not allow it to be re-thrown, an arrow packet solves any possible confusion right then and there.