2nd Edition Weapon Speeds - Anyone Else Miss Them?

Whodat

First Post

• Sep 16, 2002

• #1

I'm kind of new to the boards here, so I'm not sure if this topic has already been beaten to death - but here we go.

In 2nd Edition there was an optional rule concerning "Speed Factors" for various weapons. The weapon’s speed factor was a relative measure of the clumsiness of the weapon. The lower the number, the easier the weapon was to use. The speed factor was then added to the character’s initiative roll in order to factor the weapon’s weight during the attack.

In this way a character using a light weapon (such as a rapier) would be able to attack before a character with a heavier weapon (such as a two-handed sword), even if they had otherwise identical initiatives.

Am I the only one who misses this rule?

 

log in or register to remove this ad

Mouseferatu

Hero

• Sep 16, 2002

• #2

Whodat said:

Am I the only one who misses this rule?

Click to expand...

Brother! I thought I was the only one! *Breaks down in sobs of joy and relief*

Seriously yes, I do miss them. I've given serious thought to adopting the following house rule:

You determine the speed factor of any weapon--which you apply as a negative modifier to your initiative when using that weapon--as follows:

Take the max damage the weapon can deal, not counting modifiers (like, say, strength). So for a dagger it's 4, a longsword 8, a greatsword 12.

For every size category below medium, subtract 1. For every size category above medium, add 1. So for a dagger, you now have 2, for a longsword 8, for a greatsword 13.

Dive the result in half, round down. For a dagger you have 1, a longsword 4, a greatsword 6.

Subtract the "plus" if the weapon is magic, to a minimum of 0. Natural weapons have a delay of 0.

Congrats. There's your speed factor.

And I realize that this maybe belongs in house rules, but it's a response to a comment here, darn it!!

 

Umbran

Mod Squad

Staff member

Supporter

• Sep 16, 2002

• #3

No, I don't miss them. Sean K Reynolds has put the reasons why speed facotrs are silly for 3E rather well:

http://www.seankreynolds.com/rpgfiles/rants/weaponspeeds.html

 

Z

Zenon

First Post

• Sep 16, 2002

• #4

No, I really don't.

I never liked that a dagger wielder could perforate a polearm wielder due to weapon speed. They never took reach into account.

I guess we kind of did at the beginning of 3E, but along with THAC0, it's another thing I no longer even realize is gone.

[edit - Wow, just checked out the SKR link, looks like he's nailing it for the same reasons!]

 

Last edited: Sep 16, 2002

Psion

Adventurer

• Sep 16, 2002

• #5

I did at first. Now, not so much.

At any rate, I do think weapon speed are okay IF you also take into account reach (there are some ignoramusses on RGFD that violently and irrationally oppose them regardless of how rationally they are approached.) Problem is that once you do that, weapon speed doesn't count for a whole lot and you are adding a whole bunch of detail to keep track of it.

 

ColonelHardisson

What? Me Worry?

• Sep 16, 2002

• #6

Speed factors were in 1e too. Even Gygax didn't use speed factors; he said so on these boards. Go ask him about it on the thread at the top of the page.

I never used them either. Well, we tried 'em once, but nobody thought they added anything to the game.

 

Emiricol

Registered User

• Sep 16, 2002

• #7

no

 

EricNoah

Adventurer

• Sep 16, 2002

• #8

If I were going to do it I would keep it really simple:

Go by size of weapon (T, S, M, L, H, etc.) -- assign it an initiative bonus or penalty. Probably put M at 0, each other category at 2 above or below that. Make special rules for special weapons (maybe nunchuku is a little faster than other weapons its size).

But really, with the way initiative works in 3E, it only helps you in the first round. To me it's not worth the effort.

 

The_Gneech

Explorer

• Sep 16, 2002

• #9

I certainly don't. Turn order is hard enough to keep track of as it is, even with static initiatives. -TG

 

Celebrim

Legend

• Sep 16, 2002

• #10

No, I don't.

What I do miss is first edition style weapon vs. armor bonus factors (and they'd be easier to calculate than even in third edition).

I've put some rules together but never had a chance to use them to see if they were worth the trouble, but in 1st edition they were (IMO) essential if you wanted 1) anything like realism, and 2) people using anything but swords (especially two-handed ones).

I also think pole arms got shafted in third.