(OSR) Nets, bolas, lassos... how would you implement them for player use?

[Shipyard Locked]

I've been tooling around with Old-School Essentials lately. I'd like to implement things like nets, bolas, and lassos so that players have more non-lethal options for dealing with foes (I'm doing a pretty merciful setting).

What are you favorite rules for these things? Any other good non-lethal options you'd suggest?

 

[Fenris-77]

The easiest way I've seen to implement them is make them save or be immobilized. The concept really kind of side steps a lot of what OSR combat is doing so I wouldn't make it too easy. A roll to hit and then an enemy save doesn't sound outrageous to me. although I haven't run the numbers or anything. Limits or penalties based on relative size might be appropriate too.

Edit: Mancatchers

 

[Tulpa Girl]

I think the BECMI rulebook had rules for bolas, but I would have to get home from work to make sure.

 

[T. Foster]

Attacks ignore armor (but not Dex). On a hit, target must save (how or against what depending on what game you’re playing) or be entangled. Make a strength check (again, depending on game for specifics) to break free, or just say they’re entangled for 1d4 rounds or something.

Edit: actually, looking at my house rules for nets, the entangle effect is automatic on a hit but only reduces movement by 50% and causes a -2 on the entangled character’s AC and saving throws, but if they fail the saving throw they are completely entangled - no movement, no attacks until they free themselves (1d4 rounds, halved if they have a dagger or knife in hand, +/- Str “to hit” bonus/penalty).

 

[Dyrnwyn]

I think the BECMI rulebook had rules for bolas, but I would have to get home from work to make sure.

It does, along with rules for nets and whips too.

Basically, bolas in BECMI cause very little damage but can entangle, slow, or delay a target on a failed saving roll (and they could also strangle with the weapon mastery rules). Also, to simulate how awkward it can be to carry them around, the encumbrance triples for each Bola carried after the first.

 

[Black Vulmea]

A lasso's a ranged grappling attack.

A net's a ranged area grappling attack.

If you're up to speed on how grappling works in whatever system you're using, then whips, nets et al become relatively straightforward to adjudicate.

 

[AsenRG]

The easiest way I've seen to implement them is make them save or be immobilized. The concept really kind of side steps a lot of what OSR combat is doing so I wouldn't make it too easy. A roll to hit and then an enemy save doesn't sound outrageous to me. although I haven't run the numbers or anything. Limits or penalties based on relative size might be appropriate too.

Edit: Mancatchers

This, with armour being a penalty to the save.

A lasso's a ranged grappling attack.

A net's a ranged area grappling attack.

If you're up to speed on how grappling works in whatever system you're using, then whips, nets et al become relatively straightforward to adjudicate.

You are right, but I'd think that there's not much chance of reversing the position once you're in a net...

 

[Shipyard Locked]

You are right, but I'd think that there's not much chance of reversing the position once you're in a net...

As a purely cinematic thing, I love the visual of the cocky rogue tossing a net over some big hideous gribbly, only for it to merely pause for a second before tearing it off in a single motion and slapping it back on him!

 

[AsenRG]

As a purely cinematic thing, I love the visual of the cocky rogue tossing a net over some big hideous gribbly, only for it to merely pause for a second before tearing it off in a single motion and slapping it back on him!

Yeah, I'm not sure that is even possible - and I'd prefer if weapons behaved like they're expected to, in order to allow players to make actual meaningful decisions!

 

[Fenris-77]

Yeah, I'm not sure that is even possible - and I'd prefer if weapons behaved like they're expected to, in order to allow players to make actual meaningful decisions!

If you use a man sized net in combat on a horrible big gribbly you have to expect some complications.

 

[robertsconley]

I've been tooling around with Old-School Essentials lately. I'd like to implement things like nets, bolas, and lassos so that players have more non-lethal options for dealing with foes (I'm doing a pretty merciful setting).

What are you favorite rules for these things? Any other good non-lethal options you'd suggest?

I haven't detailed any of those in my Majestic Fantasy RPG. But if I were to add them T T. Foster rules would be pretty close to what I would do.

Keep in mind that the effects of a net, bolo, or lasso are to entangle or immobilize an opponent. Entanglement or immobilization is something "bad" that happens to a character. For classic D&D the way to deal with something bad happening is for the character to make a save. Either to avoid it or for something less "bad" to happen.

For a net, I would go

Rete (Melee Net) 5d/ea. 5/lbs
Damage: 1d3, Rate of Fire 1, Range: melee/10 feet.
A small net weighted with lead is used to entangle or trip an opponent. On a successful to hit roll, the attacker can do one of three things. While holding the net, they can trail it in front of them. This create an area of bad footing in front of the character. Their opponent has to make a save or fall prone.

Another option while holding the net, the attacker can use the net to entangle one of their opponent's arms. If their opponent fails to make their save then they cannot use whatever shield or weapon they are holding with the hand. Must make an opposed athletic or strength check to break free. On a successful save, their opponent is not entangled but will attack with disadvantage for the next round.

Last on a successful attack, the net can be thrown onto their opponent. If the opponent fails their save then they fall prone entangled and unable to move. They can free themselves with a successful athletic or strength check (15 or better). They get advantage if they are holding a dagger to cut themselves free. On a successful save, they are not entangled but still have the net draped over them. This will cause their attacks to be a disadvantage until they make a strength or athletic check (15 or better) at an advantage to remove the net.

Regardless of the outcome of the saving throw, the numerous lead weights on the net will inflict 1d3 damage on a successful to hit roll.

If you don't like advantage or disadvantage then sub in +4 (advantage) or -4 (disadvantage) in the description.

I have to some reading and think about how I would handle Lassos (Lariats) and Bolas. Mainly because I don't remember their effective range. But the general principle would be similar to that of the Rete (Melee Net), if you hit the target would have to make a save or be entangle. With a Lasso, the entanglement would be the only effect, and it would be all or nothing. A bolo would do a small amount of damage in addition to the save. Like the Lasso the entanglement save would be all or nothing.

Hope this helps.

 

[TristramEvans]

 

[robertsconley]

Fundamentally, nets are a type of hunting weapon. While Lassos/Lariats and bolas are used in herding. Lindyberge is being critical of their use as part of a military battle. However, hunting sometimes comes up in adventuring when monsters are involved. So all three could be reasonable used in the context of a fantasy campaign.

Finally, Arena combat for show is not common in fantasy RPG campaigns but it does happen (and did in my last campaign) in which case having a bit of detail on what make these three things distinctive is relevant.

 

[Toadmaster]

One added consideration is many of these weapons occupy the attention of the attacker, or they become easier to cast off. They are not generally fire and forget type weapons.
A lasso in particular, just looping it around someone, will encumber the target for a round perhaps, but if not maintained, it is pretty easy to remove. To keep the target entangled the attacker has to maintain tension and counter the actions of the target. Lasso's also do nothing to hold the target at distance (although multiple lassos can be used to immobilize, by pulling against each other), so charging the attacker is a real option. The same can be said for some style of nets. Bolos on the other hand do tend to be primarily useful to slow a target to allow pursuers to catch up and employ other means of capture or harm.

I have experience with a lasso and a bear cub. We were trying to capture the orphaned cub to bring to a rescue organization (this was for work and biologist approved). Our first attempt went well, we got the cub with the lasso (baited so the cub walked into the circle of rope and we could ensure it was around the mid section not neck). Celebrations lasted about 3 seconds, ending abruptly when the cub stopped trying to flee and charged the guy on the end of the rope. It was a young cub, but still the size of a large dog, with teeth and sizable claws.
The cub was ultimately caught in a trash can, the lid secured with the one time lasso.

 

[Gringnr]

Here are a couple of different T&T takes on it.

5th ed.



Deluxe

 

[Moonglum]

The Fantasy Trip does a great job developing these sorts of weapons; TFT grognards like to debate some of the fine details (some people think these weapons are over powered; others think that whole line of argument is annoying). But it is all very concrete, and, more importantly, fun. TFT isn't OSE, but translating back and forth isn't that big of a deal. In the end, a to-hit roll is a to-hit roll.

 

[ffilz]

One added consideration is many of these weapons occupy the attention of the attacker, or they become easier to cast off. They are not generally fire and forget type weapons.
A lasso in particular, just looping it around someone, will encumber the target for a round perhaps, but if not maintained, it is pretty easy to remove. To keep the target entangled the attacker has to maintain tension and counter the actions of the target. Lasso's also do nothing to hold the target at distance (although multiple lassos can be used to immobilize, by pulling against each other), so charging the attacker is a real option. The same can be said for some style of nets. Bolos on the other hand do tend to be primarily useful to slow a target to allow pursuers to catch up and employ other means of capture or harm.

I have experience with a lasso and a bear cub. We were trying to capture the orphaned cub to bring to a rescue organization (this was for work and biologist approved). Our first attempt went well, we got the cub with the lasso (baited so the cub walked into the circle of rope and we could ensure it was around the mid section not neck). Celebrations lasted about 3 seconds, ending abruptly when the cub stopped trying to flee and charged the guy on the end of the rope. It was a young cub, but still the size of a large dog, with teeth and sizable claws.
The cub was ultimately caught in a trash can, the lid secured with the one time lasso.

This is why dog catchers (and other aggressive animal catchers) have a pole with a loop on the end of it...

 

[Fenris-77]

Y'know, I don't really see poles with loops or mancatchers and being super useful against a humanoid foe who is actively defending themselves. Against defenseless or distracted targets, or even targets fighting multiple foes? Much better.

 

[ffilz]

Y'know, I don't really see poles with loops or mancatchers and being super useful against a humanoid foe who is actively defending themselves. Against defenseless or distracted targets, or even targets fighting multiple foes? Much better.

Well, you need to "hit" with the man catcher... That allows a parry in a system with a parry. Now if you want to say they're harder to use, fine, add a penalty. I'm not sure I wouldn't even assess a penalty to hit against an animal.

 

[Skarg]

I would convert the characters to either TFT or GURPS, and then use the rules for nets, bolas, and lassos (and whips, and kusari, and . . .), in those games. TFT's are simpler, but GURPS' rules are more like reality, and take better account of the target being able to avoid getting entangled.

The problem with TFT's simpler rules, is that they let someone just make their own to-hit roll, and if they hit, the hit person is seriously messed up (depending on the weapon or hit location, they fall down, and can't move or do much unless/until they take time and manage to get out). Which means the abilities of the target aren't taken into account at all, so anyone can be taken out of action, at least for a turn, with equal ease. It's a bit much, in some cases, and could be munchkined. Though in practice, strong/competent groups of foes may tend to target people carrying entangling weapons first, so in practice it may just mean the people holding such weapons get filled full of arrows etc.

 

[AsenRG]

If you use a man sized net in combat on a horrible big gribbly you have to expect some complications.

I'm starting to suspect you're using "big gribbly" to mean something specific that's not "a big, strong guy you don't want to catch you", but I guess I should just ask what you mean.

Because in most accounts, being caught in a net or similar is a huge complication even for big, strong guys.

 

[Fenris-77]

Well, you need to "hit" with the man catcher... That allows a parry in a system with a parry. Now if you want to say they're harder to use, fine, add a penalty. I'm not sure I wouldn't even assess a penalty to hit against an animal.

Yeah, I don't think it's reasonable at all to have the mancatcher trap people on a simple hit. That's ridiculous, parry or not. Simply whacking someone with a pole arm isn't the same getting a called shot to the neck or whatever. This argument is why mancatchers don't appear in my games - they need extra rules cruft and I don't care about them in the first place. Someone who really wants to trap some men might be more willing to faff about with bespoke mechanics.

I'm starting to suspect you're using "big gribbly" to mean something specific that's not "a big, strong guy you don't want to catch you", but I guess I should just ask what you mean.

Because in most accounts, being caught in a net or similar is a huge complication even for big, strong guys.

Gribbly is, in my experience, a word used to describe monsters, not humanoids. YMMV.

 

[AsenRG]

Gribbly is, in my experience, a word used to describe monsters, not humanoids. YMMV.

IME, words used for monsters are sooner rather than later applied to humanoids as well, at least figuratively.

And, yeah, no net is going to hold an elephant, if that's what you mean. There's limits to how useful any weapon can be. But I'm also assuming that when PCs use a weapon, they're accounting for such things as "this weapon is ineffective against this foe".

Otherwise, it's like laughing at Rapier Guy because he encountered skeletons in his first adventure!

 

[ffilz]

Yeah, I don't think it's reasonable at all to have the mancatcher trap people on a simple hit. That's ridiculous, parry or not. Simply whacking someone with a pole arm isn't the same getting a called shot to the neck or whatever. This argument is why mancatchers don't appear in my games - they need extra rules cruft and I don't care about them in the first place. Someone who really wants to trap some men might be more willing to faff about with bespoke mechanics.

I’ve been assuming some kind of save too as robertsconley suggested.

 

[Fenris-77]

And, yeah, no net is going to hold an elephant, if that's what you mean. There's limits to how useful any weapon can be. But I'm also assuming that when PCs use a weapon, they're accounting for such things as "this weapon is ineffective against this foe".

Oh, like I'll attack the 12' tall ogre with this 24' wooden stick? That shit happens all the time and most system don't really account for it (nor should they IMO, I think that's an adjudication matter not a rules matter).

 

[Fenris-77]

I’ve been assuming some kind of save too as robertsconley suggested.

It would depend on the save (and I'm one of those who advocated for saves above). If you're failing that save 60% of the time (like a lot of low level PCs might in many games) the weapon is still stupidly OP. It's a niche weapon that's not really designed for general combat use per se, not against targets on foot anyway, so it doesn't need to be 'good'.

 

[Black Vulmea]

Gribbly is, in my experience, a word used to describe monsters, not humanoids.

Could be both.

 

[AsenRG]

Oh, like I'll attack the 12' tall ogre with this 24' wooden stick? That shit happens all the time and most system don't really account for it (nor should they IMO, I think that's an adjudication matter not a rules matter).

...where did you find a 7,20 m stick in the first place, and who thought that using it as a stick is a good idea?

I mean, if it was using it as a sarissa, I could see it.

 

[Fenris-77]

...where did you find a 7,20 m stick in the first place, and who thought that using it as a stick is a good idea?

I mean, if it was using it as a sarissa, I could see it.

It was a slightly sarcastic description of a club, a very common OSR weapon, and one that realistically wouldn't do much to a 12' tall 500lb Ogre. But it does. Shrug.

 

[Toadmaster]

Yeah, I don't think it's reasonable at all to have the mancatcher trap people on a simple hit. That's ridiculous, parry or not. Simply whacking someone with a pole arm isn't the same getting a called shot to the neck or whatever. This argument is why mancatchers don't appear in my games - they need extra rules cruft and I don't care about them in the first place. Someone who really wants to trap some men might be more willing to faff about with bespoke mechanics.

Gribbly is, in my experience, a word used to describe monsters, not humanoids. YMMV.

They aren't so great 1 on 1, you need multiple attackers to distract the target so the mancatcher can get into position, as demonstrated here.

Typically these are used to capture, if a target puts up too much resistance more lethal action is taken.

This clip also demonstrates a hard target, is well difficult to contain.

 

[AsenRG]

It was a slightly sarcastic description of a club, a very common OSR weapon, and one that realistically wouldn't do much to a 12' tall 500lb Ogre. But it does. Shrug.

Didn't get the sarcasm, possibly because I've literally never seen anyone using just a club in an OSR game, though, not when going zombie-hunting.

I mean, it can happen if zombies attack the camp or something, but otherwise, I wouldn't expect to see this ever, simply because people would take something like a spear, a halberd, a mace, or just a trusty old sword, if they're going to do ogre-hunting.

 

[robertsconley]

It would depend on the save (and I'm one of those who advocated for saves above). If you're failing that save 60% of the time (like a lot of low level PCs might in many games) the weapon is still stupidly OP. It's a niche weapon that's not really designed for general combat use per se, not against targets on foot anyway, so it doesn't need to be 'good'.

Just pointing out that a lot of things are OP when you are low level. But I agree the mancatcher is a niche weapon.

 

[opaopajr]

I'm pretty sure AD&D 2e has a rule for each somewhere... But point being is they are great for non-lethal restraint methods. But their step from non-lethal to lethal is just one of bad temper after someone's been restrained and rendered more open to pain. I don't need to delay you for very long, just long enough for you to realize resisting is not the best idea.

Which reminds me, I probably have used NPC parley, begging, and surrender more than most GMs I've played with. Something about getting in NPC headspace and wanting to stay alive really lets these weapons shine. Morale, that's been a remarkably useful tool in the Monster Manual...

 

[pawsplay]

Attacks ignore armor (but not Dex). On a hit, target must save (how or against what depending on what game you’re playing) or be entangled. Make a strength check (again, depending on game for specifics) to break free, or just say they’re entangled for 1d4 rounds or something.

Apart from the balance concerns, I don't think bolas and nets should ignore armor. It's harder to bola someone around the neck who is wearing a helmet. Maybe armor shouldn't be as effective against entangling weapons, but it shouldn't do nothing. Also, while nets are not damaging, bolas do a bit of damage and should not ignore AC.

In general, I think these weapons should produce, on a failed save, some kind of momentary entangling. Only on a called shot or some kind of crit should they successfully immobilize a limb or target in a way that's hard to remove. Trying to cover a man-dized target in a net in one smooth motion is probably about on the level of trying to shoot an arrow through an eye-slit.

Real-life gladiators sometimes used a net and trident. The net was usually used in your hand, to trip and entangle, and if you caught your opponent off balance, you attacked with the trident. Generally speaking, there was not a serious attempt to completely pin the target with a net, whether thrown or hand-held.

Bolas in BECMI D&D cause strangulation on a natural 20, resulting in paralysis and death in a few rounds. On a normal hit, the victim must make a save, with a bonus. On a failed save, depending on the victim's level they are entangled (unable to act until they make a save), slowed, or delayed (lose individual initiative). I think I might allow a save on a natural 20, as well, and give a Large creature a +4 on their save.

 

[T. Foster]

Yeah, the house rule I posted was for nets. Looking back, bolas are less effective. They don’t ignore armor, inflict 1-3/1-2 damage, and only entangle like a whip (a fairly granular set of rules in 1E Unearthed Arcana that I won’t bother to repeat in full: chance of entanglement on a successful hit depends on attacker level, separate roll for whether one limb, two limbs, or head are entangled - first immobilizes for one round and possibly disarms if the weapon arm is hit, second immobilizes for one round and possibly knocks prone, third immobilizes for one round and possibly inflicts choking damage). That’s almost certainly too detailed and granular for an OSE game. Say instead 1-3 damage, if attack roll is 4+ above required to hit target must save vs paralyzation or be entangled and immobilized for one round.