Quote from: Elfdart;860248I have five categories:

Reminds me slightly of Ryuutama. I was re-reading it last night and realized I really like how they handle weapons. It basically uses three of the four stats in the game for the various weapons. I might play with this idea more, as I like the idea that certain weapons (light blades below) do damage based on intelligent use, not strength. Bows are based on Dexterity. Unarmed is still based on STR, but I could see using DEX or INT on that if you wanted to represent a martial art like Aikido. Depending on how "spiritual" you wanted your art, the fourth stat Spirit could be used for that.

(spoiler has Ryuutame weapon stats)

Spoiler

Light Blade (one handed): dagger, short sword, wakizashi, etc.
Accuracy: [DEX + INT] +1
Damage: [INT] -1

Blade (one handed): broadsword, rapier, katana, etc.
Accuracy: [DEX + STR]
Damage: [STR]

Polearm (two handed): longspear, trident, lance, etc.
Accuracy: [DEX + STR]
Damage: [STR] +1

Axe (two handed): battleaxe, greataxe, etc.
Accuracy: [STR + STR] -1
Damage: [STR]

Bow (ranged, two handed): shortbow, longbow, crossbow, etc.
Accuracy: [INT + DEX] -2
Damage: [DEX]

Unarmed (two handed): unarmed combat, using a stick, etc.
Accuracy: [DEX + STR]
Damage: [STR] -2 (Using an improvised weapon makes this -1 instead)

Quote from: Christopher Brady;860267
Although I do like the Barbarians of Lemuria system, in which everything does a D6 in one hand and D6+2 if it's meant for two.  Some weapons can only be used with a certain way, but other than that.

I agree with most of what I snipped away.

BTW, BoL: Mythic Edition changed this slightly. Weapons now do d6L (roll two, pick lower, which is generally 1-3), d6H (roll two, pick higher, which is generally 4-6), and d6. Unarmed or improvised is d3. Generally, your Strength or 1/2 Strength are added to damage. (For reference, max starting stat is 3 and the best armor in the game, plate, stops 1d6-1 damage.)

Quote from: Tod13;860177This may not be as true nowadays. I've been reading/researching a lot of RPGs lately. And a lot of them have some sort of fatigue system or minuses to skills, combat, etc. at certain damage levels or even express damage strictly as minuses.

I notice this because I dislike it, as exceeding my paperwork threshold.

The software developer, simulationist portion of me likes it. :cool:

Indeed. About a month ago a friend showed me a game I hadn't even heard of (I forget, something like Buccaneers of the Seven Winds.) The game had no stats, just skills and character descriptive aspects. Taking damage meant reducing your skills or aspects. So an injury would look like:

GM: You took 4 levels of damage.
Player: I'll reduce my Climbing 2 levels and Love of Homeland 2 levels.

A character had a limited amount of skills so it worked out. A guy could only take a few blows before he was near useless. It was interesting for a one-shot, I don't know how it would work out for a long term campaign. I do kinda like the idea that the more beat up a guy is the less he can do and the less he cares about things on a social level.

I suppose that if Zweihander works a lot like WFRP it could stick to d10s only. In that case the weapon categories could all be d10-based. Eg: d5 for small, d10 for medium and 2d10 keep the highest for large.

Quote from: Christopher Brady;860267That's actually a Hollywoodism.  With a knife you have to strike multiple times, or in the right locations, and even then it's often death by blood loss.  

Yeah, sure (edit - forgot to add a sarcasm face: :rolleyes:)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liver_injury

QuoteIn the 1880s a severe liver injury would in most cases prove fatal in the first 24 hours after sustaining the injury.

QuoteLiver injuries constitute 5% of all traumas, making it the most common abdominal injury.

QuoteThis can occur through either a blunt force such as a car accident, or a penetrating foreign object such as a knife.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;860251I was the person who first suggested different damage for different weapons in OD&D.

Interestingly, I no longer use those "Greyhawk" damage tables and have gone back to all weapons do1d6, with a couple tweaks for 2 handed weapons to compensate for the loss of the shield.

Because I find that the more abstract combat is, the more the players concentrate on other possibilities within the game.

:hatsoff:

Might I ask what houserules you use for 2 handed weapons?

Quote from: Moracai;860370Yeah, sure (edit - forgot to add a sarcasm face: :rolleyes:)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liver_injury

QuoteIn the 1880s a severe liver injury would in most cases prove fatal in the first 24 hours after sustaining the injury.

Because death within 24 hours from a perforated liver and death from the massive hemorrhaging that occurs when a halberd takes off your head or severs your femoral artery are all exactly the same result. :rolleyes:

Quote from: Bren;860384Because death within 24 hours from a perforated liver and death from the massive hemorrhaging that occurs when a halberd takes off your head or severs your femoral artery are all exactly the same result. :rolleyes:

Thank you.

Yeah, I know.

It probably wouldn't be very satisfying to play a character with a RL-equivalent liver wound in a setting that has pre WWII medtech level. Yet another reason why RPGs shouldn't try to simulate real life

Quote from: Moracai;860409Yeah, I know.

It probably wouldn't be very satisfying to play a character with a RL-equivalent liver wound in a setting that has pre WWII medtech level. Yet another reason why RPGs shouldn't try to simulate real life

Sounds interesting to me. At least it's not going to drag on.

Once I was doubtful if I'd want to stick with a certain GURPS campaign run by a GM who was at least trying to be realistic. I gave him my PC a low health so I might be likely to die off quickly. As it turns out, I was the last PC left alive. Later (out of game) he ruled that I'd get killed though.

Far too many assumptions built in the question.

If you are going to provide a choice of weapons, make it an interesting choice, or constrain it in some way.

This was my problem with the original 3 D&D booklets practically from day 1. I agree with Phillip (or at least what I think he was saying here) that if you're going to have a well-defined mechanical effect of different armor types, then the same should apply to weapons.

How you do that--it depends. I've seen people suggest here that given D&D's level of abstraction in terms of how HPs and to-hit rolls work, it would be sufficient, even desirable, to just use the weapon-vs-armor modifiers and not use variable damage. (Quick thought: maybe use weapon-vs-armor when facing enemies who actually wear armor, such as humans, elves, dwarves, orcs, etc., and use the variable damage including vs. S/M and L when facing enemies whose AC isn't mainly due to actual armor.)

Again, it all depends on the totality of the combat system. From a quick glance at the pages linked in the OP, the approach advocated looks reasonable there in terms of effect, but rather convoluted in terms of procedure. Maybe that's just a matter of presentation in the blog and lack of familiarity on my part.

If the aim is to evoke Warhammer FRP, then (based on my distant memory) one thing that stands out is that using up the hit-point buffer is a prelude to serious specific wound rolls. I don't recall the details of the original, but differentiating more in terms of the latter might be interesting.

A nastier weapon might thus not do much to help you win the fight per se (that being more dependent on skill) -- but could still make a big difference in the consequences for him that ends up smitten more than smiting.

In fact, that's something I might do in my D&D house rules ... already had a deal of tossing to generate results at 0 HP instead of always simple death.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;860251I was the person who first suggested different damage for different weapons in OD&D.

Interestingly, I no longer use those "Greyhawk" damage tables and have gone back to all weapons do1d6, with a couple tweaks for 2 handed weapons to compensate for the loss of the shield.

Because I find that the more abstract combat is, the more the players concentrate on other possibilities within the game.

That is kind of where we have moved our game over the years, at least for D&D and related games.

Out of curiosity, did Gary ever say what the reasoning was behind the weapon damages? Was it an attempt to replicate real world effects (like the weapon vs. Armor charts supposedly were), or some form of balancing measure? This probably is answered in many interviews, but I thought I'd ask since you are here.

Quote from: Willie the Duck;860617That is kind of where we have moved our game over the years, at least for D&D and related games.

Out of curiosity, did Gary ever say what the reasoning was behind the weapon damages? Was it an attempt to replicate real world effects (like the weapon vs. Armor charts supposedly were), or some form of balancing measure? This probably is answered in many interviews, but I thought I'd ask since you are here.

I'm also curious about this.