Anyone else miss weapon speed?

[dren]

lament for weapon speed

Yeah I miss it.

IMHO, it makes more sense that a dagger is faster than a two handed sword, plus, at times it was more dramatic. In many encounters, fighters dropped their swords to wield daggers to ensure a faster initiative. Now, just let the rogue up front (or in back) with a 20+ dex and improved initiative...

I also miss rolling initiative every round. Yes, combat was slower. But a lot less mechanical. Timed hits, happens everytime there are more than 3 foes in battle.

3e is a much better system, but I miss a few things, like weapon speed. (sigh)

 

[Sanackranib]

weapon speed

weapon speeds allowed my spellcasters to usually go 1st when wielding a staff and using 2 hand specialization. ya, I miss it

 

[Wormwood]

Re: lament for weapon speed

In many encounters, fighters dropped their swords to wield daggers to ensure a faster initiative.

In fencing that's called "giving up".

 

[Henry]

7 (init roll) + 5 (weapon speed) -1 (dex mod) = 11. I go on initiative 11.

Only one change - Dexterity did NOT figure into initiative in 1E or 2E in the official rules. It was only used in surprise, not initiative. However, it was a WIDELY used house rule, as was the using of a d10 for initiative instead of a d6 back in the days of 1E.

However, the weapon's "plus" factor DID figure into the weapon speed! Go figure that!

It sometimes surprises many people just how fuzzy the line was between house rules and the actual rules for their individual groups.

 

[BryonD]

Re: lament for weapon speed

IMHO, it makes more sense that a dagger is faster than a two handed sword, plus, at times it was more dramatic. In many encounters, fighters dropped their swords to wield daggers to ensure a faster initiative. Now, just let the rogue up front (or in back) with a 20+ dex and improved initiative...

OK, but then if you use that logic, shouldn't the greatsword weilder get a bonus due to much better reach? Wouldn't the quick motions of the dagger weilder be simply reflex spasms as he dangles on the point of the sword, never having gotten to the other guy?

Point being that length of weapons should cancel out lightness in attack speed. I belive that was the essence of Sean's rant.

Besides, I am betting that if you use a dagger or rapier, you just might have a high DEX. And you also probably have improved init. With these things, you will tedn to go first and the problem is solved. Without them there is not basis for complaint.

 

[MerricB]

Nope, don't miss it at all.

It was an abstraction that generally had one purpose: to make Magic-Users unplayable in melee combat. It didn't make sense, either - combat is continuous; weapon speeds may make sense for the first attack, but after that?

Cheers!

 

[seankreynolds]

Nope, don't miss it. It never made a lot of sense and slowed down the game. Sean Reynolds wrote a piece on this a few years ago, and it's one of the few things I agree with him on.

Speaking of which:

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

 

[Sanackranib]

house rules

It sometimes surprises many people just how fuzzy the line was between house rules and the actual rules for their individual groups.

but the fact that so MANY of us used the same house rules is what led to the changes we now like to call 3e

 

[Thorvald Kviksverd]

Only one change - Dexterity did NOT figure into initiative in 1E or 2E in the official rules. It was only used in surprise, not initiative...

Just a minor point, the Dex adjustment was used when figuring initiative for missile fire.

I actually think the implementation of weapon speeds in 1e was fairly elegant. Leaving aside spellcasting, they only came in to play when both combatants were using weapons and the initiative die rolls were tied--in which case the faster weapon would strike first, and would sometimes gain multiple attacks.

This allowed speed to play a part, without it being overly important.

I also think it is important to use the weapon versus armour type adjustments however; since many of the faster weapons also tend to be poorer at penetrating armour, this helps to balance out their advantages--as does the fact that they also tend to have lower damge potential.

I do something a quite different in my Basic D&D campaign (you can check it out at my website below), but I like the official version when playing AD&D--this after trying many variants over the years.

 

[JacktheRabbit]

Nope, weapon speed was stupid. Sure a dagger is faster than a two handed sword but the two handed sword has a much greater reach.

Which one really matters more?