A Song of Ice and Fire: Statting Bronn

[ddude987]

Hello Giant.

One of my friends and I were wondering what Bronn's stats and level would be. He is a sellsword so he would probably be a fighter or maybe a ranger. Any thoughts?

Thanks.

[Sgt. Cookie]

In one of the older Mags (I think it was Dungeon, could have been Dragon), and I'm talking, 3.0 era old, there were details for running a campaign in Westeros. If you can find it, it should have the information you seek.

[Rhynn]

You'd have to establish benchmarks to stat any character from the books. However! There's a d20 Game of Thrones RPG that probably stats Bronn.


In one of the older Mags (I think it was Dungeon, could have been Dragon), and I'm talking, 3.0 era old, there were details for running a campaign in Westeros. If you can find it, it should have the information you seek.

Holy crap is it weird to realize that AGoT came out in the AD&D 2E era. 1996!

[Kudaku]

3.5 or PF?

For 3.5 I'd suggest a mix of fighter and rogue, better yet the thug-variant of rogue.

For PF... Free hand Fighter or better yet, Cad. Mix in rogue (vanilla or bandit) to your liking.

[Sgt. Cookie]

Found it! Dragon 307. Full colour map and everything!

[Cirrylius]

Well?? Don't keep us in suspense!

[Rhynn]

Bronn isn't even mentioned as far as I can tell. FWIW Jaime is stated to be a 16th-level fighter. Tyrion is an aristocrat/fighter. The whole thing is pretty messed up, with the Tyrells (the ruling house of the "kingdom" of the Reach) and Martells (same for the "kingdom" of Dorne) claimed to be Lannister Bannermen, etc. Might just be that they were working only with the earlier books. (Although, well, A Storm of Swords had been out for 4 years.)

So make Bronn, I don't know, a fighter/rogue totalling 10 or 12 levels. Gregor is a 14th-level fighter and Sandor is a 13th-level fighter.

The whole article statting them is a pretty great indication of how D&D 3.X isn't much good for that kind of game, and how an older edition (with a few simple classes and 0-level humans) would work better.

[Piggy Knowles]

I only actually recall Bronn's fighting described once, in GoT, when he kills Ser Vardis in the Eyrie. Mostly he seems to be displayed threatening or intimidating.

I'd make him a zhentarim thug fighter with a splash of warblade, probably. Mostly focus on counters from the warblade levels to represent his parries and evasions from the fight in the Eyrie.

[Rhynn]

I only actually recall Bronn's fighting described once, in GoT, when he kills Ser Vardis in the Eyrie. Mostly he seems to be displayed threatening or intimidating.

Ha, well, that fight certainly fits into D&D, anyway. Cutting through iron/steel armor with a sword! rofl

[Kudaku]

Ha, well, that fight certainly fits into D&D, anyway. Cutting through iron/steel armor with a sword! rofl

From what I can recall Brom is described as feinting, dodging, using dirty tricks (you fight with no honor!), and specifically targeting weak points in his opponent's armor. Didn't he win the fight by hamstringing his opponent?

[Rhynn]

From what I can recall Brom is described as feinting, dodging, using dirty tricks (you fight with no honor!), and specifically targeting weak points inhis opponent's armor. Didn't he win the fight by hamstringing his opponent?

No, Bronn was explicitly described as cutting his armor. (No hamstringing, either.) I had to put the book down because I didn't know whether to laugh or to cry.

The stupid D&Disms mostly ended there, though (except for the ridiculous armor everyone wears, whether "ring mail" or enamelled plate with freakin' jewels). The books are much better about combat after that. Funnily, the TV show also did the scene far better - maybe, once they were visualizing it, they realized how silly the idea of cutting through steel armor with a sword is.

This is getting a bit off-topic but...

Ser Vardis Egen was steel from head to heel, encased in heavy plate armor over mail and padded surcoat. Large circular rondels [...] protected the vulnerable juncture of arm and breast. A skirt of lobstered metal covered him from waist to midthigh, while a solid gorget encircled his throat [...] and his visor was a pointed metal beak with a narrow slit for vision.

Then there's the ridiculous description of Bronn's sword:


but if did not shave it was not for want of a razor; the edge of his sword had the dangerous glimmer of steel that had been honed every day for hours, until it was too sharp to touch.

Yeah, because razor-sharp is what you want from a sword, amirite? :smallamused: Especially against full armor!

But then the stupidity really begins!


[Bronn] stepped left again, away from the shield, and caught Ser Vardis across the stomach, the [B]razor edge of his blade leaving a bright gash when it bit into the knight's plate.

:smallsigh:


[Bronn's] cuts were leaving their marks now. Deep shiny gashes gleamed all over [Vardis'] armor, on his right thigh, his beaked visor, crossing on his breastplate, a long one along the front of his gorget. The moon-and-falcon rondel over Ser Vardis’s right arm was sheared clean in half, hanging by its strap.

Granted, it's unclear whether Bronn was actually cutting through the armor, but this is just ridiculous. That poor "razor edge" ...


Bronn brought his sword down with both hands, catching Ser Vardis in the elbow of his sword arm. The thin lobstered metal that protected the joint crunched. [...]

"Ser Vardis is hurt," Ser Rodrik said [...]

Catelyn did not need to be told [...] she could see the bright finger of blood running along the knight’s forearm, the wetness inside the elbow joint.


To top it all off, cutting through his armor was entirely unnecessary to begin with for the story! He ends it in a relatively realistic manner, getting his opponent on the ground and going in under the arm where there's no or insufficient armor.

Now, granted, in 1996 it was probably fairly harder to actually find out how one fights in or against armor.

[Callin]

This is getting a bit off-topic but...


Then there's the ridiculous description of Bronn's sword:



Yeah, because razor-sharp is what you want from a sword, amirite? :smallamused: Especially against full armor!

But then the stupidity really begins!



:smallsigh:



Granted, it's unclear whether Bronn was actually cutting through the armor, but this is just ridiculous. That poor "razor edge" ...



To top it all off, cutting through his armor was entirely unnecessary to begin with for the story! He ends it in a relatively realistic manner, getting his opponent on the ground and going in under the arm where there's no or insufficient armor.

Now, granted, in 1996 it was probably fairly harder to actually find out how one fights in or against armor.

Not True. People have been reenacting/studying medieval combat for a long long time. People with and without degrees. Just a passion for it.

It seems like he just described what he thought a good combat would look like in his imagination and didnt care that it wasnt historically accurate.

[Piggy Knowles]

No, Bronn was explicitly described as cutting his armor. (No hamstringing, either.) I had to put the book down because I didn't know whether to laugh or to cry.

The stupid D&Disms mostly ended there, though (except for the ridiculous armor everyone wears, whether "ring mail" or enamelled plate with freakin' jewels). The books are much better about combat after that. Funnily, the TV show also did the scene far better - maybe, once they were visualizing it, they realized how silly the idea of cutting through steel armor with a sword is.

This is getting a bit off-topic but...


Then there's the ridiculous description of Bronn's sword:



Yeah, because razor-sharp is what you want from a sword, amirite? :smallamused: Especially against full armor!

But then the stupidity really begins!



:smallsigh:



Granted, it's unclear whether Bronn was actually cutting through the armor, but this is just ridiculous. That poor "razor edge" ...



To top it all off, cutting through his armor was entirely unnecessary to begin with for the story! He ends it in a relatively realistic manner, getting his opponent on the ground and going in under the arm where there's no or insufficient armor.

Now, granted, in 1996 it was probably fairly harder to actually find out how one fights in or against armor.

I always read that as Bronn denting Ser Vardis' armor, not actually cutting through it. He only draws blood when he hits him on the elbow where his mail covering has gaps.

It's still a ridiculous fight, and the "razor sharp" sword thing is obviously wrong to anyone with half a brain, but I never actually read it as him slicing through the armor with those swings.

What I find most funny is how the same situation more or less played out exactly backwards in the last book with Ser Barristan Selmy and his fight with Khrazz.

[Eldariel]

Swordsage without the magical schools. Some Setting Sun, some Diamond Mind, Assassin's Stance and maybe few mobility options or so. Overall fairly well rounded versatile lightly armored melee combatant. Mobile, Wis to AC, few counters to negate some attacks, etc.

[Kudaku]

This is getting a bit off-topic but...
[spoiler]
Ah, that takes me back - haven't read those books in a fair while, I guess I got the book fight and the TV show fight mixed up.

However, reading those quotes... He's not cutting through the armor, is he? The first time he draws blood is when he targets a vulnerable location on any armor (specifically the swivel joint at the elbow), and swings at it with both hands. The fact that his swings leave bright gashes makes me think he's scraping away at the paint on the armor, not cutting through it. You can get a similar effect by scratching dull metal in order to get at the new metal underneath.

http://havoc20.files.wordpress.com/2011/02/metal-scratch2.jpg

[ddude987]

Ah, that takes me back - haven't read those books in a fair while, I guess I got the book fight and the TV show fight mixed up.

However, reading those quotes... He's not cutting through the armor, is he? The first time he draws blood is when he targets a vulnerable location on any armor (specifically the swivel joint at the elbow), and swings at it with both hands. The fact that his swings leave bright gashes makes me think he's scraping away at the paint on the armor, not cutting through it. You can get a similar effect by scratching dull metal in order to get at the new metal underneath.

http://havoc20.files.wordpress.com/2011/02/metal-scratch2.jpg

I too felt the same way when I read the books. This has all been very helpful. I guess I forgot the first book was released all the way back in '96. I only read them 3 or 4 years ago.

[Rhynn]

Not True. People have been reenacting/studying medieval combat for a long long time. People with and without degrees. Just a passion for it.

Right, so in 1996, you could just hop online and look up harnischfechten on Wikipedia or surf over to www.thearma.org ? :smallamused:

We're talking about an author who got all his information about the medieval period (and arms and armor specifically) from D&D.


What I find most funny is how the same situation more or less played out exactly backwards in the last book with spoilers.

Yeah, GRRM has seriously clued on after the first book.


However, reading those quotes... He's not cutting through the armor, is he? The first time he draws blood is when he targets a vulnerable location on any armor (specifically the swivel joint at the elbow), and swings at it with both hands. The fact that his swings leave bright gashes makes me think he's scraping away at the paint on the armor, not cutting through it. You can get a similar effect by scratching dull metal in order to get at the new metal underneath.

It's very unclear. I confess, I recalled it saying "bright red gash." But even so, the idea that you can crush one of the these (http://steel-mastery.com/images/products/full/full-plate-armour-in-churburg-style-6.jpg) with a sword-blow strikes me as highly unlikely.

It's quite possible that, especially given the word "bright" and the later description suggesting he's only leaving scratches (the gorget and visor), that even the first "gash" is a scrach. Just a bad choice of word, then: a "gash" is a deep cut, and certainly suggests, to me, cutting all the way through in this case. "Scratch" seems like it would have been an obviously better word, or even "gouge." Or, heck, "furrow" ...

[Kudaku]

It's very unclear. I confess, I recalled it saying "bright red gash." But even so, the idea that you can crush one of the these (http://steel-mastery.com/images/products/full/full-plate-armour-in-churburg-style-6.jpg) with a sword-blow strikes me as highly unlikely.

It's quite possible that, especially given the word "bright" and the later description suggesting he's only leaving scratches (the gorget and visor), that even the first "gash" is a scrach. Just a bad choice of word, then: a "gash" is a deep cut, and certainly suggests, to me, cutting all the way through in this case. "Scratch" seems like it would have been an obviously better word, or even "gouge." Or, heck, "furrow" ...

I'm guessing he chose "gash" for the visceral imagery, to make the fight seem more engaging and exciting, and to demonstrate Bronn's display of skill. To have him leave "scratches" in his opponent's armor creates a very different impression of how the fight is progressing. I do on the whole agree that this particular fight could have been (much) better written, as indeed his later fight scenes are.

[Callin]

Right, so in 1996, you could just hop online and look up harnischfechten on Wikipedia or surf over to www.thearma.org ? :smallamused:

We're talking about an author who got all his information about the medieval period (and arms and armor specifically) from D&D.




Maybe i'm just older than you but I remember things like a Library long before people looked **** up on the internet.

[Rhynn]

Maybe i'm just older than you but I remember things like a Library long before people looked **** up on the internet.

Indeed woe is unto me that I was borne after the era of libraries.

Are you seriously having this much trouble parsing the words "fairly harder"? If it helps establish the frame of reference, researching the subject in question is now trivial. It was "fairly harder" in 1996.

[Azernak0]

Hodor would be a Zodor that uses Wish if it isn't his name that is spoken.

[Saintheart]

Right, so in 1996, you could just hop online and look up harnischfechten on Wikipedia or surf over to www.thearma.org ? :smallamused:

We're talking about an author who got all his information about the medieval period (and arms and armor specifically) from D&D.

Yeah, GRRM has seriously clued on after the first book.

Maybe his reading changed. He once published a list of (some) of the books he claims he used for reference on the series, and among them were John Clements' books Medieval Swordsmanship: Illustrated Methods and Techniques and Renaissance Swordsmanship : The Illustrated Book Of Rapiers And Cut And Thrust Swords And Their Use. Clements' organisation, ARMA, promotes itself as studying the original historical texts regarding swordsmanship of the period and trying as far as possible to keep out modern fencing/boffer techniques that corrupted the form; I didn't get the impression, reading the books, that they were exactly the Knights of Mayhem.

EDIT: Oh, and Bronn would not be complete without fitting Craven in somewhere. Maybe all that smashing through armour is Sneak Attack bonus d6s? :smallbiggrin:

[Rhynn]

Maybe his reading changed.

That's what I figure, yeah. We're talking about a 15-year period of writing or longer, from AGOT to ADWD. AGOT was full on D&D fantasy, just better than average. (I mean, at least it's not Wheel of Time. Although GRRM could still croak before A Dream of Spring comes out, assuming the series doesn't stretch even further, as these fantasy epics will do.) It's 3 years to ACOK and another 1 to ASOS, then 5 and 6 more for AFFC and ADWD... that's a lot of time to study actual references. (I still wish the books showed any indication of understanding feudalism and medieval daily life, though!)

Edit: Holy crap, Artesia started in 1999. Why is all of my "current entertainment" from the 90s?

[Saintheart]

Edit: Holy crap, Artesia started in 1999. Why is all of my "current entertainment" from the 90s?

Because there has been nothing produced since the turn of the century of any value whatsoever :smalltongue::smalltongue:

[ddude987]

It's very unclear. I confess, I recalled it saying "bright red gash." But even so, the idea that you can crush one of the these (http://steel-mastery.com/images/products/full/full-plate-armour-in-churburg-style-6.jpg) with a sword-blow strikes me as highly unlikely.


I disagree. I believe it was quoted in the book as saying crushing through the paper thin metal?


That's what I figure, yeah. We're talking about a 15-year period of writing or longer, from AGOT to ADWD. AGOT was full on D&D fantasy, just better than average. (I mean, at least it's not Wheel of Time. Although GRRM could still croak before A Dream of Spring comes out, assuming the series doesn't stretch even further, as these fantasy epics will do.) It's 3 years to ACOK and another 1 to ASOS, then 5 and 6 more for AFFC and ADWD... that's a lot of time to study actual references. (I still wish the books showed any indication of understanding feudalism and medieval daily life, though!)

Edit: Holy crap, Artesia started in 1999. Why is all of my "current entertainment" from the 90s?

I hope he doesn't die *knock on wood*
I also had no idea he wrote the series on dnd lore. Then again when I read it the only dnd experience I had had was 4th edition and that was brief. The series is certainly old and its interesting how many people picked up on it only after the TV series. Such is the way with people these days.

[Rhynn]

I disagree. I believe it was quoted in the book as saying crushing through the paper thin metal?

I quoted it above. Not having any idea what armor is like falls squarely under my complaint - in fact, that's rather the point.


I also had no idea he wrote the series on dnd lore. Then again when I read it the only dnd experience I had had was 4th edition and that was brief.

It's pretty strikingly obvious from all the D&Disms - "ring mail", using "longsword" to refer to one-handed swords that are used with shields, using shields with plate armor to begin with (outside of duels, anyway), etc.

Dragon #307 also has an interview with/article on him where he talks about it. And they pretend shock that his group doesn't run 3.X, as if that was somehow rare among people who'd actually been playing for years and years. :smallsigh: