Bringing back weapon speed!

[Angcuru]

If there's one thing that's a definite in any version of D&D, it's that the system doesn't come anywhere near to parallelling reality. Which is why D&D runs smoothly.

If you were to add in different rules for every little variable, you would end up with a rules system where you need a scientific calculator to determine whether or not the ogre squashes your head.

The D&D systems sacrifice realism for speed and efficiency.

If you were to compare D&D rules to the rules of reality(physics), D&D is faster and easier to comprehend, while reality is incredibly complicated and very difficult to comprehend.

Bottom line: trying to make D&D more realistic is a mistake. The system is built to make sense and be easy to use, which it does and is. LEAVE IT ALONE!

 

[Ravellion]

I think that Everquests System is a blight on game design. It is disgusting. Halflings by default getting more attacks?!?! Disgusting!

 

[A'koss]

I have a fair bit of weapon knowledge and weapon speeds are something most people who play D&D simply get wrong. A shortsword, longsword, bastard sword and a greatsword weilder who chokes up on the ricasso are all *faster* than a dagger weilder. A small amount of movement at the hilt translates to great speed at the tip.

As it's been pointed out, if you want to model closer to reality - reach is the primary determining factor in who strikes first. IRL, advantages in reach are measured in inches, not feet. So it is better to make rule adjustments from that perspective if you want to model something closer to reality. Everquest... is just plain wacky.

Just my 2 cp.


A'koss.

 

[Tzudralkor]

I have a fair bit of weapon knowledge and weapon speeds are something most people who play D&D simply get wrong. A shortsword, longsword, bastard sword and a greatsword weilder who chokes up on the ricasso are all *faster* than a dagger weilder. A small amount of movement at the hilt translates to great speed at the tip.

this allows the weapon to move faster in a swing, but wouldn't that added momentum make it a little harder to get the next swing going? if i were to use weapon speed rules (probably wont, but anyway) i would probably use something more like the everquest system. i would drop the iterative penalty by one for each size category the weapon was below the character's size, or increase it by one for every size category larger (and maybe make a magic item property making the weapon count as one size smaller.)

 

[Obryn]

this allows the weapon to move faster in a swing, but wouldn't that added momentum make it a little harder to get the next swing going?

Depends - are you stabbing or slashing? If stabbing, the answer is no, not really. If slashing, maybe. It is easier to recover from a hefty swing on a greatsword than on a one-handed sword sometimes due to the greater control allowed by 2-handed wielding.

Besides, you need to give the wielders a little bit of credit and assume they're not making random, unbalancing swings at their opponents...

-O

 

[Fenes 2]

The EQ system sounds quite stupid to me. The way the bonuses to damage stack, the base damage of a weapon loses its significance quickly. The EQ system would make using daggers and equally fast weapons the best course of action for most fighters since they would get more attacks faster and their attacks would hit more often (less of a difference between iterative attacks).

Thank you, but no. Any system that makes the dagger one of the best weapons in a medieval combat is would ruin my suspense of disbelief completely. There is a reason why people used swords and not daggers as soon as they invented them.

 

[A'koss]

this allows the weapon to move faster in a swing, but wouldn't that added momentum make it a little harder to get the next swing going? if i were to use weapon speed rules (probably wont, but anyway) i would probably use something more like the everquest system. i would drop the iterative penalty by one for each size category the weapon was below the character's size, or increase it by one for every size category larger (and maybe make a magic item property making the weapon count as one size smaller.)

You have to understand something about combat, you're not chopping wood here or stabbing away at a door, it's more about quality than the quantity.

IRL, melee combat usually ends with the first wounding hit. You'll have either wounded him in the arm or the leg (leg wounds were the most common in medieval warfare) and then you'd have finished him off (or leave him as a burden for his allies). Also, IRL, a proficient longsword wielder has an enourmous, and I mean enormous, advantage over a dagger wielder. Wtih the reach and speed of your weapon, it's almost impossible to close the gap (unless he throws the dagger). Essentially, he's your bitch. The dagger wielder would have to be *much* better than the sword wielder to have a chance. And if the sword wielder had a heater shield (shields are far better IRL than in D&D) as well, you've probably tripled again the odds in your favor.

Momentum isn't the issue most think it is when you know how to use it. Even a greatsword, the style in which you use it (often employing polearm-techniques) is designed to deliver swift blows. Cuts are short using the momentum of the blade to actually inflict the damage, none of this Conan-stuff you see in the movies.


Cheers,

A'koss.

 

[Anubis]

As someonw with a fair bit of weapons knowledge, I'm gonna be totally honest and (hopefully) end this debate.

Weapon speed is pedantic, pointless, *and unrealistic*. The "speed" of any particular weapon is directly based on the person's proficiency in said weapon. Some people may have a hard time wielding a katana, while masters can wield one faster than most can wield a dagger. Bigger weapons follow this as well. There are masters out there who could wield a greatsword extremely fast, faster than some can wield a dagger. Speed is not weapon-dependent in the least.

 

[Coredump]

Yep, I bow down to your logic. I am sure that will end this debate for all time.

.

 

[Anubis]

Yep, I bow down to your logic. I am sure that will end this debate for all time.

.

Ya' know, you are quite rude. You had earned some respect before in the previous debates, but that's all gone now due to your bash rudeness. At least when I argue and attack, I back up my point. You simply attacked me and contributed nothing to the dicussion. If you got nothing useful to say, just go away.

My statement was not based on logic, it was based on FACT. Ask any weapons expert. Anyone with even rudimetary knowledge of weaponry can tell you that the skill in a particular weapon is all that matters and that weapon type and size makes no difference. The only physical factor that can contribute to a weapon's "speed" is if it's point-heavy, unbalanced from the forge, etc. Those things, however, are issues with the creation of any specific weapon and not types of weapons.

Basically, glitches and mistakes aside, a dagger is as fast as a longsword is as fast as a greatsword if you wanna go with "realism".

Also, I would hope this would end the debate. First, there are absolutely no balance issues from an in-game to use as a basis for weapon speed, so mechanics are not a reason. Second, weapon speed is unrealistic, so there is no realism basis for this debate. What's left? Nothing. With no reason to bring back weapon speed, mechanic nor realistic, then what's the point of the debate?

In other words, you're arguing over absolutely nothing or value.