Seriously, has anyone ever looked at Flail and really done the math on what it does? I find this weapon quite sick. :P Sure, you'll have to be slightly crazy to use it, but even more crazy to go against someone who does use one.

Flail ignores shields (6 points of armor) and does extra 1d6 against chainmail (most knights, at least before plate). In other words, it is roughly equivalent to +3d6 (!!!) against another knight! Sheesh!

Lets take two knights again, skill 19. One with Sword (A), the other with a Flail (B). Lets give them shields, reinforced chains, for armor 12+6. Lets say they do 5d6 damage. Again, we ignore knockdown, and focus our attention to looking just the average damages. This can be slightly misleading, but it will give us a handle what the probable outcome might be. Since the skills are equal, we can assume that the knights hit one another about as many times. With each hit, A does no damage (unless B fumbles). But when B hits, he smacks A for 9 points of damage (6d6 = 21, 21 - 12 (chain) = 9). Three such hits are enough to make A unconscious for sure. If luck is with B, and he rolls just slightly higher, two hits might be all he needs. Like, ouch.

What about that killer of a fumble, where you hit yourself if you are using the Flail? Well, that is certainly no picnic. B takes 9 points himself. BUT, you may note that unless he knocks himself down, he still has his weapon, and thus doesn't take the +5/-5 for rearming. Furthermore, by winning the fight as quickly as he should, he reduces the chance that A criticals his roll. If A criticals, the damage past the armor would be around 18. Major wound and a likely battle winner right there. Also, once you reach skill 20, fumble is a non-issue (unless you take penalties, which, I admit, happen quite often due to the knockdown).

This leads me to another thought, but I'll start a separate thread for that, since it is more general.

I'm away from the book, but arn't you not allowed to use a shield if you are using a flail?

I'm away from the book, but arn't you not allowed to use a shield if you are using a flail?


That's War Flail, a two-handed weapon, I think? Flail is the one-handed version.

Unless I am misremembering the name of the weapon, not able to find my Pendragon book at the moment. I am talking about the one-handed chain weapon, anyway.

War Flail would do an extra +1d6 due to two hands, but then you can't use a shield (worth 2d6-1), so it isn't actually worth it.

The flail is a nice weapon. The only things that hold it back is that it's not a sword so swords break it on ties. Which when you a swordsman with a 20+ skill and a flail man with a 20+ skill the increased odds of both critical put the flail or other non-sword user at an increased risk. It also breaks on a fumble.

In addition to the normal non-sword penalties if you roll a 1 you hit yourself no matter what the modified result of the roll would be. So even if you have a 39 flail skill and are fighting an old lady with a dagger and a dagger skill of 2 you still have a chance to miss the old lady and hit yourself. Which can be a bit humiliating for a prideful knight, though resorting to fighting old ladies would be a bit humiliating as well.

if you roll a 1 you hit yourself


Ah, so it is on a roll of 1, not on a fumble? That changes the math slightly, since now you have three 5% probabilities to look out for: killing yourself, breaking yuor weapon on a fumble, and breaking your weapon on a draw. Still, pretty terrifying weapon, and the math is still for a flail-wielding knight being a total menace.

Yup, so an over all 15% chance or so to have things go bad for the flail man. Of course the chances get worse the more skilled both combatants are since crits count as a 20 so if both people crit the sword breaks the flail. So while the flail is great at lower skill levels it can be a risk at higher skill levels.

Plus if I remember correctly the flail isn't available till later in the Great Pendragon Campaign so that may also hurt it's utility a bit.

lol, a war flail is outright suicidal! :o but, then again, so are duels and war as well. I guess flail weapons are best in battles (as you only roll your skill once per fight). :D and oh, be sure to NOT wear chainmail. ;) the flail is the best weapon for guys with low STR (so that when you hurt yourself you dont hurt yourself THAT much) and high CON (so that when you hurt yourself you don't knock yourself out) and DEX (so that when you hurt yourself you don't knock yourself DOWN), wearing plate armour. you don't have to worry about having a low STR (= 4d6 damage), since you'll do 5d6 w. no shield against almost all enemies. that's decent, I must say. or am I getting it wrong here?

or am I getting it wrong here?


or MAYBE, you should be a strong guy, not giving a crap about CON or DEX or what armour you wear, since if you lose a fight/duel, you are dead anyway. so, be STRong (6d6), wear NO armour (+5 to skill, right? in 4th ed, anyway). that way, you either maim your opponent or die the first round, either from your own weapon or from your foes. lol, if you win the resolution you give the poor un-shielded chain-clad bastard 6d6+1d6+1d6 (since it's a war flail, right?) 28-12 = 16 hp in damage. if you lose or roll a tie, you get his damage outright, no armour, either that same round or the next. owwww. if you roll a "1", you give yourself a 7d6, no armour. 25? ouch. ;D

Yup, so an over all 15% chance or so to have things go bad for the flail man. Of course the chances get worse the more skilled both combatants are since crits count as a 20 so if both people crit the sword breaks the flail. So while the flail is great at lower skill levels it can be a risk at higher skill levels.

Plus if I remember correctly the flail isn't available till later in the Great Pendragon Campaign so that may also hurt it's utility a bit.


I think it becomes available around 510? I am not sure, it has been a while since I have opened the Boy King where it is listed. But yes, you obviously couldn't specialize in Flail prior to that, and if you have a 30-something knight specialized in sword, you likely have the skill in excess of 20 already and can't be bothered with a new weapon anyway.

I am not convinced that rolling 1 is all that bad... It is one chance out of 20, and if you fail, you just do around 9 points to yourself. By comparison, you have something like a 40% chance of giving that 9 points to your enemy per turn. So it breaks out roughly (again, cutting corners) like this...
5% hit yourself, 9 points of damage
5% draw, break weapon
5% fumble, break weapon
5% you crit, enemy is DEAD
35% you hit enemy, 9 points of damage to enemy
40% enemy hits you, no damage
5% enemy crits, you are DEAD

You'd have to hit yourself three times before that would become a battle winner for your enemy (ignoring about Knockdown here). The probability of doing that is miniscule over the duration of a normal battle. Weapon breakage is an issue, but if you carry a spare, it is not an instant lost battle. It does skew the results for the sword, though. My results from the combat simulator (other thread) would seem to indicate that Knockdown actually plays a big part in the results, allowing the guy standing a huge edge against a similarly skilled opponent. That is, assuming that special tactics are not used, or that both use special tactics (which then cancel out). Same presumably would apply to weapon breakage, tilting the battle.

When skill is over 20, I'd expect that the weapon breakage is usually not an issue, since the probability is for one guy critting and the other not (when skills is below 29). It of course becomes increasingly an issue as you get closer to 29, or above it. At high skill, that +5/-5 becomes even more important.

War flail in the Boy King period, along with reinforced chainmail.
Flail in the Romance period, along with partial plate and the warhammer.