Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Herremann the Wise" data-source="post: 5918218" data-attributes="member: 11300">I like the idea behind weapon speeds but I believe that they are muddling two different concepts into one:* When can my character act* How well can my character reactThe classic argument against weapon speed values is that the longspear/bastard sword wielder should get first crack at the dagger wielder (due to reach) but as the weapon is a "slower" weapon, this is not going to happen. As well, cyclic initiative does not gel as well with weapon speed numbers compared to the old static initiative round structure that once housed weapon speeds. Essentially, you have two things competing here (how quickly can a combatant act, and how quickly can they react) but under the single definition of weapon speed.I would prefer that the "speedy" dagger wielder is represented by how well they can react to things, such as opportunity attacks or quick attacks that may be triggered by an opponent missing or some such (allowing the dagger wielder to get in close). What would be great is if characters had a number of swift actions up their sleeve (between 1 and at high levels 4) as well as a Major action and a Minor action. The dagger user can use each of their swift actions to make these reactionary attacks while the guy with the greataxe is NOT going to be using a swift action to react (needing to use their single minor action to perform an opportunity attack). He might have got the first swing in but he's not going to be reacting with a huge chunk of metal like how the zippy dagger wielder can.I would leave initiative to determine who gets to act first and use swift actions in a round to model how well a character can react (with high speed weapons getting to use swift actions for attacks, while slower weapons do not). Certainly something for an advanced module rather than the core but heh. That's my take anyway.Best RegardsHerremann the Wise</blockquote>

Verification