TheRPGSite

Care to dissect? Criticize? Explain all of what's awful about this (http://www.enworld.org/newsimages/weapons.jpg)?

Or do you actually feel excited seeing it?

Wow. Do not get caught unarmed.

I like how strength negates armor movement penalties.  Because let's be honest, in my games, we pretty much did that anyway ;)

But from a mechanics perspective, I think I see where they are going with that.  Helps mitigate the "I'm a level 1 fighter with 10 strength and 18 intelligence, and all the rest of my levels are mage so I can wear armor and cast spells."

Unarmed strike should probably be 'finesse' so you can use either str or dex.

But yea, without a high stat and any class ability that might add damage, being unarmed is rough.

Then again, that's why we love our weapons.

Any monks in 5E?

Quote from: RPGPundit;757673Care to dissect? Criticize? Explain all of what's awful about this (http://www.enworld.org/newsimages/weapons.jpg)?

Or do you actually feel excited seeing it?

  Excited? Not really; I've seen this same basic list half a dozen times already in some form of another. :)

  But it doesn't contain any real howlers that seem to cry out as system traps or as grievous punishments for people who want their character to use a certain type of weapon (although I'm not completely sure about that trident). Like most of what I've seen of 5E, it looks solid but not dramatic. Probably what we want out of the gateway system.

Quarterstaff's damage one handed is a d6 and two d8???  Am I reading this right?  If so, that'll be the first house rule.

So why didn't they explain "versatile"?

Quote from: Marleycat;757688So why didn't they explain "versatile"?

  Probably because that text is on p. 18. :)

Quote from: Tyndale;757686Quarterstaff's damage one handed is a d6 and two d8???  Am I reading this right?  If so, that'll be the first house rule.

Why is that a problem? Just curious.

I like some of the streamlined rules (compared to 3.X, I'm not familiar with Pathfinder or 4E). For example: instead of including small versions of every single weapon they seem to just give small characters a penalty with Heavy weapons.

I like the ammo rule too. Not a huge change, but removing a bit of extra book-keeping.

I can see there being a lot of Greatsword Fighters out there in the 5e-verse.

Quote from: Necrozius;757693I like some of the streamlined rules (compared to 3.X, I'm not familiar with Pathfinder or 4E). For example: instead of including small versions of every single weapon they seem to just give small characters a penalty with Heavy weapons.

I like the ammo rule too. Not a huge change, but removing a bit of extra book-keeping.

I can see there being a lot of Greatsword Fighters out there in the 5e-verse.

I would have had the great axe and the great sword reversed for the 1d12 and 2d6 damage values.

Quote from: Tyndale;757686Quarterstaff's damage one handed is a d6 and two d8???  Am I reading this right?  If so, that'll be the first house rule.

Versatile=damage if wielding 2H, so a staff does d8 when used 2H. Evidently, they expect some people to bash 1H with it (for d6).

Quote from: Bill;757695I would have had the great axe and the great sword reversed for the 1d12 and 2d6 damage values.

The thing about the Axe and sword comparison I found interesting (as posted on the Wiz site by cyberdave), was that the 2d6 does greater consistent damage, while the d12 has a greater chance to spike at 12 points (8% to about 3%, if I remember right). Reversing the two might make sense, especially as the Axe tends to be a Dwarf weapon, and one could see them doing more damage, more consistently.

Quote from: cranebump;757696Versatile=damage if wielding 2H, so a staff does d8 when used 2H. Evidently, they expect some people to bash 1H with it (for d6).

It may seem strange at first, but soldiers have used 8' spears in one hand. A staff's damage one handed should probably be 1d4 though.

In practice, I doubt anyone will use a staff one handed, or with a shield.

Quote from: cranebump;757697The thing about the Axe and sword comparison I found interesting (as posted on the Wiz site by cyberdave), was that the 2d6 does greater consistent damage, while the d12 has a greater chance to spike at 12 points (8% to about 3%, if I remember right). Reversing the two might make sense, especially as the Axe tends to be a Dwarf weapon, and one could see them doing more damage, more consistently.

I really don't know which weapon is 'better' under various conditions.

I suspect the sword is harder to master.

Quote from: Bill;757680Unarmed strike should probably be 'finesse' so you can use either str or dex.

But yea, without a high stat and any class ability that might add damage, being unarmed is rough.

Then again, that's why we love our weapons.

Any monks in 5E?

I am playing a Monk using the current iteration. Monks are awesome...eventually. They do more damage open-handed, and treat unarmed as finesse, so two strikes a round. They have a pool of ki points that allow them to enact powers specific to their type. I'm playing an elemental type monk, focusing on the "Air" powers. When using Ki, he can perform several feats: grant himself advantage, increase movement, take additional attacks, shoot a stream of concussive art in a 50' line. EVentually, he'll be able to soar through the air, wuxia-like. Monks are proficient with both DEX and WIS saves (two of the big 3 in 5E, with CON being the third). They develop immunities as they progress. Their base armor incorporates CON and WIS bonuses to their natural armor (10+mods). Their attacks are treated as magical weapons, a la the old school version. They're really just mobile fighters, and honestly, the plain fighter eclipses them entirely in raw damage and hit points. Fun to play, overall, however.

Quote from: cranebump;757697The thing about the Axe and sword comparison I found interesting (as posted on the Wiz site by cyberdave), was that the 2d6 does greater consistent damage, while the d12 has a greater chance to spike at 12 points (8% to about 3%, if I remember right). Reversing the two might make sense, especially as the Axe tends to be a Dwarf weapon, and one could see them doing more damage, more consistently.

Yeah frankly I've always felt that it was weird to suddenly include one or two 2DX weapons in a weapons table filled with single die types. Why does a greatsword have a different "bell-curve" than other weapons?

I almost wonder why they just don't just abstract the damage die to categories: Tiny d4, Small d6, Medium d8 and Large d10 and then just differentiate by tags (reload, versatile etc...). Maybe using a weapon two handed brings the die "up one level" d4>d6, d10>d12 etc... Or maybe that's an awful idea too. Oh well. (haha the idea of using a tiny weapon two handed is kind of hilarious)

Quote from: Bill;757698It may seem strange at first, but soldiers have used 8' spears in one hand. A staff's damage one handed should probably be 1d4 though.

In practice, I doubt anyone will use a staff one handed, or with a shield.

Staff: I wouldn't think, so, either.  Spears are actually an awesome weapon in 5E. Versatile, plus you can throw them. So you get ability to use 1H, 2H and you can toss them downrange. Since shields are typically +2 in 5th, I find a spear a pretty decent option.

Quote from: Necrozius;757701I almost wonder why they just don't just abstract the damage die to categories: Tiny d4, Small d6, Medium d8 and Large d10 and then just differentiate by tags (reload, versatile etc...). Maybe using a weapon two handed brings the die "up one level" d4>d6, d10>d12 etc... Or maybe that's an awful idea too. Oh well. (haha the idea of using a tiny weapon two handed is kind of hilarious)

This is a approach used in Microlite here and there. I actually like it a great deal. I don't so see why it couldn't be house-ruled into 5th.

Quote from: Bill;757699I really don't know which weapon is 'better' under various conditions.

I suspect the sword is harder to master.

I'm not sure, either, but it would seem to me a sword would be tougher. I would also think a "Great Axe" as something of a Halberd. You'd have a lot more control that way, and could use the haft to shove people back, or to parry.

Quote from: cranebump;757700I am playing a Monk using the current iteration. Monks are awesome...eventually. They do more damage open-handed, and treat unarmed as finesse, so two strikes a round. They have a pool of ki points that allow them to enact powers specific to their type. I'm playing an elemental type monk, focusing on the "Air" powers. When using Ki, he can perform several feats: grant himself advantage, increase movement, take additional attacks, shoot a stream of concussive art in a 50' line. EVentually, he'll be able to soar through the air, wuxia-like. Monks are proficient with both DEX and WIS saves (two of the big 3 in 5E, with CON being the third). They develop immunities as they progress. Their base armor incorporates CON and WIS bonuses to their natural armor (10+mods). Their attacks are treated as magical weapons, a la the old school version. They're really just mobile fighters, and honestly, the plain fighter eclipses them entirely in raw damage and hit points. Fun to play, overall, however.

Nice to hear Con adds to monk AC. I always thought that should be the case since 3X.

Now that 'concussive art' attack must look cool! the monk hurls heavy wooden framed oil paintings at is foes!

Quote from: Bill;757692Why is that a problem? Just curious.

I've always thought of the quarterstaff as being two-handed and doing 1d6 at that. Could be just me...

Quote from: Tyndale;757706I've always thought of the quarterstaff as being two-handed and doing 1d6 at that. Could be just me...

The way dnd weapons have had questionable damage values, the staff probably should be a d6. But many weapons have always seemed a bit off to me in various dnd versions.

But the staff is a tricky animal. I suppose it should be a 1d6 weapon with a +1 on ac.

I like the staff at 1d8 just so someone might actually use one.

Quote from: Bill;757707The way dnd weapons have had questionable damage values, the staff probably should be a d6. But many weapons have always seemed a bit off to me in various dnd versions.

But the staff is a tricky animal. I suppose it should be a 1d6 weapon with a +1 on ac.

I like the staff at 1d8 just so someone might actually use one.

Wizards would or if they ever have a Magus like subclass that does the staff varient fighting style.

Quote from: Bill;757705Nice to hear Con adds to monk AC. I always thought that should be the case since 3X.

Now that 'concussive art' attack must look cool! the monk hurls heavy wooden framed oil paintings at is foes!

Yeah, I haven't used it much, yet. No opportunity. You hit something, you shoot a line of air 50'. Everything in the path has to save. Damage is pretty low (d6 I think), but a failed save knocks them over.

Since we're on it, I'll provide this illustration of one cool thing my monk did. We were in a boat, taking on an Aboleth and some minions. Main problem for us was "For God's sake, get to land!" Our strongest fighter, who happens to be a Tengu (don't ask), was flying, pulling the boat toward shore. Our halfling rogue was riding the back of the damned Aboleth (don't ask). Our Paladin was in the bought, praying not to fall in the water, armored. Our pair of Gnomes (one a bard, the other a mage), BOTH ended up trying to swim for it. Well, the mage gets grappled and tugged below water. The Bard manages to free her. My turn comes. There's no limit on burning Ki, and he has an ability to not only run additional distance, but to run over liquid surfaces. So I tell the GM I want to try to run across the water and grab BOTH the gnomes, then speed my way to shore. GM says, give it a shot, rattling off a series of STR benchmarks I'd need to meet to grab one/both/not grab, pull to shore and so on (bear in mind, Monk's STR is only a 12). I say, "okey doke," burn 2 ki points, kiss the dice...and roll a damned 20!  Monk leaps out of boat, speeds across the water, grabs BOTH the gnomes, deposit them on shore and say, "No swimming!"

THAT...was pretty awesome, I must say.

Quote from: Marleycat;757710Wizards would or if they ever have a Magus like subclass that does the staff varient fighting style.

I am a big fan of staves; it's just that dnd usually does not support the lowly staff much.

Quote from: RPGPundit;757673Care to dissect? Criticize? Explain all of what's awful about this (http://www.enworld.org/newsimages/weapons.jpg)?

Or do you actually feel excited seeing it?

Not enough polearms. :D

On a more serious note it makes no sense that a 1 handed spear does the same amount of damage as a one handed staff (1d6). Unless piercing has some effect beyond that of blundgeoning.

Quote from: Bill;757712I am a big fan of staves; it's just that dnd usually does not support the lowly staff much.

I like that it's d8 it means it's a viable choice for a wizard or the like.

Quote from: estar;757715On a more serious note it makes no sense that a 1 handed spear does the same amount of damage as a one handed staff (1d6). Unless piercing has some effect beyond that of blundgeoning.

The spear should have reach.

Quote from: Bill;757717The spear should have reach.

Not if it is one handed type that are typically used with shields. They are generally gripped in the middle. They are about head height.

Quote from: estar;757713Not enough polearms. :D

Actually yeah!

I mean, we don't need 50 different kinds, but pole arms have their use and it's kind of weird that they're not in there at all...?

Ah, that's better.  They just corrected it.  See below...

QuoteTrident, kid's    

If the trident is going to be that weak, then the quarterstaff should be 1d4 / 1d6 two-handed.  I can imagine a short, slender scimitar but I'm having trouble envisioning a small, ornate trident that looks as if it belongs in the little mermaid's hands (or maybe Sebastian's) rather than a warrior.

So, Mearls, if it's not too late - make the trident 1d8 / 1d10 two-handed or something weird and cool like 2d4 / 3d4 two-handed.

VS

Quote from: estar;757722Not if it is one handed type that are typically used with shields. They are generally gripped in the middle. They are about head height.

I though greek soldiers had shields and long spears they used three ranks deep?

Quote from: Bill;757731I though greek soldiers had shields and long spears they used three ranks deep?

Yes but D&D kind I believe is the one where we see a medieval guard standing with a shield with a spear about head height in length.

Looks great, mechanically feels good. Like how the small bows are simple and heavy and hand crossbows are martial.

I missed the pole arm section though.

Anyone know whether you can fight with a pike and shield finally?

EDIT: haha looks like we were talking about this anyway

Quote from: Bill;757712I am a big fan of staves; it's just that dnd usually does not support the lowly staff much.

It seems a common trend that non-martial weapons do less than martial weapons.

It would be kind of an interesting take to not make that distinction, but instead let martial proficiency bump up the damage for weapons used.  So a staff or sword in the hands of a wizard would be 1d6, while the same weapon used by a fighter would be 1d8.

Just a random thought.

They don't have polearms in the excerpt so have no idea yet.

Quote from: Bill;757680Unarmed strike should probably be 'finesse' so you can use either str or dex.

But yea, without a high stat and any class ability that might add damage, being unarmed is rough.

Then again, that's why we love our weapons.

Any monks in 5E?

Yes, there are monks. Presumably they'll get better damage as a class feature.

Quote from: Tyndale;757686Quarterstaff's damage one handed is a d6 and two d8???  Am I reading this right?  If so, that'll be the first house rule.

Ditto, two-handed 1d6 quarterstaff and pass the versatile d8 over to the Mace at my table, I think.

The trident could use some more differentiation from the spear too.

Quote from: Marleycat;757688So why didn't they explain "versatile"?

Versatile weapons are ones that can be used one or two handed, and usually get a damage boost from being used 2 handed.

And that part is likely on the next page with Thrown, Two-Handed, Reach, etc.

The club is still a d4? I'll have to bump that up to a d6 and perhaps add versatile to it so 2-handed its a d8. hmmm...

I note that no weapons with reach are listed. No Glaive or Halberd?
Both were in the playtest 1d10 slashing, heavy, 2-handed, reach weapons.

I'd probably make the mace versatile so you could do 1d8 with it two-handed, and leave the staff at 1d6, otherwise we're good.

Quote from: Imp;757781I'd probably make the mace versatile so you could do 1d8 with it two-handed, and leave the staff at 1d6, otherwise we're good.

I have this odd feeling Versatile is going to get added in houserules to a couple of weapons.

Quote from: LibraryLass;757739Ditto, two-handed 1d6 quarterstaff and pass the versatile d8 over to the Mace at my table, I think.

Yeah, drove home and had a glass of wine to unwind, and feeling no better about a one-handed quarterstaff.  Its straight up silly, IMHO, both on a historical and practical level.  A 5' melee stick is not meant to be leverage in one hand - it defies physics.  One handed blunt force trauma evolved...into a club and mace.  And on top of it, making a quarterstaff comparable to a two-handed great club?  Ah, no.  Sorry.

1e - two-handed and 1d6
2e - two-handed and 1d6
3e - two-handed and 1d6
PF - two-handed and 1d6
4e (have no idea)
5e - one handed and 1d6 plus two-handed 1d8....

Why?

Don't get me wrong, huge 5e fan here.  Just kinda surprised by this course correction.  I don't think the Wizard was ever shafted because of his choice of his/her melee weapon.

I'm not quite sure about this "Finesse" peoperty. Most of the larger weapons aren't finessable so you'd definitely want STR in a great weapon fighter build, but it seems like a basic high Strength, longsword-and-shield fighter is less useful than high Dex, rapier-and-shield, which would do the same damage while also having a higher AC...maybe there's a problem with the rapier doing d8. We'll see when the full rules appear and it can all be evaluated in context, I suppose.

Other than that:
I do like that small creatures don't have specific S-sized weapons (having a halfling unable to use the magic shortsword you just found a la 3E/Pathfinder because it isn't an S-sized shortsword irks me). Also, I like that the handaxe can be thrown, instead of needing a separate throwing axe.

Quote from: Tyndale;75779143 (have no idea)

4e - two-handed and 1d8

I thought that the 5e staff might be meant to cover the club and the staff, but club has a separate listing :confused:

Quote from: Bloody Stupid Johnson;757793I'm not quite sure about this "Finesse" peoperty. Most of the larger weapons aren't finessable so you'd definitely want STR in a great weapon fighter build, but it seems like a basic high Strength, longsword-and-shield fighter is less useful than high Dex, rapier-and-shield, which would do the same damage while also having a higher AC...maybe there's a problem with the rapier doing d8. We'll see when the full rules appear and it can all be evaluated in context, I suppose.

Other than that:
I do like that small creatures don't have specific S-sized weapons (having a halfling unable to use the magic shortsword you just found a la 3E/Pathfinder because it isn't an S-sized shortsword irks me). Also, I like that the handaxe can be thrown, instead of needing a separate throwing axe.

I really HATE the finesse property, precisely for the reason you state here. DEX is an uber-stat in modern D&D. It affects INISH, AC, ranged AND melee hit and damage, AND is probably the most used saving throw (5E uses stats versus saves). It's just ridiculous, to the point where, recently, I drew up a Ranger, and ended up with one of my rolls being a 6. After careful thought, I put the 6 into STR of all things, because the only thing it hurt him on was Athletics checks (well, with his high CON, low STR, I also preferred to think of him as "tough, but wiry").  Seeing as how I was headed down an archer path anyway, it made sense to go that way. But, yeah...can't stand how much DEX affects everything now. It's insane.

Quote from: Skywalker;7577944e - two-handed and 1d8

Fair enough.  I can grant that there are probably arguments for upgrading the quarterstaff damage-wise in terms or parity and balance (although I would respectfully differ).  But making it one-handed???

Quote from: cranebump;757797I really HATE the finesse property, precisely for the reason you state here...

Seems to me that this is another example of "everyone should be equally awesome in combat." It's no fair if the high-DEX thief or ranger does less damage per attack than the high-STR fighter, so let's let the thief use DEX for a damage bonus. Oh, and the magic-user isn't doing enough damage either, so let's bump the staff up to 1d8. I think I'd much rather get bonked with a staff than stabbed with a spear.

Quote from: languagegeek;757802Seems to me that this is another example of “everyone should be equally awesome in combat.” It’s no fair if the high-DEX thief or ranger does less damage per attack than the high-STR fighter, so let’s let the thief use DEX for a damage bonus. Oh, and the magic-user isn’t doing enough damage either, so let’s bump the staff up to 1d8. I think I’d much rather get bonked with a staff than stabbed with a spear.

Or just maybe there are other tropes then Conan or traditional sword and board or elven cavalier or just any elven fighter beyond Drizz't or Algoron or whatever. What? You think there are no elven melee fighters without being Bard or Rogue? Just a couple concepts among many that are expected and accepted in the modern era.

There are popular lightly armoured archetypes beyond 1200 AD. Sorry it busts your bubble but those and others are valid.

As for the great stave controversy it's that way to avoid the bullshit of...is a quarterstaff a 1 or 2 handed weapon, it's both by the way, or a double weapon? And to allow a Mage/Sorcerer possibly Warlock primary F/M subclass like a staff fighting Magus or similar in the future without being forced into a Bard subclass or Paladin to make an ugly kludge.  

The goal of 5e is exactly like FantasyCraft. It wants to be CONFIGURABLE not purely COMPATIBLE.

Quote from: Marleycat;757806Or just maybe there are other tropes then Conan or traditional sword and board or elven cavalier or just any elven fighter beyond Drizz't or Algoron or whatever.There are popular lightly armoured archetypes beyond 1200 AD. Sorry it busts your bubble but those and others are valid.

Yes, those are valid, and I'm totally on-board with DEX giving a to-hit bonus to reflect that. I mean, I like certain weapons getting an overall to-hit bonus reflecting that a bow is easier to aim than a sling (or whatever). But the damage bonus from DEX for specific weapons doesn't make a lot of sense to me. Instead, this gives Errol Foiljabber twice the advantage over Biff Brainsmasher.

QuoteAs for the great stave controversy it's that way to avoid the bullshit of...is a quarterstaff a 1 or 2 handed weapon, it's both by the way or a double weapon? And to allow a Mage primary F/M subclass like a staff fighting Magus or similar.

2-handed @ 1d6 damage. If you want a one-handed staff, make it smaller or less balanced with 1d4 damage. Or hell, I got DCC dice so the smaller staff is 1d5 damage. Done. Otherwise, why the hell would I use a mace or trident which have heavy and/or sharp metal bits at the end?

Quote from: Marleycat;757806The goal of 5e is exactly like FantasyCraft. It wants to be CONFIGURABLE not purely COMPATIBLE.

I'm happy that 5e's goal is to be just like your favourite flavour of D&D.

Main thing I noticed was that there is no actual point to taking a greatclub since a 2H staff does the same damage and weighs 6# less.  I'd raise the greatclub to 1d10 damage, since at 10 lbs it's stupid heavy.

As well the trident is just a 1 pound heavier spear unless there is more to the write-up we aren't seeing.

I'm assuming the greataxe is a "big ass fantasy axe" more than something ever actually used by anyone historically.

As for issues with using a staff 1 handed, you don't use it like a sword 1 handed, you use it like a spear 1-handed (either along the arm held in the middle-ish or overhand), it's just not sharp on the end (though a few minutes with a knife to sharpen an end or two and arguably it is for a couple pokes).  

Really, spear/staff/polearm is a continuum of weapons with similar techniques more than totally separate categories.  Though you can use a staff like a dull wooden greatsword (something Gurps noted).  And I say this as someone who has fought with padded versions of them used at full strength and as near to "real" weight as we could make them.  I may not be authentic, but I've tried to come as close as I can without killing anyone.

Quote from: Skywalker;7577944e - two-handed and 1d8

:

And 4vengers say 5e never pulled anything from 4e :D

Quote from: languagegeek;757808Yes, those are valid, and I'm totally on-board with DEX giving a to-hit bonus to reflect that. I mean, I like certain weapons getting an overall to-hit bonus reflecting that a bow is easier to aim than a sling (or whatever). But the damage bonus from DEX for specific weapons doesn't make a lot of sense to me. Instead, this gives Errol Foiljabber twice the advantage over Biff Brainsmasher.


2-handed @ 1d6 damage. If you want a one-handed staff, make it smaller or less balanced with 1d4 damage. Or hell, I got DCC dice so the smaller staff is 1d5 damage. Done. Otherwise, why the hell would I use a mace or trident which have heavy and/or sharp metal bits at the end?

Configurable..you get where I'm coming from and now I get where you're coming from.We're good.:)

Quote from: Marleycat;757806As for the great stave controversy it's that way to avoid the bullshit of...is a quarterstaff a 1 or 2 handed weapon, it's both by the way, or a double weapon? And to allow a Mage primary F/M subclass like a staff fighting Magus or similar.

Bo Staff has some one-handed techniques.

Quote from: cranebump;757797I really HATE the finesse property, precisely for the reason you state here. DEX is an uber-stat in modern D&D. It affects INISH, AC, ranged AND melee hit and damage, AND is probably the most used saving throw (5E uses stats versus saves). It's just ridiculous...

Part of this is that there are/were weapons used in formation vs weapons used for duels.  No sane person used a rapier and buckler in formation for example but you would likely do so in a duel (depending on period of course).

Quote from: languagegeek;757809I'm happy that 5e's goal is to be just like your favourite flavour of D&D.

EXACTLY. And if you understand it's all supposed to be mix and match beyond BASIC it may be yours also.:)

Quote from: Brander;757810Main thing I noticed was that there is no actual point to taking a greatclub since a 2H staff does the same damage and weighs 6# less.  I'd raise the greatclub to 1d10 damage, since at 10 lbs it's stupid heavy.

As well the trident is just a 1 pound heavier spear unless there is more to the write-up we aren't seeing.

I'm assuming the greataxe is a "big ass fantasy axe" more than something ever actually used by anyone historically.

As for issues with using a staff 1 handed, you don't use it like a sword 1 handed, you use it like a spear 1-handed (either along the arm held in the middle-ish or overhand), it's just not sharp on the end (though a few minutes with a knife to sharpen an end or two and arguably it is for a couple pokes).  

Really, spear/staff/polearm is a continuum of weapons with similar techniques more than totally separate categories.  Though you can use a staff like a dull wooden greatsword (something Gurps noted).  And I say this as someone who has fought with padded versions of them used at full strength and as near to "real" weight as we could make them.  I may not be authentic, but I've tried to come as close as I can without killing anyone.

What you and everyone seems to be forgetting is setting and which options ARE actually available... too much white room stuff is coloring your stance. Of course 1 handed you use it like a spear! Or like a teacher's ruler to rap them upside the noggin to wake them up or back them off for your real action. Swift spell anyone? Think magical staves and multiclassing or subclasses and that it's all optional but needs to be there AS AN OPTION...it's really fun.:)

Still hoping shield-and-pike is viable finally.

If all PHB options are options. I think I will create a Drow multiclass Enchanter or Bard or just  straight to piss off everyone over 40. Better yet a Paladin of some kind or multiclass Bard/Paladin!!!!!

Apparently an advantage of high Str is that is can negate the advantage of heavy armor so high Str characters can catch up with the dex monkeys in AC that way.

Quote from: Marleycat;757818What you and everyone seems to be forgetting is setting and which options ARE actually available... too much white room stuff is coloring your stance. Of course 1 handed you use it like a spear! Or like a teacher's ruler to rap them upside the noggin to wake them up or back them off for your real action. Swift spell anyone? Think magical staves and multiclassing or subclasses and that it's all optional but needs to be there AS AN OPTION...it's really fun.:)

I have no idea what exactly you are saying here.  I didn't and don't have a problem with the staff, I was just noting an explanation for a previous poster who questioned it's viability one-handed.  And I was in fact noting more options for creative use.  Such as sharpening it and that the staff is more or less the pole part of polearm, which includes spears (though it's fine if the game system might drawing hard divisions in that fuzzy continuum).

The only real problem I actually have is that they have weapons that are blatantly worse than others and/or inconsistent without any corresponding reason (at least on the page).  Even the least char-op player might look at that table and think "Why exactly am I going to carry around a 10 pound weapon that has the exactly same effect as a 4 pound one that is more versatile" unless their concept is quite specific.

There is no white room coloring my stance, I'm basing my stance on experience with actual (albeit padded and built for safety) weapons I have actually fought against others with (often in armor and with a shield).  I am also basing it on 30+ years of GMing experience that says players avoid shit gear when there is a better alternative.

Quote from: Marleycat;757820Better yet a Paladin of some kind or multiclass Bard/Paladin!!!!!

The... Balladin... :cool:

Quote from: Scott Anderson;757819Still hoping shield-and-pike is viable finally.

It's not really a viable loadout in reality or history unless you are in a formation.  A "medium" spear and shield being viable would make me happy too though.

one handed staff techniques - http://www.youtube.com/watch%3Fv%3DU5QmrllB7cQ&rct=j&frm=1&q=&esrc=s&sa=U&ei=1IyaU_6wDo_78QXwqYHQDQ&ved=0CBQQtwIwAA&usg=AFQjCNF6xBbogQlB9sfVPZEJDebdeIX-VQ (http://www.youtube.com/watch%3Fv%3DU5QmrllB7cQ&rct=j&frm=1&q=&esrc=s&sa=U&ei=1IyaU_6wDo_78QXwqYHQDQ&ved=0CBQQtwIwAA&usg=AFQjCNF6xBbogQlB9sfVPZEJDebdeIX-VQ)

My favourite staff technique is one handed where you rest the short end under your armpit and extend the staff in a wide arc from your opposing foot out and then flip it round and back round your body picking it up with the other hand as it rotates, if it fails to connect of course.

the staff is known as the king of weapons for a reason - http://www.quarterstaff.org (http://www.quarterstaff.org)

You would hope they have an optional rule that differentiates damage type against armour type. Not as poorly presented as the weapon vs armour table but the same gist. This is where weapons like the club (baseball bat) and quarter staff get seen off because they are awesome vs lightly armoured foes but drop in effectiveness massively vs heavy armour. A quarter staff will rattle a guy in plate but its very unliekly to cuase any permanent damage.

As for Finese dealing damage we need to stop thinking game balance and start thinking about actual use. If you can hit accurately you can deal more damage. You can basically target more vulnerable areas. However there needs to be a skill element to this and again armour matters. A skilled double knife user should be devastating up close against lightly armoured foes but exposed at reach versus a guy with a sword and feeble versus a guy in heavy armour.
there should eb optional rules to allow DMs to add these sorts of detail.
I would use disadvantage/advantage. So knife versus sword... ont eh attack on first round knife gets dis and sword gets ad. For damage against heavy armour a knife gets disad or maybe even doubel disad....

Quote from: Brander;757829I have no idea what exactly you are saying here.  I didn't and don't have a problem with the staff, I was just noting an explanation for a previous poster who questioned it's viability one-handed.  And I was in fact noting more options for creative use.  Such as sharpening it and that the staff is more or less the pole part of polearm, which includes spears (though it's fine if the game system might drawing hard divisions in that fuzzy continuum).

The only real problem I actually have is that they have weapons that are blatantly worse than others and/or inconsistent without any corresponding reason (at least on the page).  Even the least char-op player might look at that table and think "Why exactly am I going to carry around a 10 pound weapon that has the exactly same effect as a 4 pound one that is more versatile" unless their concept is quite specific.

There is no white room coloring my stance, I'm basing my stance on experience with actual (albeit padded and built for safety) weapons I have actually fought against others with (often in armor and with a shield).  I am also basing it on 30+ years of GMing experience that says players avoid shit gear when there is a better alternative.

I build to concept not Charop sorry for picking on you. It's just a mentality I can't fully comprehend. I'm there to play, have fun not win DnD.

Quote from: Omega;757830The... Balladin... :cool:

It's like Bollywood.:)

Quote from: jibbajibba;757833...
You would hope they have an optional rule that differentiates damage type against armour type. Not as poorly presented as the weapon vs armour table but the same gist. This is where weapons like the club (baseball bat) and quarter staff get seen off because they are awesome vs lightly armoured foes but drop in effectiveness massively vs heavy armour. A quarter staff will rattle a guy in plate but its very unliekly to cuase any permanent damage.

It's why I'm a huge fan of armor reducing damage rather than making it hard to get hurt, but that doesn't really work well with the way DnD has tended to have escalating damage as the levels get higher.  It would make armor less and less useful as levels increased.

Quote from: jibbajibba;757833As for Finese dealing damage we need to stop thinking game balance and start thinking about actual use. If you can hit accurately you can deal more damage. You can basically target more vulnerable areas. However there needs to be a skill element to this and again armour matters. A skilled double knife user should be devastating up close against lightly armoured foes but exposed at reach versus a guy with a sword and feeble versus a guy in heavy armour. ...

One of the ways to dispatch a person in heavy armor is to grapple him and stick a knife/dagger in the groin, pits, or eye-slits.  But yes, it's the getting close part that can be hard since they might first poke at you with a spear, then swing their sword or shield* at you before you can even attempt to poke them in the soft bits.


*Weapon and shield often IS two-weapon fighting, the shield is very much an aggressive weapon in many cases.  This vid shows a fair bit of it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dkhpqAGdZPc
"Sword & Shield Fighting with Roland Warzecha"

strength suddenly becomes very important when DMs enforce carrying capacity ;-). No one likes leaving a bunch of treasure behind

Quote from: Sacrosanct;757840strength suddenly becomes very important when DMs enforce carrying capacity ;-). No one likes leaving a bunch of treasure behind

Well duh, why do you think I mentioned white rooming? We aren't playing 0e and Sam the fighter with his 27 no name NPC redshirts here.

I really like the idea of versatile: letting people use a sword one or two handed without some fucking exotic weapon proficiency for bastard-swords.

Unless they still do have exotic weapons (I see no chain weapons or magical "superior" blades of the East LOL).

Either way I'm eager to see more!

Given that the weapons as statted vary a lot in effectiveness, and appear to have been statted for simulation rather than for 4e-style balance, it's fair to look at that variance. The statting of the staff is stupid; a staff is a pole arm; fundamentally it's just a spear without a point on the end. It can be used one-handed, but it shouldn't be doing more damage than a one-handed club.

Quote from: jibbajibba;757833one handed staff techniques - http://www.youtube.com/watch%3Fv%3DU5QmrllB7cQ&rct=j&frm=1&q=&esrc=s&sa=U&ei=1IyaU_6wDo_78QXwqYHQDQ&ved=0CBQQtwIwAA&usg=AFQjCNF6xBbogQlB9sfVPZEJDebdeIX-VQ (http://www.youtube.com/watch%3Fv%3DU5QmrllB7cQ&rct=j&frm=1&q=&esrc=s&sa=U&ei=1IyaU_6wDo_78QXwqYHQDQ&ved=0CBQQtwIwAA&usg=AFQjCNF6xBbogQlB9sfVPZEJDebdeIX-VQ)

My favourite staff technique is one handed where you rest the short end under your armpit and extend the staff in a wide arc from your opposing foot out and then flip it round and back round your body picking it up with the other hand as it rotates, if it fails to connect of course.

the staff is known as the king of weapons for a reason - http://www.quarterstaff.org (http://www.quarterstaff.org)

You would hope they have an optional rule that differentiates damage type against armour type. Not as poorly presented as the weapon vs armour table but the same gist. This is where weapons like the club (baseball bat) and quarter staff get seen off because they are awesome vs lightly armoured foes but drop in effectiveness massively vs heavy armour. A quarter staff will rattle a guy in plate but its very unliekly to cuase any permanent damage.

As for Finese dealing damage we need to stop thinking game balance and start thinking about actual use. If you can hit accurately you can deal more damage. You can basically target more vulnerable areas. However there needs to be a skill element to this and again armour matters. A skilled double knife user should be devastating up close against lightly armoured foes but exposed at reach versus a guy with a sword and feeble versus a guy in heavy armour.
there should eb optional rules to allow DMs to add these sorts of detail.
I would use disadvantage/advantage. So knife versus sword... ont eh attack on first round knife gets dis and sword gets ad. For damage against heavy armour a knife gets disad or maybe even doubel disad....

The way you're describing finesse here, I am wondering if maybe it shouldn't be INT-based. Choosing vulnerable locations could be a matter of analytic, rather than just deftness.  Again, my main problem with finesse isn't the idea. It's the fact that DEX already has so much utility over other stats. If finesse was shifted to INT, then INT would gain a combat use, and DEX would balance out a bit more (saves, inish and AC).

Quote from: Bill;757680Unarmed strike should probably be 'finesse' so you can use either str or dex.

But yea, without a high stat and any class ability that might add damage, being unarmed is rough.

Then again, that's why we love our weapons.

Any monks in 5E?

I made a mistake on the Monk AC, Bill. It's DEX+WIS, rather than DEX+CON.  Apologies.

In my Forgotten Realms game, Mr. Do'Urden is going to ditch the dual blades and take up a quarterstaff and shield. Talk about bad ass.

Criticals and critical threat ranges could go a long way towards remedying some of those numbers.  For instance, the quarterstaff gets nothing; daggers, swords and whatnot score a crit on a natural 20; tridents get 19 and 20.

Come on, Mearls!  You gotta give the trident something.

VS

Quote from: honesttiago;757868I made a mistake on the Monk AC, Bill. It's DEX+WIS, rather than DEX+CON.  Apologies.

I could see a monk getting an AC bonus for any stat.

Quote from: VengerSatanis;757876Criticals and critical threat ranges could go a long way towards remedying some of those numbers.  For instance, the quarterstaff gets nothing; daggers, swords and whatnot score a crit on a natural 20; tridents get 19 and 20.

Come on, Mearls!  You gotta give the trident something.

VS

Makes sense to me. A staff could plausibly have reach as well.

Quote from: Bill;757882I could see a monk getting an AC bonus for any stat.

They compensate on the whole by allowing bonuses to WIS and DEX saves, plus they get an Uncanny Dodge ability that makes save/miss equal to half/no damage. HP's are fairly healthy (d8's), and unarmed damage scales to d12, eventually. At level 14, you have advantage on ALL saving throws (mechanically, that's like having a +5 over and above all else). Eventually, you don't age, you're immune to disease and poison, you don't need food or water and, by burning ki (which recharges faster as you level), you can become incorporeal and invisible.

I doubt I'll play at that high a level, but, there it is...

Quote from: Tyndale;757871In my Forgotten Realms game, Mr. Do'Urden is going to ditch the dual blades and take up a quarterstaff and shield. Talk about bad ass.

He should quad wield two staves and two shields, and dual ride a pair of panthers into battle.

Quote from: cranebump;757888They compensate on the whole by allowing bonuses to WIS and DEX saves, plus they get an Uncanny Dodge ability that makes save/miss equal to half/no damage. HP's are fairly healthy (d8's), and unarmed damage scales to d12, eventually. At level 14, you have advantage on ALL saving throws (mechanically, that's like having a +5 over and above all else). Eventually, you don't age, you're immune to disease and poison, you don't need food or water and, by burning ki (which recharges faster as you level), you can become incorporeal and invisible.

I doubt I'll play at that high a level, but, there it is...

But do they get 'Quivering Palm' ?

Quote from: Bill;757891But do they get 'Quivering Palm' ?

They do, if you take the "Way of the Open Hand" path. 17th level ability. THe Open Hand Monk appears to be much like a traditional OS Monk (deflecting missiles, for example).

All monks also have "Stunning Strike," which activates on a crit. Target is stunned for a round. They all have "Slow Fall," also. It's very much like the traditional fighting Monk, though there isn't much fluff attached.

Quote from: cranebump;757893They do, if you take the "Way of the Open Hand" path. 17th level ability. THe Open Hand Monk appears to be much like a traditional OS Monk (deflecting missiles, for example).

All monks also have "Stunning Strike," which activates on a crit. Target is stunned for a round. They all have "Slow Fall," also. It's very much like the traditional fighting Monk, though there isn't much fluff attached.

I like stunning fist on a crit. Somehow that feels better to me than stunning fist a few times per day.

Quote from: Bill;757890He should quad wield two staves and two shields, and dual ride a pair of panthers into battle.

Like this?

Quote from: Tyndale;757896Like this?

Exactly!


Epic! :)

Quote from: Bill;757890He should quad wield two staves and two shields, and dual ride a pair of panthers into battle.

A multiclass dip into Witchalok oughta do the trick.

Quote from: Bill;757890He should quad wield two staves and two shields, and dual ride a pair of panthers into battle.

  Would you settle for someone who wields a double-bladed sword and a staff, and rides one panther into battle? :)

(https://c1.staticflickr.com/9/8153/7361419530_4403f55a68_z.jpg)

So what's the word on weapon specific focus/specialization?  The last playtest packet I saw mentioned weapon focus on the fighter sheet, but it looked like it was a class feature that applied to all weapons to give +2 damage (which somebody upthread mentioned in a different context, I think).

For my taste I rather hope they aren't included. The grinch in me wants them not included at all EVAR, but mostly I hope they aren't in the basic rules.  This goes double for racial weapons bonuses.

Quote from: Armchair Gamer;757938Would you settle for someone who wields a double-bladed sword and a staff, and rides one panther into battle? :)

(https://c1.staticflickr.com/9/8153/7361419530_4403f55a68_z.jpg)

As long as there are two of them (I see you covered this already), and they are psychically attuned assassins a la Christopher Hinz.

Quote from: Armchair Gamer;757938Would you settle for someone who wields a double-bladed sword and a staff, and rides one panther into battle? :)

(https://c1.staticflickr.com/9/8153/7361419530_4403f55a68_z.jpg)

Close enough.

Quote from: Marleycat;757844Well duh, why do you think I mentioned white rooming? We aren't playing 0e and Sam the fighter with his 27 no name NPC redshirts here.

Yeah. Now you can have as many retainers as you want since there is nolonger a charisma limiter.

Quote from: languagegeek;757802I think I'd much rather get bonked with a staff than stabbed with a spear.

I did notice that all of the weapons have a 'damage type' listed.  I'm not clear on what, if any, mechanical effect that will have.  But, as an example, in GURPS any cutting damage that penetrates armor is increased by 50%, and piercing damage is doubled - so something similar to that may happen?

Quote from: Bill;757890He should quad wield two staves and two shields, and dual ride a pair of panthers into battle.

Each staff should dual wield scimitars.

Quote from: robiswrong;757973Each staff should dual wield scimitars.

I read that as 'Each Staff should deal wield Minotaurs'. Which I believe is a brilliant decision.

Quote from: Emperor Norton;757975I read that as 'Each Staff should deal wield Minotaurs'. Which I believe is a brilliant decision.

So long as the minotaurs dual wield scimitars.

It's D'riz'z't.  There's gotta be dual wielding scimitars in there somewhere.

Quote from: robiswrong;757979So long as the minotaurs dual wield scimitars.

It's D'riz'z't.  There's gotta be dual wielding scimitars in there somewhere.

Get him a Drizzt version of the Sly sword. essentially a sword dual wielding swords...

Well ok, Technically the Sly sword was a dagger wielding a sword dual wielding swords...

Now combine this with a Staff of Wielding and you are good to go.

Quote from: Brander;757832It's not really a viable loadout in reality or history unless you are in a formation.  A "medium" spear and shield being viable would make me happy too though.

Neither was holding up a cross to ward off a vampire. But, ya know, verisimilitude. ;)

Quote from: Scott Anderson;757987Neither was holding up a cross to ward off a vampire. But, ya know, verisimilitude. ;)

Heh, good point :)

Quote from: robiswrong;757979So long as the minotaurs dual wield scimitars.

It's D'riz'z't.  There's gotta be dual wielding scimitars in there somewhere.

You do know why Drizzt and scimitars are a thing right? It's from UA it's a drow racial ability in 1e. Drow are the only PC race able to dual wield medium weapons. It's why scimitars are light weapons and hand crossbows aren't exotic weapons in 5e, given Drow are in PHB and expected to be a viable choice in most games and probably OP.

Quote from: Marleycat;757820If all PHB options are options. I think I will create a Drow multiclass Enchanter or Bard or just  straight to piss off everyone over 40. Better yet a Paladin of some kind or multiclass Bard/Paladin!!!!!

Now, I'd let you play that, but only if you were a Paladin of the god... OF ROCK!!!

Quote from: Ladybird;758013Now, I'd let you play that, but only if you were a Paladin of the god... OF ROCK!!!

Of course. I would even make her more specific if required..Thrash Rock and Korn  come to mind.;)

Quote from: Marleycat;757820I think I will create a Drow multiclass Enchanter or Bard or just  straight to piss off everyone over 40. Better yet a Paladin of some kind or multiclass Bard/Paladin!!!!!

Heh, everyone over 40 did that already.

Quote from: CRKrueger;758020Heh, everyone over 40 did that already.

Damn it! I blame 3x and me being under 40.

Quote from: Omega;757830The... Balladin... :cool:

/stolen

Quote from: Werekoala;758027/stolen

isn't Ballardin better though .....

Quote from: jibbajibba;758040isn't Ballardin better though .....

Ballad = A sort of narrative song.

Quote from: honesttiago;757867The way you're describing finesse here, I am wondering if maybe it shouldn't be INT-based. Choosing vulnerable locations could be a matter of analytic, rather than just deftness.  Again, my main problem with finesse isn't the idea. It's the fact that DEX already has so much utility over other stats. If finesse was shifted to INT, then INT would gain a combat use, and DEX would balance out a bit more (saves, inish and AC).

I think you are looking for a way to balance stats especially in combat which is irrelevant to a physics engine that simulates combat.
Or in other words would you prefer to be stabbed by Zorro or Stephen Hawking?

Quote from: Omega;758042Ballad = A sort of narrative song.

Yeah me bad can't spell ballad :) thought it was ballard ... just goes to show :)

Quote from: jibbajibba;758040isn't Ballardin better though .....

Hmm...ballarina ---paladin. It has traction.;)

Quote from: Marleycat;758004You do know why Drizzt and scimitars are a thing right? It's from UA it's a drow racial ability in 1e. Drow are the only PC race able to dual wield medium weapons. It's why scimitars are light weapons and hand crossbows aren't exotic weapons in 5e, given Drow are in PHB and expected to be a viable choice in most games and probably OP.

Seriously?  So it could just as easily have been dual long swords or maces?

I seem to remember that those characters were min-maxed; wasn't one a UA barbarian?

Quote from: Votan;758049Seriously?  So it could just as easily have been dual long swords or maces?

I seem to remember that those characters were min-maxed; wasn't one a UA barbarian?

No minmax just fact. No, scimatars were the male drow racial weapon and considered medium ONLY to them. They're actually heavy weapons to everyone else including female drow. Hence hand crossbows for female drow. And like I already said....only Drow can dual wield two medium weapons and only scimitars because it's a RACIAL advantage and weapon for them, everyone else has to do medium/light.

Remember this is 1e which was cross compatible to all versions until 3e.

Quote from: Marleycat;758060No minmax just fact. No, scimatars were the male drow racial weapon and considered medium ONLY to them. They're actually heavy weapons to everyone else including female drow. Hence hand crossbows for female drow. And like I already said....only Drow can dual wield two medium weapons and only scimitars because it's a RACIAL advantage and weapon for them, everyone else has to do medium/light.

Remember this is 1e which was cross compatible to all versions until 3e.

I don't feel like digging out my decreipt copy of 1e UA, but this doesn't sound right at all. 1e AD&D didn't even have a concept of 'heavy' and 'light' weapons. It did say that drow could dual wield without penalty, which was already the case in 1e Fiend Folio - but in FF they could only use shortsword + dagger without penalty, and 1e UA didn't mention that restriction, which led to Driz'zt. Salvatore had Driz'zt's dad dual-wielding longswords in 'Homeland', as I recall.
Anyone could use drow hand crossbows AFAICR, if they could get hold of one.

Quote from: jibbajibba;758043I think you are looking for a way to balance stats especially in combat which is irrelevant to a physics engine that simulates combat.
Or in other words would you prefer to be stabbed by Zorro or Stephen Hawking?

That is exactly what I'm trying to do, mainly because DEX is such an uber stat in 5E (initiative, saves, ranged attack, melee attack AND damage with finesses weapons).  On the above, who's to say Zorro's prowess isn't in some way based on experience and training? His DEX could indicate his ability to defend himself, his INT could indicate ability to seek opening, press advantage, hit the right spot -- coolness in combat, so to speak. That is, if I was really trying to rationalize the concept. As you correctly noted, I'm trying to diminish the cache of DEX. Feel like it eclipses all other stats in 5th.

Quote from: cranebump;758087That is exactly what I'm trying to do, mainly because DEX is such an uber stat in 5E (initiative, saves, ranged attack, melee attack AND damage with finesses weapons).  On the above, who's to say Zorro's prowess isn't in some way based on experience and training? His DEX could indicate his ability to defend himself, his INT could indicate ability to seek opening, press advantage, hit the right spot -- coolness in combat, so to speak. That is, if I was really trying to rationalize the concept. As you correctly noted, I'm trying to diminish the cache of DEX. Feel like it eclipses all other stats in 5th.

There is training involved for sure and that is why its easier to hit as you level up and you learn techniques (feats or specialisation or whatever) that increase damage.

The problem isn't with the dominance of dex its with the inclusion of dex as a single stat. If you look at what is dex is made up of, balance, speed, agility, accuracy, reactions is it the dominant stat for combat without a doubt. In the real world those things are not so tightly coupled.

So if you want to reduce the effectiveness of dex rather than artificially enhancing int or wisdom or whatever split dex into accuracy and agility or whatever. Or even further and have reactions, agility and accuracy. One gives you a + to initiative, one to ac and one to hit and damage.

Quote from: jibbajibba;758089There is training involved for sure and that is why its easier to hit as you level up and you learn techniques (feats or specialisation or whatever) that increase damage.

The problem isn't with the dominance of dex its with the inclusion of dex as a single stat. If you look at what is dex is made up of, balance, speed, agility, accuracy, reactions is it the dominant stat for combat without a doubt. In the real world those things are not so tightly coupled.

So if you want to reduce the effectiveness of dex rather than artificially enhancing int or wisdom or whatever split dex into accuracy and agility or whatever. Or even further and have reactions, agility and accuracy. One gives you a + to initiative, one to ac and one to hit and damage.

Accurate observation. DexterityIS quite all-encompassing. I am wondering, too, if a strong approach might not be to go the other way--fewer stats. Microlite uses STR, DEX and MIND, essentially folding STR/CON together and INT/WIS together. DEX pretty much stays the same. Since STR now enhances hit, damage, hp's and is a saving throw, it has a LOT more cache. MIND is still the province of casters and such, but it IS the will save, and figures in a lot of other checks, so it balances a bit more.

Quote from: cranebump;758091Accurate observation. DexterityIS quite all-encompassing. I am wondering, too, if a strong approach might not be to go the other way--fewer stats. Microlite uses STR, DEX and MIND, essentially folding STR/CON together and INT/WIS together. DEX pretty much stays the same. Since STR now enhances hit, damage, hp's and is a saving throw, it has a LOT more cache. MIND is still the province of casters and such, but it IS the will save, and figures in a lot of other checks, so it balances a bit more.

yup I have used Prowess, Guile and Lore before. It all depends on what  are looking to do.

I definitely agree that you can reduce the importance of Dex in an array of 6 stats by either splitting it and adding more stats or by condensing the other stats to increase their importance, if a balance of stats is critical to you.

Often this sort of balance is only critical if a particular element of play is central to your game so a combat focused game might want to balance the effectiveness of stats in combat. But if the game is more open and roleplay, exploration, research etc are all as critical as combat then in effect a single stat dominating an aspect of play is less critical because of the other aspects of play.

Quote from: Marleycat;758048Hmm...ballarina ---paladin. It has traction.;)

Pallarina. :rolleyes:

Add lycanthropy and you could be a were-ballerina like in Howling III. :eek:

Quote from: S'mon;758085I don't feel like digging out my decreipt copy of 1e UA, but this doesn't sound right at all. 1e AD&D didn't even have a concept of 'heavy' and 'light' weapons. It did say that drow could dual wield without penalty, which was already the case in 1e Fiend Folio - but in FF they could only use shortsword + dagger without penalty, and 1e UA didn't mention that restriction, which led to Driz'zt. Salvatore had Driz'zt's dad dual-wielding longswords in 'Homeland', as I recall.
Anyone could use drow hand crossbows AFAICR, if they could get hold of one.

UA on page 10 says that Dark elves may fight with two weapons without penalty, as long as each weapon can easily be wielded in one hand. No gender requirement.

Quote from: cranebump;758091Accurate observation. DexterityIS quite all-encompassing. I am wondering, too, if a strong approach might not be to go the other way--fewer stats. Microlite uses STR, DEX and MIND, essentially folding STR/CON together and INT/WIS together. DEX pretty much stays the same. Since STR now enhances hit, damage, hp's and is a saving throw, it has a LOT more cache. MIND is still the province of casters and such, but it IS the will save, and figures in a lot of other checks, so it balances a bit more.

Personally I dislike stats that are rolled together too much.

linking 'IQ' and 'Willpower' feels wrong to me.

Linking how dexterous a person is with their hands to how well they move around feels wrong.

Etc...

Quote from: jibbajibba;758040isn't Ballardin better though .....

The best of all is the Bardbarian.

On the topic of the one-handed staff, the explanation which makes most sense to me is that this only really matters for use with the 'Polearm Master' feat. That lets you wield a pole arm (including a quarter staff) as a pair of light weapons, with the off-hand end doing 1d4 damage. So you would either strike once for 1d8 damage, or dual wield for 1d6 and 1d4.

Quote from: dbm;758539On the topic of the one-handed staff, the explanation which makes most sense to me is that this only really matters for use with the 'Polearm Master' feat. That lets you wield a pole arm (including a quarter staff) as a pair of light weapons, with the off-hand end doing 1d4 damage. So you would either strike once for 1d8 damage, or dual wield for 1d6 and 1d4.

Except that part of staff training for real is using it one handed. The staff is held at the middle and whipped around close in to the body to get alot of accelleration and fend of closing attackers. Also leaves one hand free which for a fantasy caster is vital. Or should be.

But I have seen at least one person using dual staves for training so it is possible.

Okay, this is verging towards Arguing About Swords On The Internet, but I think the test of a one-handed weapon is not whether you can (or are supposed to, even) execute a few moves with it one-handed (consider a two-handed sword swing that is finished one-handed for the extra reach), but whether you don't ordinarily use the second hand at all (allowing for the odd instance of infighting and such, because that is plausible even with a knife) and could wield the thing perfectly well with a shield in the other hand.

Quote from: Imp;758559...could wield the thing perfectly well with a shield in the other hand.

In the case of the staff, certainly, it's just a spear without a spearhead.  Spear and shield are ubiquitous throughout history.

This is incredibly stupid. No one in the history of history has fought with a staff one handed, other than through loss of an arm, drunkenness or in a misguided attempt to mimic something seen in a game. I'm generally supportive of the whole 5E thing and like much about this weapons table, but let's keep this thing real, fan boys: someone shit the bed just a tiny bit when they decided to do this.

Quote from: Omega;758543Except that part of staff training for real is using it one handed. The staff is held at the middle and whipped around close in to the body to get alot of accelleration and fend of closing attackers. Also leaves one hand free which for a fantasy caster is vital. Or should be.

But I have seen at least one person using dual staves for training so it is possible.

I believe you have seen some dork in a martial arts class windmilling with a staff. I'ld like to respectfully suggest whoever did this sort of show boating BS in a real fight would get his or her ass beat down hard.

Or even in a pretend fight. I'm reminded of a goofy kid who showed up at my local SCA heavy weapons practice all kitted out to try some dual-wielding made up technique using some pair of made up double bladed weapons. I hurt him.

Quote from: Brander;758863In the case of the staff, certainly, it's just a spear without a spearhead.  Spear and shield are ubiquitous throughout history.

Ah, yes! How could I forget the part in Thucydides where in the defense of Corinth the Spartans fielded companies of elite staff-and-hoplon-wielders (later to be known affectionately among historians as "boplites") whose concussive prodding turned out to be surprisingly effective against the better-armored Athenian ranks? Or that memorable episode in the Roman conquests where  Sulla outfitted four corps of velites with knob-ended javelins, thus knocking the Phyrgian caps clean off the Thracian host, rendering them stunned & demoralized when the legionnaires struck home?

*mutters, gestures, throws up hands, leaves*

Quote from: Larsdangly;758959This is incredibly stupid. No one in the history of history has fought with a staff one handed...

Quote from: Imp;758972Ah, yes! How could I forget the part in Thucydides where in the defense of Corinth the Spartans fielded companies of elite staff-and-hoplon-wielders...

*mutters, gestures, throws up hands, leaves*

Wallow in your ignorance if you wish, but the problem is you obviously think a "staff" is something other than a pole.  As in polearms/spears.  The only difference is whether you have a point or not.

"So among the weapons of the staff, the pike is the most plain, most honourable and most noble of all the rest. ..." Giacomo DiGrassi, True Art of Defense, 1594

"It could be argued that a staff and spear are two different weapons, but I might argue back that they would be held and used exactly the same way depending on whether or not one held a shield, and the only real difference is whether or not the ends have a point. "
http://www.swordsmanship.ca/academy-articles/fighting-with-staff-and-spear/

Yes, staff and shield would not be an optimal choice, but the techniques are identical to spear and shield.  Have your enemy lop off the pointy bit doesn't make it any less useful to keep him at range or poke them with the now somewhat less pointy end.  As well any differences are well below the level of resolution used in D&D (absent details on what exactly damage types actually mean and details as to exactly wtf a hit point really is).

Quote from: Brander;759010Wallow in your ignorance if you wish, but the problem is you obviously think a "staff" is something other than a pole.  As in polearms/spears.  The only difference is whether you have a point or not.

“So among the weapons of the staff, the pike is the most plain, most honourable and most noble of all the rest. ..." Giacomo DiGrassi, True Art of Defense, 1594

"It could be argued that a staff and spear are two different weapons, but I might argue back that they would be held and used exactly the same way depending on whether or not one held a shield, and the only real difference is whether or not the ends have a point. "
http://www.swordsmanship.ca/academy-articles/fighting-with-staff-and-spear/

Yes, staff and shield would not be an optimal choice, but the techniques are identical to spear and shield.  Have your enemy lop off the pointy bit doesn't make it any less useful to keep him at range or poke them with the now somewhat less pointy end.  As well any differences are well below the level of resolution used in D&D (absent details on what exactly damage types actually mean and details as to exactly wtf a hit point really is).

Wait, people are arguing that a quarterstaff isn't a polearm? It's just shorter like a spear without a pointy stone/metal thing attached. Both fully capable of being used offensively 1-handed.

It's a frigging stick! Of course you can use it 1-handed! I mean really some people need to get a life. Hell, a trained quarterstaff user can easily embarrass a trained sword user that isn't in heavy armour or mounted and maybe even then.

Quote from: Larsdangly;758961...

Or even in a pretend fight. I'm reminded of a goofy kid who showed up at my local SCA heavy weapons practice all kitted out to try some dual-wielding made up technique using some pair of made up double bladed weapons. I hurt him.

Nice strawman.  Fight someone who has practiced spear and shield.  Give em a blunted "spear" (pretty sure you do that already unless the SCA are killing more people with metal tipped spears than I'm aware)  and tell me it somehow changes things.  The spear/staff and shield fighter will destroy you unless you are extremely good or they are extremely bad.

I think everyone accepts that it's physically possible to wield a staff one-handed. It's just not a very effective weapon, especially vs armoured opponents. It definitely shouldn't be equivalent to a one-handed spear ("staff + dagger") in damage.

I think the general problem is that staffs are seen as vaguely cool, spears as uncool, so the more effective weapon gets nerfed and the less effective weapon gets boosted.

Quote from: Larsdangly;758959This is incredibly stupid. No one in the history of history has fought with a staff one handed, other than through loss of an arm, drunkenness or in a misguided attempt to mimic something seen in a game. I'm generally supportive of the whole 5E thing and like much about this weapons table, but let's keep this thing real, fan boys: someone shit the bed just a tiny bit when they decided to do this.

Maybe. It could just be a hiccup because wielding a staff in one hand is fairly 'weak' and should probably be 1d4.

A person might on a very rare situation be forced to use a staff in one hand, if the other hand is busy. Like he needs to hold a lantern so as not to be blind.

Quote from: Bill;759064Maybe. It could just be a hiccup because wielding a staff in one hand is fairly 'weak' and should probably be 1d4.

A person might on a very rare situation be forced to use a staff in one hand, if the other hand is busy. Like he needs to hold a lantern so as not to be blind.

I still maintain there are plenty of one handed quarterstaff techniques from and extended thrust to a cross blow from under the armpit to a one handed spin, all are valid.
Would you fight with a staff as a solely single handed weapon no probably not I could see you using a staff and buckler with the intention of using he buckler hand to provide attacking support.
However the fact that in any given combat you might choose to attack one handed with a staff for a variety of tactical reasons so a one handed staff attack is a valid attack. Does differentiating the damage make sense in D&D terms where the combat model s so highly abstracted.... probably not but we are differentiating between different lengths of swords and knives so ...

Quote from: jibbajibba;759070I still maintain there are plenty of one handed quarterstaff techniques from and extended thrust to a cross blow from under the armpit to a one handed spin, all are valid.
Would you fight with a staff as a solely single handed weapon no probably not I could see you using a staff and buckler with the intention of using he buckler hand to provide attacking support.
However the fact that in any given combat you might choose to attack one handed with a staff for a variety of tactical reasons so a one handed staff attack is a valid attack. Does differentiating the damage make sense in D&D terms where the combat model s so highly abstracted.... probably not but we are differentiating between different lengths of swords and knives so ...

And this is why I liked BX D&D. All the weapons did 1d6, different damage was optional, rather than the norm. I like differing damage. But no one can agree on what should do what.

Quote from: Omega;759074And this is why I liked BX D&D. All the weapons did 1d6, different damage was optional, rather than the norm. I like differing damage. But no one can agree on what should do what.

Yup.  Balancing variable weapon damage is a PITA.

In my OD&D campaign small weapons do 1d6-1, medium weapons do 1d6, and two handed weapons do 1d6+1.

Quote from: Exploderwizard;759076In my OD&D campaign small weapons do 1d6-1, medium weapons do 1d6, and two handed weapons do 1d6+1.

That is beautifully elegant and simple.

Quote from: Exploderwizard;759076Yup.  Balancing variable weapon damage is a PITA.

In my OD&D campaign small weapons do 1d6-1, medium weapons do 1d6, and two handed weapons do 1d6+1.

One thing I like about standard damage is that players are more apt to choose weapons based on what they like, rather than what damage they do.  In modern D&D (and most RPGs), how many dual dagger weilding PCs do you see?  Not many.  They're all with weapons to maximize damage.  The poor broad sword in D&D was always tossed aside for the long sword ;)

Quote from: S'mon;759035I think the general problem is that staffs are seen as vaguely cool, spears as uncool, so the more effective weapon gets nerfed and the less effective weapon gets boosted.

Is that true? I'm not disputing, but it seems strange to me. Is this a video-game thing?

Quote from: Haffrung;759103Is that true? I'm not disputing, but it seems strange to me. Is this a video-game thing?

It's a factor, one among several.

Quote from: Haffrung;759103Is that true? I'm not disputing, but it seems strange to me. Is this a video-game thing?

Seems weird to me, too.  If I were choosing a weapon for a hand-to-hand fight, some sort of spear would probably be at the top of the list.

Quote from: Haffrung;759103Is that true? I'm not disputing, but it seems strange to me. Is this a video-game thing?

  Staff fighters have a little bit of cultural cachet, from Little John to Donatello. I can't think of similar spear-wielders off hand; even the term 'spear carrier' is dismissive.

Totally bizarre. The spear is the primary combat weapon for infantry combat in countless nations and eras. The staff is a thing you use for walking, goofing around in martial arts class, and showing off in hollywood movies.

Well, there's some conscript "spear carrier," and there's Cú Chulainn, or Hector, or Ajax, or Achilles.  From the Greeks, to the Romans, to the Celts, the Anglo-Saxons, the Norse and Danes, et cetera -- the spear was the primary weapon of the warrior (part of which is the inexpensive nature of the spear, but part of it is the spear's effectiveness), and ability to fight with a spear was lauded.  Even in religious myth you'll find a lot more gods and heroes with spears than wielding a staff.  

A staff can be an effective weapon, but I'd take a spear over a staff any day.

I figure the staff's damage is high so that magic users can do good damage with a melee weapon, just like the high damage for the combat cantrips. Seriously, I don't think M-Us should be doing anything more than 1d6 in mundane combat to reflect their lack of training, especially if to hit numbers are the same compared with fighters.

And if staves do near the same damage as spears, why would our caveman ancestors bother knapping flint spearheads before their dinosaur hunts. They could have just bashed the t-rexes with sticks.

Quote from: Armchair Gamer;759198Staff fighters have a little bit of cultural cachet, from Little John to Donatello. I can't think of similar spear-wielders off hand; even the term 'spear carrier' is dismissive.

I can think of 300.

Quote from: Armchair Gamer;759198Staff fighters have a little bit of cultural cachet, from Little John to Donatello. I can't think of similar spear-wielders off hand; even the term 'spear carrier' is dismissive.

I believe that connotation comes from drama/theater and doesn't have anything to do with actual spear fighting or warfare, but I can't think of a pop culture spear user either. Nobody thinks of Odin because of his spear.

Quote from: Natty Bodak;759207Nobody thinks of Odin because of his spear.

I do. And for his ravens and his missing eye. I like the whole package deal :(

Quote from: Necrozius;759209I do. And for his ravens and his missing eye. I like the whole package deal :(

Ok. There's two of us. Odin has a posse!

Quote from: Necrozius;759209I do. And for his ravens and his missing eye. I like the whole package deal :(

No love for his goats?

Thor had goats.

Quote from: Rincewind1;759215Thor had goats.

D'oh.

Shiva had a trident, I think.

Upthread somewhere far back I asked if anyone knew anything about Weapon Focus and its ilk, but nobody responded.  Maybe it rightfully got lost in the staff v spear donnybrook.

So, does Weapon Focus survive as a Fighter class feature that just gives an across-the-board bonus to weapon damage (as it seemed to be in the last playtest doc I saw) or in some other way?

The focus/specialization feats were some of my least favorite "feat taxes", especially the racial forms.

Quote from: Natty Bodak;759234Upthread somewhere far back I asked if anyone knew anything about Weapon Focus and its ilk, but nobody responded.  Maybe it rightfully got lost in the staff v spear donnybrook.

So, does Weapon Focus survive as a Fighter class feature that just gives an across-the-board bonus to weapon damage (as it seemed to be in the last playtest doc I saw) or in some other way?

The focus/specialization feats were some of my least favorite "feat taxes", especially the racial forms.

I don't have the material in front of me, but I don't recall any weapon specialization type feat/skill in 5e.  There are feats like polearm specialization, but its a broad feat and no single +1 type feats anywhere, unless you're talking about the broad fighting style stuff like archery

Quote from: Sacrosanct;759236I don't have the material in front of me, but I don't recall any weapon specialization type feat/skill in 5e.  There are feats like polearm specialization, but its a broad feat and no single +1 type feats anywhere.

This is what I saw on the Dwarf Fighter sheet from one of the play test packets, but haven't seen anything else like it.

QuoteWEAPON FOCUS: You gain
a +2 bonus to damage on
weapon attacks. This bonus
has already been figured into
the damage of your attacks.

Quote from: Natty Bodak;759237This is what I saw on the Dwarf Fighter sheet from one of the play test packets, but haven't seen anything else like it.

That's an old version.  I pulled up my docs to be sure, and there aren't any things like that any more.

Dwarves get proficiency in axes and other weapons as a bonus, but don't get bonuses to hit and damage.  Fighting styles for fighters get a bonus +1 to attack rolls for archery, and can apply ability modifier damage for dual weapon style.  Barbarians get bonuses to damage from raging, but nothing like a weapon focus/specialization skill

Feats like polearm mastery basically treat the weapon like a double bladed weapon, allowing you another minor attack you can make with it (1d4 dmg) and causing opponents to suffer an attack of opportunity if they enter range

Other feats like archery mastery allow you to make long ranged attacks without suffering disadvantage, and allow you an extra shot as long as you take a -5 penalty to each attack that round.

So nothing really like the weapon focus/spec/spec II feat chain you saw in AD&D and 3e.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;759080One thing I like about standard damage is that players are more apt to choose weapons based on what they like, rather than what damage they do.  In modern D&D (and most RPGs), how many dual dagger weilding PCs do you see?  Not many.  They're all with weapons to maximize damage.  The poor broad sword in D&D was always tossed aside for the long sword ;)

According to, I believe, Old Geezer. Some of the players opted for iron spikes as those were the cheapest weapon you could get.

So in 5e that would be the Club, Great Club, Quaterstaff, Dart and Sling. aheh.

Much as I may malign 4e D&D Gamma World, during chargen the only choice you had was your starting weapon and armour. It was one ranged and one  melee. And they were divided into light and heavy, one handed and two handed, and ranged were divided further into regular or guns. What the weapon was was up to the player.
A light 1 handed melee was a d8 weapon and a 2-hander was a d12. While a 2-handed heavy was 2d8. Could be a knife, a rock, a Buick, a claymore.
Just choose the type and make it whatever your you want.

Quote from: Omega;759241A light 1 handed melee was a d8 weapon and a 2-hander was a d12. While a 2-handed heavy was 2d8. Could be a knife, a rock, a Buick, a claymore.
Just choose the type and make it whatever your you want.

One of my friends rolled up in his random equipment that he had a Saxophone. So he said his 1 handed heavy weapon was a reinforced saxophone.

Quote from: Armchair Gamer;759198Staff fighters have a little bit of cultural cachet, from Little John to Donatello. I can't think of similar spear-wielders off hand; even the term 'spear carrier' is dismissive.

Also staves are percieved as more family friendly in media. In media you can poke, stun and subdue someone with a staff. A spear leaves those bothersome spurty holes in the foe.

TMHT in the UK. Then again they also banned the showing of nunchaku. So even those blunt weapons arent safe. ahem...

Quote from: Gunslinger;759213No love for his goats?

Odin has Sleipnir, Loki's multi-legged horse kid he had while posing as a mare to save the construction of Asgard.

That plays right to my preferences, so cool!

Quote from: Sacrosanct;759239That's an old version.  I pulled up my docs to be sure, and there aren't any things like that any more.

Dwarves get proficiency in axes and other weapons as a bonus, but don't get bonuses to hit and damage.  Fighting styles for fighters get a bonus +1 to attack rolls for archery, and can apply ability modifier damage for dual weapon style.  Barbarians get bonuses to damage from raging, but nothing like a weapon focus/specialization skill

Feats like polearm mastery basically treat the weapon like a double bladed weapon, allowing you another minor attack you can make with it (1d4 dmg) and causing opponents to suffer an attack of opportunity if they enter range

Other feats like archery mastery allow you to make long ranged attacks without suffering disadvantage, and allow you an extra shot as long as you take a -5 penalty to each attack that round.

So nothing really like the weapon focus/spec/spec II feat chain you saw in AD&D and 3e.

Quote from: Armchair Gamer;759198Staff fighters have a little bit of cultural cachet, from Little John to Donatello. I can't think of similar spear-wielders off hand; even the term 'spear carrier' is dismissive.

They have Oberyn Martell

Quote from: Larsdangly;759200Totally bizarre. The spear is the primary combat weapon for infantry combat in countless nations and eras. The staff is a thing you use for walking, goofing around in martial arts class, and showing off in hollywood movies.

I have posted this before but worth the repeat - from http://ejmas.com/jwma/articles/2001/jwmaart_docherty_0501.htm

"In the year 1625 England and Spain were at war and Peeke was serving in an English naval squadron, under the command of the Earl of Essex, which was attacking a Spanish naval stronghold. After heavy and accurate bombardment the English captured the fortress, whereupon, they sent forces ashore to carry the attack inland. In the wake of the English landings sailors were sent ashore to forage for food. Richard Peeke, of Tavistock in Devon, was among them. Unwisely he foraged alone and paid the price for his mistake when he was attacked by a patrol of spanish musketers. After a furious fight, during which Peeke was wounded twice, he was captured and taken in chains to Cales ( Cadiz ). from there he was transfered to Xeres where he was put on trial. Present at his trial, which in reality was a miitary interrogation, were four Dukes, four Marquesses, and four Earls. After much questioning Peeke was asked if he thought that the Spanish soldiers present would prove such 'hennes' as the English when they landed in England the following yeare. "

"No" replied Peeke. "They would prove to be pullets or chickens."

Peeke's insolent reply brought forth an angry response from the Spaniards.

"Darst thou then ( quoth Duke Mdyna, with a brow half angry ) fight with one of these Spanish pullets."

Peeke replied that,

"...hee was unworthy the name of an Englishman, that should refuse to fight with one man of any nation whatsoever."

At this Peek's chains and shackles were removed and a space was created for him to fight a Spanish champion by the name of Tiago. Both were armed with Rapier and Poinard. The ensuing fight continued for some time before Peeke, using the guard of the poinard, trapped the blade of Tiago's rapier and simultaniously swept the Spaniards feet from under him. Peeke's rapier, held to the throat of senor Tiago brought forth the necessary capitulation. Spanish pride had been sorely wounded and it was demanded of Peeke whether he would be willing to fight another Spaniard. Peeke replied in the affirmative provided he was allowed to fight with.

"... mine owne countrrey weapon called the quarter - staffe."

Upon this remark the Spanish unscrewed the head from a Halbered to create a makeshift Quarterstaff. Armed with the weapon of his choice Peeke stood ready to meet his next challenger. However the Spanish were clearly no longer so confident in the prowess of their soldiers for, to Peeke's consternation, two Swordsmen stepped forward to fight him. Peeke sarcastically asked if more would like to join them. The Duke of Medyna asked how many he desired to fight.

"Any number under sixe". replied Peeke.

The Duke smiled scornfully and beckoned a third man to join the original two. Peeke and the rapier men warily traversed each other, all the while thrusting and warding, till finally Peeke gambled on an all out attack. His first blow a left one of his adversaries dead and his subsequent blows left the other two injured and disarmed. No doubt they also left the spanish seriously questioning the wisdom of their invasion plans. Peeke's feat so impressed his Spanish captors that they released him and granted him safe conduct to England.

A tale to warm the heart of every Englishman, but the realities of the quarterstaff were far more gruesome, as a report from 1527 shows.

On the 4th of September, John Strynger late of Babworth, laborour, assaulted Henry Pereson of Babworth with a staff worth 1d. Which he held in both hands, striking him on top of the head so that his brains flowed out and giving him a wound 1 inch deep, 2 inches wide and 3 inches long of which he immediately died. Thus John feloniously murdered him, and immediately afterwards he fled about 9am and escaped. Robert Bramley, a man of good reputation and standing, first found Henry dead. ( J.C.Holt Robin Hood Pages 170-71 )

Although the quarterstaff is seen as a weapon of film and television by modern society may be even a weapon of myth, the reality as we have just read were very different, the quarterstaff, was not known as the king of weapons for nothing.

Quote from: jibbajibba;759269They have Oberyn Martell

And Matrim Cauthon (Robert Jordan was in the military, a graduate of VMI, and a serious military historian).

Another obvious reason for how 5e handles the quarterstaff is Pathfinder specifically their GISH the Magus with the staff fighting archetype.

Quote from: Brander;759013Nice strawman.  Fight someone who has practiced spear and shield.  Give em a blunted "spear" (pretty sure you do that already unless the SCA are killing more people with metal tipped spears than I'm aware)  and tell me it somehow changes things.  The spear/staff and shield fighter will destroy you unless you are extremely good or they are extremely bad.

The SCA has some rules for safety that can lead to bad intuition.  They actually use wraps to the back of the helmet, a maneuver that would be much less effective if shield bashes or grapples were allowed.  Or if the blow had to cleave the helmet.  

With a spear, the knees and below are not legal targets.  A very, very good rule for safety (SCA fighting is shockingly safe due to a genuine culture of caring about people not being hurt while having fun), it does eliminate one of the obvious tricks to keep a for at range with a spear.  It also disallows the some of the standard counters for people who get inside the range of the spear.  

Fun sport and it does yield some genuine insights, but it isn't perfect.

I think what's often missing in rpg combat systems is blunt weapons stunning and or inflicting blunt trauma, and pointy/cutting weapons inflicting bleeders or nasty wounds.

Quote from: Bill;759317I think what's often missing in rpg combat systems is blunt weapons stunning and or inflicting blunt trauma, and pointy/cutting weapons inflicting bleeders or nasty wounds.

I agree. I don't really care about differing damage dice: I'd rather focus on Descriptors or Tags that differentiate a spiked mace from a rapier.

However, we then veer into the can of worms that is the debate about whether HP are actually tracking real wounds or if they are a nebulous representation of fatigue and exertion.

Quote from: Bill;759317I think what's often missing in rpg combat systems is blunt weapons stunning and or inflicting blunt trauma, and pointy/cutting weapons inflicting bleeders or nasty wounds.

GURPS handles these things very well. It is not an abstract system like D&D.

I prefer to leave abstract systems simple and leave the particular levels of detail to systems constructed to handle them.

Quote from: Bill;759317I think what's often missing in rpg combat systems is blunt weapons stunning and or inflicting blunt trauma, and pointy/cutting weapons inflicting bleeders or nasty wounds.

Well AD&D had subdual damage.

RuneQuest 6 also deals with this really well. The Combat Special Effects handles blunt weapons inflicting Bash (to knock someone off balance) or Stun Location (numbs one hit location, causing them to fall, drop a weapon, or be briefly knocked out or winded), pointy weapons can Impale (getting stuck in the wound, and inflicting further damage if/when pulled out), slashing weapons can Bleed (severing a major blood vessel and inflicting blood loss) ... and then there are many other effects like Damage Weapon or Disarm, Trip, Entangle (for nets and flexible weapons), etc etc.
It's a great system if you like your combat a bit more simulationist and gritty, but it runs smoothly in my experience.
It also has the advantage of armour reducing damage rather than making you harder to hit, though of course the Bypass Armour Special Effect can find the chinks in even full plate ...
If anyone's interested in checking it out, there's now a free download of RuneQuest Essentials on the Design Mechanism website. I highly recommend it ...

Quote from: Omega;759332Well AD&D had subdual damage.

But implemented it in a bizzaro manner.

Subdue a dragon with a stick but can't subdue a kobold.

1E also eventually added in a chance to knock out with brawling but a mace to the head can't ko you.

Quote from: Exploderwizard;759076Yup.  Balancing variable weapon damage is a PITA.

In my OD&D campaign small weapons do 1d6-1, medium weapons do 1d6, and two handed weapons do 1d6+1.

I'd buy that for a dollar.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;759080One thing I like about standard damage is that players are more apt to choose weapons based on what they like, rather than what damage they do.  In modern D&D (and most RPGs), how many dual dagger weilding PCs do you see?  Not many.  They're all with weapons to maximize damage.  The poor broad sword in D&D was always tossed aside for the long sword ;)

Amen.  And a bit of the ol' shield and gladius now and again wouldn't be bad for us would it? Anything that nudges us back toward some variety would be welcome.

Quote from: Bill;759374But implemented it in a bizzaro manner.

Subdue a dragon with a stick but can't subdue a kobold.

1E also eventually added in a chance to knock out with brawling but a mace to the head can't ko you.

DMG says subdual applies to mugging more than just dragons.

And it was fairly straightforward too. Damage converted to subdual. 75% was temp. 25% was owies. Applied to humanoids, etc.

Quote from: Exploderwizard;759326GURPS handles these things very well. It is not an abstract system like D&D.

I prefer to leave abstract systems simple and leave the particular levels of detail to systems constructed to handle them.

I totally agree with this.

Sadly, some people insist that either one system should be stretched to do everything, or that a particular system actually does things other than what it does (and usually what it says it does).

Interestingly in real life a rapier is far heavier than a scimitar. People think of a rapier as a foil and indeed it actually isn't. I actually googled it today. WotC got it completely right.:eek:

Quote from: Marleycat;759602Interestingly in real life a rapier is far heavier than a scimitar. People think of a rapier as a foil and indeed it actually isn't. I actually googled it today. WotC got it completely right.:eek:

The page/table mentioned in the OP gives the rapier as being lighter than a scimitar, so how is that right in light of your googling?

Quote from: Natty Bodak;759605The page/table mentioned in the OP gives the rapier as being lighter than a scimitar, so how is that right in light of your googling?

I meant wrong. :o

Because before then I never thought different. Which means we're going to have to muck with the weights for weapons. I mean how hard is it to use Google?

Quote from: Marleycat;759608I meant wrong. :o

Because before then I never thought different. Which means we're going to have to muck with the weights for weapons. I mean how hard is it to use Google?

Heh. I can't ever keep the fencing weapons straight. I always think the sabre is the heaviest but I think it's actually the épée (thanks for accents, autocorrect!).

It's ironic that they list the scimitar as being heavier than the rapier but give the scimitar the "light" tag. I guess that's for you-know-who.

Quote from: Natty Bodak;759609Heh. I can't ever keep the fencing weapons straight. I always think the sabre is the heaviest but I think it's actually the épée (thanks for accents, autocorrect!).

It's ironic that they list the scimitar as being heavier than the rapier but give the scimitar the "light" tag. I guess that's for you-know-who.

No the scimitar is lighter and an edged weapon which means yes it can be dual wielded. The fact is the rapier is not only heavy, but so heavy that main guache, cloak or a buckler was used in your off hand to use the full effect of the weapon and in some cases just for basic balance. It really is that heavy. It's not a girl weapon at all unless you're profiencent.

1e fucked up by classing a scimitar as medium and therein the controversy.

Quote from: Marleycat;759613No the scimitar is lighter and an edged weapon which means yes it can be dual wielded. The fact is the rapier is not only heavy, but so heavy that main guache, cloak or a buckler was used in your off hand to use the full effect of the weapon and in some cases just for basic balance. It really is that heavy. It's not a girl weapon at all unless you're profiencent.

1e fucked up by classing a scimitar as medium and therein the controversy.

I see nothing wrong with the weight on the Rapier.  The sources I've read suggest that 2# is a reasonable average.  As for the scimitar, I'm not sure what weapon D&D has really meant when it says "scimitar" since it could mean a LOT of different things and I'd classify the majority as approximately as heavy as a longsword.

As for using a weapon in each hand, even rapiers were sometimes used two at a time.  Though dual-wielding in general appears to have been almost only a dueling thing and mostly pointless outside of that area.

Many games have massively inflated the weight of weapons.  Though outside of the Maul and Greatclub* I'm mostly impressed with the weights given in the 5e list even though they chose weights at he high end of the spectrum.


*A ten pound weapon is likely a show or parade weapon, not something used except in the direst of emergencies.

Quote from: Marleycat;759602Interestingly in real life a rapier is far heavier than a scimitar. People think of a rapier as a foil and indeed it actually isn't. I actually googled it today. WotC got it completely right.:eek:

Depends what you mean by each.

I collect antique swords and I have a very nice rapier that is much lighter than my crappy knackered scimitar.

A rapier also has a lot of weight in the pommel to make the blade more manuverable.

A scimitar can be a 24 inch long 1 and a 1/2 inch wide blade widening a the end to weight the blade for chopping and slashing or it can be a 3 inch wide 36 inch long curved blade used for beheding folk....

in terms of the blade weight since a rapier tends to have less metal in it (1/2 inch wide 24-36 inches long - though 24 inch would more correctly be a small sword) the blade is lighter. As I noted the weight of a rapier is in the pommell as a counter balance.

The damage a rapier does is mostly stabbing although most rapiers have a double edged tip about 6-8 inches long. Typically stabbing causes more damage than slashing because your squiggy internal organs are int eh middle of your body not on the outside.

Meh, there are always exceptions. But I least I got you boys talking about something other then edition war stupidity.

*Marley drops the mike *

Yeah 2 pounds about right for the classic Spanish Cup Hilt rapier, going up for the transitional rapiers which still were intended to cut.  If you're talking about a thin cavalry saber shamshir type scimitar then it would be less, but the kind with the thick flaring end with the back false edge would be more.

Quote from: jibbajibba;759622A scimitar can be a 24 inch long 1 and a 1/2 inch wide blade widening a the end to weight the blade for chopping and slashing or it can be a 3 inch wide 36 inch long curved blade used for beheding folk....

I think D&D generally classes the latter sort of blade as a falchion.

Quote from: S'mon;759671I think D&D generally classes the latter sort of blade as a falchion.

Probably , but its not though. A falchion is european not middle eastern and is generally more like a machete with a curved blade but a straight back.

A scimitar has more in common with a tulwar. And a big scimitar is more like well to be honest scimitar has come to mean a curved longsword that looks a bit middle eastern so a scimitar can look like almost anything :)

The daul weild question is interesting as a scimitar would be unlikely to be dual wileded as its primarily a cavalry weapon like its cousin the sabre. that is why its curved and single edged.

The most effective dual weild blades are actually short swords of the xiphos configuration which were 40 cm long leave shaped blades that can stab or slash and are short so they are easy to track and manipulate without tangling. Its a bit like dual weilding handaxes which is again another very effective technique.

Quote from: Omega;759565DMG says subdual applies to mugging more than just dragons.

And it was fairly straightforward too. Damage converted to subdual. 75% was temp. 25% was owies. Applied to humanoids, etc.

I was referring to the percentage chance that a Dragon would surrender, not referring to bonking someone on the head to capture them with less lethal damage.  



Kobolds did not have the chance to surrender, Dragons did.

Quote from: estar;757713Not enough polearms. :D

They have betrayed the Gygax!!

Quote from: jibbajibba;759676The most effective dual weild blades are actually short swords of the xiphos configuration which were 40 cm long leave shaped blades that can stab or slash and are short so they are easy to track and manipulate without tangling. Its a bit like dual weilding handaxes which is again another very effective technique.

Look at what escrima fighters do, right?  Sticks (which could be knives) of about that length.

Whenever I see an Escrima guy bust some ass in a Martial Arts movie I always think how much more badass he would be with shortswords.

Quote from: CRKrueger;759995Whenever I see an Escrima guy bust some ass in a Martial Arts movie I always think how much more badass he would be with shortswords.

You'd be objectively wrong, sir!

Controlling movement, pinpoint strikes, Escrima sticks for the win.

Quote from: Silverlion;760122You'd be objectively wrong, sir!

Controlling movement, pinpoint strikes, Escrima sticks for the win.

Yeah yeah, tell that to the guys who lost to the Spanish. :D

Seriously though, I'm talking about the movies.  Hit a guy 500 times is cool and all, but way better to use swords.  Look at The Raid, awesome movie, but he was best when he was just fucking people up with knives like a true Silat practitioner rather then going unarmed like every other martial art movie.

Quote from: LibraryLass;759217Shiva had a trident, I think.

Indeed he did!

Quote from: jibbajibba;759269They have Oberyn Martell

If you look across cultures, they also have a half-dozen or so heroes from Romance of the Three Kingdoms; at least one of whom became a god (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guan_Yu)...