Is it just me or do any of you think Speed Factor on weapons should be brought back?

[Saeviomagy]

Frankly, there is no problem with "this is the best weapon and everyone uses it".

People use daggers. People who are built to use daggers, typically - ie a high dex character who wants a combined thrown/melee weapon.

People use shortswords - if you want to make someone who takes the best advantage of fighting with a sword and a board, then a shortsword is your best weapon (so you can use a large shield and have a shortsword as your light weapon).

People use spears for the thrown/melee weapon aspect, as well as that sweet x2 damage vs a charge.

People use greatclubs because they're the only blunt 2h weapon. People use greataxes because they like having a huge critical when they get lucky. People use falchions because they want to crit a lot. People use glaives, guisarmes and ranseurs because they want reach, and want more damage/trip ability/disarm ability.

"everyone uses a greatsword" is NOT a problem with the mechanics of the game.

It's a problem with peoples imagination - usually a new player will go for greatsword or greataxe or sword and board, just because that's what comes into their head when they think "fighter" or "barbarian".

No amount of stupidly complex rules which really add nothing to the game is going to change that.

All it's going to do is promote arguements containing statements like:

"when I wielded an X, I was teh Ubarr! They should have grate spid valoos!"

 

[craftyrat]

One way to encourage more varied weapon use, or to reward players with non-ideal weapons, is with prestige classes (ie: invisible blade for that dagger wielder, the older lasher, the various bow-using prestige classes). I prefer this to adding another level of complexity.

craftyrat

 

[D+1]

Besides character flair and in-game ease of concealability there is absolutely NO reason to use the lowly dagger.

And...? That statement is it's own best response - besides roleplaying reasons the lowly dagger is a LOWLY weapon and should not commonly be used for truly martial purposes.

Then it struck me, Speed Factors need to be brought back. In 2E the reason you'd use a dagger is because it was the fastest weapon out there.

And making it the fastest weapon out there was illogical - and at the same time pointless. Take a 10 round combat between a greatsword user and a dagger user. Each attacks once a round. If the dagger goes first EVERY round, after 10 rounds each fighter has attacked... 10 times. If the greatsword goes first EVERY round, after 10 rounds each fighter has attacked... 10 times. First is relevant only in the first round of a fight. The remainder only need deal with who goes next. "Speed" of a weapon is meaningless unless directly mitigated by weapon reach - and damned near EVERYTHING is going to have greater practical reach than a dagger making it the poorest, least optimal choice even if it WERE "faster".

Some people say that it overly complicates initiative but come on... everyone has the initiative bonuses worked out in advance of the game.

You misunderstand. It overly complicates initiative in that it is a shockingly IRRELEVANT statistic regarding a weapons usefulness in combat.

Bringing back weapon speed would breath new life into the lesser used, low-damage dealing weapons. Anyone agree?

No. Because it assumes that the LESSER used, LOW-damage dealing weapons SHOULD be equal in usefulness in the game to blatantly SUPERIOR weapons. IF you want to proceed on that kind of assumption then you get what you deserve.

 

[Krieg]

I would say no, because of two reasons:

1) Speed Factors never made sense, because Zweihanders were not cumbersome weapons in history;

So it's a bad idea merely because it was implemented poorly in previous editions?

As has already been mentioned, if you are going to institute weapon speeds you also need to institute more granular reach/weapon length rules.

FWIW The Everquest D20 book does include a weapon speed variant that doesn't entirely suck.

 

[Frostmarrow]

This is the house rules forum and here we discuss house rules or would be house rules. That is until the rules lawyers decides to step in and lay the smack down because they not only refuse to change anything in their own game they also loathe the idea that anyone else does. Come on, I said let's PRETEND.

This thread is dead.

 

[Tuzenbach]

So I suddenly move faster if I pick up and wield a dagger vs. not attacking?

With these house rules what's the speed factor for spell casting? Using a shortbow, a longbow, a light crossbow, a sling? Opening a door? Opening a heavy door?

As has been said, this just adds a layer of complication.

And I agree with Aaron2, I think weapon length is a much more important factor than weapon "speed".

I just thought of something else, weapons really don't have speed all on their own. Their wielder's generate the speed. I'm sure Conan can swing a greatsword faster than Mr. Burns from "The Simpsons" . . .

Point taken:

Unarmed = +10 initiative
Light = +5
Medium = +0
Heavy = -5

 

[Khaalis]

FWIW The Everquest D20 book does include a weapon speed variant that doesn't entirely suck.

I have mulled this over many times myself but always come back to the fact that weapon speed doesnt account for weapon reach nor weapon use skill, which makes the idea too arbitrary.

The real issue is that the entire concept is a bit arbitrary to begin with. Yes a weapon like a great sword is a hulking weapon. However in the hands of a skilled user it is just as "viable" in combat as any other weapon used by a proficient user. It is really quite difficult to say that any one weapon is "faster" than another. However...if we set realism asside, and were to insist on weapon speed adjestments, I would agree to using the Iteration modifiers presented by EQ. I disgree with using initiative modifiers because initiative has nothing to do with weapon use, it is the characters reaction time and reflexes.

The problem is how to assign the weapon speeds. Is it based on Weapon class? Weight? Or just picked randomly based on what someone thinks should be faster?

Even though a Trident is a 4 lb. One-Handed weapon, I would disgree that it would be the same ease of use (speed) as a Longsword (also a 4lb. One-Handed weapon). On the other hand, as a trained staff user myself, I know that the staff style is a very fast fighting style even though it is a 4 lb. Two-Handed weapon.

However, back to the original topic, the trident and q-staff have reach on the longsword. So how would these be classified?

Personally I would just prefer to see one or two new feats something along the lines of this.

WEAPON SPEED [GENERAL]
Choose one type of weapon for which you have already selected the Weapon Focus feat. You can also choose unarmed strike or grapple as your weapon for purposes of this feat. You are faster than normal when using this weapon.
Prerequisites: Proficiency with selected weapon, Weapon Focus with selected weapon, base attack bonus +8
Benefit: Your iterated attacks in a full attack with this weapon increase in speed from -5 to -4 (as a Monk's unarmed strikes). Thus at base attack bonus +9 your iterated attacks increase from the standard +9/+4 to +9/+5/+1 with this weapon.
Special: You can gain this feat multiple times. Its effects do not stack. Each time you take the feat, it applies to a new type of weapon.
.....A fighter may select Weapon Speed as one of his fighter bonus feats.


GREATER WEAPON SPEED [GENERAL]
Choose one type of weapon for which you have already selected the Weapon Speed feat. You can also choose unarmed strike or grapple as your weapon for purposes of this feat.
Prerequisites: Proficiency with selected weapon, Weapon Focus with selected weapon, Greater Weapon Focus with selected weapon, Weapon Speed with the selected weapon, Fighter level 12
Benefit: Your iterated attacks in a full attack with this weapon increase in speed from -4 to -3. Thus at base attack bonus +12 your iterated attacks increase from the standard +12/+7/+2 to +12/+9/+6/+3 with this weapon.
Special: You can gain this feat multiple times. Its effects do not stack. Each time you take the feat, it applies to a new type of weapon.
.....A fighter must have Greater Weapon Focus with a given weapon to gain the Greater Weapon Speed feat for that weapon.
.....A fighter may select Greater Weapon Speed as one of his fighter bonus feats.


JMHOs and random thoughts.

 

[Aaron2]

However...if we set realism asside, and were to insist on weapon speed adjestments, I would agree to using the Iteration modifiers presented by EQ.

The problem with using modifying the number of interative attacks is that those attacks do not have to be with the same weapon. If I grapple an opponent and then attack him with my dagger, do my number of iterative attacks change mid-round?

Aaron

 

[Wonko the Sane]

Sean K Reynold's rant on this very subject

Very cogent arguments as to why the concept of weapon speeds is not one that belongs in the game.

 

[Khaalis]

The problem with using modifying the number of interative attacks is that those attacks do not have to be with the same weapon. If I grapple an opponent and then attack him with my dagger, do my number of iterative attacks change mid-round? Aaron

Even if you could grapple and attack with the dagger in the same round, no you wouldnt be using iteration with the dagger because you would only be getting a partial action with the dagger not a full attack. However, this is exactly why I like the feat idea better. Clarifies such issues right up front.