War Pick; ?d8

[Khaim]

Yeah, I heard that too. It makes me worry about halflings - they really shouldn't be anywhere near as strong as a human. They need a serious strength penalty, but bonuses in other areas to balance that.

Why? I mean, sure, in past editions halflings had a strength penalty. But I don't see any reason that they must have such a penalty.

 

[Pazu]

My guesses on this statblock:

Prof (Proficient); characters will get a plus to bab if they are proficient in the pick category.

Property, versatile; I believe this will give the weapon extra uses, possibly outside of combat, like door bashing.

I am liking that they are now differentiating weapons more. Character will have a greater range of tools, each suiting their personal fighting style.

I'm hoping that "versatile" means that you can switch damage types without penalty; i.e. you could do piercing damage with the sharp end of the pick, or bludgeoning damage with the blunt end. 3e seemed unnecessarily strict in that respect (short swords were only piercing? why?)

Of course, I don't think we've actually seen anything about weapon damage types yet, have we?

 

[Thornir Alekeg]

I'm think the d8 is an indication of type, not number. My prediction is that it will increase by level, and perhaps class as well. One thought I had was Heroic PCs roll one die, Paragon roll 2 and Epic roll 3, but my gut says it will be faster than that.

My understanding is that there will be a significant static bonus to damage that will go up with level to replace the iterative attacks and reduce the requirement for magic weapon bonuses. If the d8 does not increase at all with level, then by the time a PC reaches Epic levels, the variability from the die roll becomes completely insignificant and maxing out the roll of 1d8 with a crit is just not very different or exciting.

 

[Howndawg]

I am more curious about what a "versatile" weapon is, myself.

My guess is that it means it can be used one handed with a shield or two handed to do more damage. Hmmm... dope smoking idea, maybe it does 1d8 one handed and 2d8 two handed?

 

[DogBackward]

Yeah, I heard that too. It makes me worry about halflings - they really shouldn't be anywhere near as strong as a human. They need a serious strength penalty, but bonuses in other areas to balance that.

I assume that halflings will still have that -4 (-5 if they stick with SWSE 1/2/5/10 progression style) penalty to most Strength-related things. So, really, that covers the whole "they're smaller, so less strong" aspect. Which means that a Strength penalty wouldn't be neccessary, and we could still have all races at a net positive.

 

[rkanodia]

Halflings are 4' tall in 4E, putting them just inside the Medium size category, meaning they carry no size penalty to strength. Also, R&C seems to indicate that PC races will have only bonuses, not penalties. That's where all of the complaints about 'halflings as strong as humans' are coming from. Me, I personally don't care either way.

Regarding the 'Prof' number, I am also liking the concept of 'attack bonus for a proficient user'. Not only would it create a distinction between 'powerful and clumsy' vs 'weak but accurate' weapons in regards to player choice, it would also mean that, all things being equal, a character who has to choose between different weapons which he is non-proficient in would be strongly inclined to grab the biggest, heaviest damn thing he can and start whacking.

 

[A'koss]

I also think it could very well as simple as Weapon Proficiency "Points" required to become proficient in the weapon. You spend 2 points to become proficient in that specific pick or X to become proficient in the entire "pick" group.

 

[Satori]

In my current game, I'm using a different model for proficiencies, using my generic weapon thingy. Instead of this huge list of weapons, I just use Light, One-Handed, Two-Handed, Projectile and Thrown, with each having their damage die, and damage type determining critial threat range and multiplier. Anyone can use any weapon; they use the stats, and decide what it looks like. The point, though, is that I have anyone with simple weapon proficiency dealing 1 die of damage with all weapons, and those with martial proficiency dealing 2 dice.

Semi-unrelated...

...but I love that idea.

 

[DogBackward]

Halflings are 4' tall in 4E, putting them just inside the Medium size category, meaning they carry no size penalty to strength.

I assume you're taking this from the dwarf race, them being 4' tall and Medium? That sounds close, but you have to realize that dwarves are generally almost as wide as they are tall (classically), and even D&D dwarves are very bulky, which gives them their medium size. Halflings, on the other hand, are nowhere near as big around as dwarves, and though I can't recall specifics, there are a few small races in 3.0 and 3.5 that are able to be about 4ft tal; I'm pretty sure the gnome is one of theml. So I think they'll stay small, and they'll use the -4/-5 size penalty to represent a halfling's lower overall brawnyness.

Some stuff...

Semi-unrelated...

...but I love that idea.

Thanks. It's a pretty simple thing, really...

Light Weapon; 1d4 damage
One-Handed Weapon; 1d6 damage
Two-Handed Weapon; 1d8 damage
Thrown Weapon; 1d4 damage
Projectile Weapon; 1d6 damage

Bludgeoning Weapon; 20/x2 Crit, +1 size to damage die (1d6 to 1d8, etc...)
Piercing Weapon; 20/x3 crit
Slashing Weapon; 19-20/x2 crit

And each Martial weapon gains 1 Weapon Point, which can be spent on various weapon abilities (such as Reach, Can be used to Trip, +1 size to damage die, +1 crit threat, Double Weapon, and so on...). Finally, a Masterwork Weapon has extra WP's, and has a cost of Total extra WP squared, x300g (max +5 WP).

 

[Gort]

Why? I mean, sure, in past editions halflings had a strength penalty. But I don't see any reason that they must have such a penalty.

Common sense. They're tiny and aren't built out of hydraulic presses. The tiny size of their muscles means they should be weaker than races with human-size muscles. The same reason housecats should have lower strength than humans.

To be honest, I think they're pushing it with elves having the same strength as humans, when on average they're about 100 pounds. (considerably lighter than the average modern human, who come in at 175 pounds, but I suppose you could shave some of that off for a medieval human)

If you were at an arm-wrestling match (or any test of strength, really), and a 65-pound, four foot tall guy was squaring up to two six-footers, one a six-foot shrimptoast of 100 pounds and the other a beefcake of 150, you wouldn't think they were equally likely to win when you were placing your bet.