Longswords for Halflings in SRD?

[Sledge]

This thread is confusing me. Halflings are not as strong as humans. Where did that come from? Average human light load is 33 lb while the heavy is 100. Average halfling light load is 19.5 lb and a heavy of 60. Of course a race without a STR penalty will be better off at 25 and 75, aka 75%.
Did anyone else look at that "wakizashi" and think it looked awfully small? Rather than use non-statted weapons, why not compare some western style swords and see how they fit in little hands?

 

[Delta]

I prefer the 3.0 rules. The "grip realism" argument is not worth the effort.

 

[Storyteller01]

Go to a toystore and find those toy swords that are made for kids.

As an adult, grip one. It will *not* fit comfortably in the hand. The grip is thinner, the pommel scrapes against the bottom of the hand because the grip is shorter, etc. All in all, it's not very comfortable to wield. It would even be harder to wield if you were wearing gauntlets or thick gloves. Your whole hand might not even be able to grip the weapon. That would be a distraction in combat.

Same thing if you pick up toy guns designed for younger kids. Again, it's hard to your hand on the whole grip. That would affect accuracy as well.

Rethink that. The toy isn't made for actual combat.


Look to the katana again. Schools teach a battlefield grip that looks similar to a baseball grip. Both hands are close to the tsuba (hand guard). Why do they do that, you ask? I'll tell you!!

The tang of a katana is actually too short for the weapon to be used with one hand at either end of the grip (which, high school physics will show, is the grip that provides the most power in a strike. It provides greater leverage and speed.). If they hit armor, the leverage will snap the handle where the tang ends.

Well, if they can skimp in this regard, why can't they skimp on the metal along the other two dimensions of the tang? What the heck, I'll tell you this as well...

Skimping along the other two dimensions means that the blade won't handle the stress of a strike where the blade and tang meet . A broken handle can be replaced; a broken blade will have to be resmelted or reshaped. You can't just re-attach the tang.

As to the question about small critters being as strong as medium critters, think of strength on two levels. There's the constant carrying rate infleunced by endurance. Then there's the quick bursts that can be attained, like that of a punch.

A human and a halfling both strike with the same power in combat, as represented by their identical strength bonuses (a 14 str gives a +2 to damage regardless of size).


Now, if the human weapons tangs are at the bare minimum to be combat effective, why are small creatures weapons grips (which are built around the tang) going to be any smaller?


As for toy guns, have you seen the derringer .22 caliber pistols? They don't fit comfortably in your hand, but it's built for a medium creature. Do they take penalties for using it?

 

[Storyteller01]

This thread is confusing me. Halflings are not as strong as humans. Where did that come from? Average human light load is 33 lb while the heavy is 100. Average halfling light load is 19.5 lb and a heavy of 60. Of course a race without a STR penalty will be better off at 25 and 75, aka 75%.
Did anyone else look at that "wakizashi" and think it looked awfully small? Rather than use non-statted weapons, why not compare some western style swords and see how they fit in little hands?

Look at this video. Third one from the bottom:

http://xo.typepad.com/blog/2005/12/14/index.html

We established earlier that a chimpanzee qualifies as a small creature. Per the video, it's definitely as strong as a human in combat, even though it can't carry as much.

While a halfling or other small creature can't carry as much, they can hit just as hard with a weapon, represented by the fact that they gain the same damage bonuses as humans with equivalent strength.

As for using western weapons, you'll run into the same problems. A roman gladius and european short blade (IE: big knife) was made to fit hands of similar size.

 

[Hypersmurf]

As for using western weapons, you'll run into the same problems. A roman gladius and european short blade (IE: big knife) was made to fit hands of similar size.

Let's take a rapier built for a halfling.

Would you contend that the human should take no penalty in using this weapon?

-Hyp.

 

[Storyteller01]

Let's take a rapier built for a halfling.

Would you contend that the human should take no penalty in using this weapon?

-Hyp.

No, that's a picture of a medium weapon minimized to half scale. The rapier is also not a small weapon for humans, as was the original arguement.


While I'll admit a human couldn't use THAT weapon without penalty, how about we use the longsword example given by the OP.

 

[Hypersmurf]

No, that's a picture of a medium weapon minimized to half scale.

But the principle illustrated is sound - even if details of blade and tang are imperfect, the human cannot fit his hand into a halfling-sized guard.

The rapier is also not a small weapon for humans, as was the original arguement.

It's a one-handed weapon for a halfling. The human shortsword is a one-handed weapon for a halfling. If the halfling can use a human light weapon with no problem, the situation should be reversible, right?

While I'll admit a human couldn't use THAT weapon without penalty, how about we use the longsword example given by the OP.

But this is my point.

For some weapons, a change in size will necessitate a penalty for an inappropriately-sized wielder. For others, perhaps that penalty is negligible. But rather than having a complicated system where we have to say "A shortsword has no penalty; a rapier has a penalty; an Ogre's large longsword has no penalty, but a Fire Giant's large longsword does; etc, etc", we've taken the "DM's friend" concept. Imperfect circumstances? -2 penalty.

The -2 penalty is a d20 staple, and I see it as a perfectly elegant solution.

And for those who disagree, they even included the variant rule where a small longsword and a medium shortsword are the same weapon, so where's the problem!?

-Hyp.

 

[Ranger REG]

While I'll admit a human couldn't use THAT weapon without penalty, how about we use the longsword example given by the OP.

Picture the posted rapier above without the knuckle guard and the "cup" on the crosspiece.

 

[Storyteller01]

But this is my point.

For some weapons, a change in size will necessitate a penalty for an inappropriately-sized wielder. For others, perhaps that penalty is negligible. But rather than having a complicated system where we have to say "A shortsword has no penalty; a rapier has a penalty; an Ogre's large longsword has no penalty, but a Fire Giant's large longsword does; etc, etc", we've taken the "DM's friend" concept. Imperfect circumstances? -2 penalty.

The -2 penalty is a d20 staple, and I see it as a perfectly elegant solution.

And for those who disagree, they even included the variant rule where a small longsword and a medium shortsword are the same weapon, so where's the problem!?

-Hyp.

We do. As it stands, I don't see it as an elegant solution. It adds another layer of math that most players ignore or are forced to go out of their way to negate. If the previous system were as broken as one would be led to believe, original design team members wouldn't have used a nearly identical system in AU/AE. My opinion though.

 

[Storyteller01]

Picture the posted rapier above without the knuckle guard and the "cup" on the crosspiece.

It would be better to not 'picture' anything. Provide numbers or effective evidence.


What would a judge say if you walked into court saying 'imagine his finger on the trigger' without any other proof?