Longswords for Halflings in SRD?

[Hypersmurf]

This isn't part of the argument. The initial debate is about small critters using medium weapons, and vice versa.

The debate is about the value of the 3.5 sizing system, and Small<->Medium is a part of that, but so is Small<->Large. When you're talking about a general mechanic, it doesn't help to isolate one small part of it without giving any consideration to the rest.

Do you feel that the halfling with the giant's shortsword should incur no penalty? Some penalty? Be unable to wield the sword at all?

-Hyp.

 

[Storyteller01]

There would be no change- the Hinkels was simply too large for my hands for me to get any leverege, and it easily escaped my grip if I tried to apply any real force. To cut anything with it tougher than butter, I had to use 2 hands. Either someone else had to hold my intended target or I had to use a smaller knife.

Never seen a Hinkels knife. I assumed that it was similar to the usual kitchen knives.

Yes, and I said that it was possible that even with weapons this similar, RW swordsmen might notice and have difficulties with unfamiliar designs. I just don't know for sure.

D&D abstracts things like this to the point of there being no mechanical differences between varied regional designs.

And there's very little mechanical difference between medium weapons and similar small weapons. Same weight, same length. There's actually greater difference in our regional weapons than a Small shortsword vs a Med dagger. Members of one country could learn the difference of anothers weapons and wield it without penalty.

That perception is inaccurate and based upon the abstraction of the D&D system.

No. You have two blades that each weigh two pounds. If they're made of the same material (ie same density), they have the same mass and volume. The distribution may be different, but not by much if they do the same damage, with the same threat range against the same creatures.

Which is why I keep breaking my E and B strings on my guitar, and rarely break others.

But those have distinct weight size and difference in relation to each string. A small weapon and its medium counter part are the same weight, damage, even the same length. The only difference might be in the damage type.

 

[Storyteller01]

The debate is about the value of the 3.5 sizing system, and Small<->Medium is a part of that, but so is Small<->Large. When you're talking about a general mechanic, it doesn't help to isolate one small part of it without giving any consideration to the rest.

Do you feel that the halfling with the giant's shortsword should incur no penalty? Some penalty? Be unable to wield the sword at all?

-Hyp.

No, the original question was why a halfling was using a weapon that was statistally identical to a shortsword (albeit a different damage type) that wasn't called a shortsword. The intent of the debate was to figure out why small characters have to take a -2 to use a medium shortsword.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

alot of people seem to have problems with the hand sizes and how one holds a weapon, so if the grip was remade on the human short sword, would any one still have a problem?

I'd have more than a slight problem with that.

The handle of a sword is based around the tang of the blade- essentially, its skinny butt end- around which is a layer of wood, metal, bone, ivory or other material, finally wrapped by some kind of leather, cloth or rubber for grip, occasionally with wire around that. All of that is topped by the pommel.

You might be able to strip some of the diameter of the grip by shaving off some of the layers of bone, etc., and using less leather on the grip, but the loss of that mass would shift the sword's point of balance towards the point.

Furthermore, you couldn't change the handle's length without cutting into the blade's tang (unless its a "rat-tail" tang). If you're shaving off part of the tang to make the weapon fit a smaller hand, that too would shift the point of balance further out towards the point.

This will, among other things, affect the amount of hand shock you recieve when striking...

Check out this article about (among other things) the effects of tangs and handle size on the operation of swords:
http://www.thearma.org/spotlight/GTA/motions_and_impacts3.htm

Also check this thread out about what happens when your tang is too small for your blade:
http://forums.swordforum.com/showthread.php?threadid=43606&perpage=25&highlight=&pagenumber=1

 

[Hypersmurf]

The intent of the debate was to figure out why small characters have to take a -2 to use a medium shortsword.

Because of the 3.5 weapon sizing system. You can't divorce "Why do Small characters take a -2 to use a Medium weapon?" from "Why does a creature take a -2 per size category difference when using an inappropriately-sized weapon?"

How do you feel about the halfling with the giant's shortsword? No penalty? Some penalty? Not possible?

-Hyp.

 

[Storyteller01]

You can't divorce "Why do Small characters take a -2 to use a Medium weapon?" from "Why does a creature take a -2 per size category difference when using an inappropriately-sized weapon?"

-Hyp.

Yes, you can. It's called pointing out flaws in the system. It's the same reason why people look to the example of a human using a giants dagger in 3.0 and then call the whole system broken.

So, back at you; if the 3.5 system is supposed to represent realistic weapons handling, and we've shown that a small creature can very probably wield a medium one handed weapon with negligable deficiency, why does it have small characters taking a -2 to use them?

Please don't use 'because it's in the system' or something similar. If the system is suppose to represent realistic handling as opposed to being an exaggerated response to a minor problem, why doesn't it do so?

 

[Storyteller01]

I'd have more than a slight problem with that.

The handle of a sword is based around the tang of the blade- essentially, its skinny butt end- around which is a layer of wood, metal, bone, ivory or other material, finally wrapped by some kind of leather, cloth or rubber for grip, occasionally with wire around that. All of that is topped by the pommel.

Not all blades have pommels.

You might be able to strip some of the diameter of the grip by shaving off some of the layers of bone, etc., and using less leather on the grip, but the loss of that mass would shift the sword's point of balance towards the point.

Furthermore, you couldn't change the handle's length without cutting into the blade's tang (unless its a "rat-tail" tang). If you're shaving off part of the tang to make the weapon fit a smaller hand, that too would shift the point of balance further out towards the point.

We've already shown that blades with similar dimensions will have similar tangs. Odds are, you won't be albe to shave much off.

You can't really short the length of the grip, but you can lengthen it. My refirbished katana has a grip about 2 inches longer to help balance the blade.

Spears are essentially knives with long handles. Naganatas are essentially wakizashis with a 5 ft grip.

A nagmaki is a katana with a grip equal length to the blade.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

So, back at you; if the 3.5 system is supposed to represent realistic weapons handling, and we've shown that a small creature can very probably wield a medium one handed weapon with negligable deficiency, why does it have small characters taking a -2 to use them?

1) I haven't seen any proof that "a small creature can very probably wield a medium one handed weapon with negligable deficiency" and consider my own experience with blades to be (anecdotal) evidence to the contrary.

2) -2 doesn't seem to be much of a penalty.

 

[Storyteller01]

1) I haven't seen any proof that "a small creature can very probably wield a medium one handed weapon with negligable deficiency" and consider my own experience with blades to be (anecdotal) evidence to the contrary.

2) -2 doesn't seem to be much of a penalty.

Read the thread all the way through.


A penalty that negates the advantage of a very expensive item (a +2 weapon) , and other items of lesser enchantment is a significant penalty.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Storyteller, I've read the whole thread.

A penalty that offsets the benefit of a +2 magical weapon isn't really significant, despite the item's cost.

Significant penalties would be ones like non-proficiency penalties (-4) or offhand fighting penalties without the right feats & weapons (-6/-10).