Mithril

[Umbran]

If it's a function of impulse, the weapon itself would be irrelevant - one could impart about the same impulse on a light weapon as a heavy weapon. Unless it's extreme on either end (low impulse for a 1 pound or 100 pound object), it's irrelevant.

Try to tell that to a baseball player, and you'll probably be laughed at.

I'll say again, over-analysis outside of a classroom is apt to be trouble. And despite that, I'll try some more explanations. Again, I'll ignore the complications of cutting edges...

To a certain degree, you are, in fact, correct. If you picked up a baseball bat, and used it on a human body, for the most part the actual weight of the bat wouldn't matter much in doing damage that body.

However, if you think energy is a real issue, then with a naive analysis, heavy weapons would be right out. Bastoche notes that you should be able to swing a light weapon faster, and the energy varies more strongly with speed than weight. And, while the gravity assist you mention exists, it isn't very strong - it will never add more energy to the strike than you'd get out of dropping it from that height. How heavy will the weapon need to be before that extra energy would be notable?

In more complete analysis, we find the mechanics of muscles and the human body are a bit daft, and defy common sense (and Bastoche) at times. Especially for very highly muscled individuals, the maximum swing speed is not as dependant on the weapon mass as you might think. The individual becomes limited not by how much the muscles can lift, but by limits on how fast muscles contract. Gregor the Mighty can probably swing a smaller object about as fast as a much heavier one, and so it'd behoove him to use the heavier weapon.

Also, I repeat that the damage done is more related to impulse - change in momentum - than it is on energy. And you see, the momentum the thing has got to impart is equal to it's mass times velocity (p=mv). That means that if I can notably increase the mass with only slight decrease in speed (say, by putting the mass at the end of a long handle), my potential damage can increase.

 

[Bastoche]

My point of view about weapon weight vs speed is drawn from my (somewhat lacking) experience in armed martial arts (kenjutsu, iaijutsu and bojutsu) and LARPG.

And like I said twice already, my simple model was an over-simplification of the issue. I only wanted to show that WotC's argument about heavier weapons and mercurial weapons are - for lack of a better word - stupid. Physics can get highly complicated in "real-life" situations. That's the reason why engineers exists. Therefore, WotC should stick to magic and trash their pseudo-physics. It's like their two dimension crap about weapons. I don't remember if it's a 3E or a 2E thing, but I recall of a 2D weapon having it's damage effect changed or something like that.

The most reasonnable and physics-friendly way to treat the same weapon made with different material and to stay as close to realism as possible and yet keep the rule and explanations simple is to rule that all those weapons does the same damage.

It's like if I claimed that the weight change was negligible in the "damage calculations".

And I think that my golf club comparison and the baseball comparison aren't that great either. Crushing a human being surely ain't the same as knocking a ball as far as possible and as straight as possible.

And I don't think my energy analysis is that bad. If I chop someone and my sword stops in the guy, all the energy the sword had is now in the guy. Suppose he didn't move after the blow, then all the kinetic energy contained in the sword at the moment right before the impact is now in the guy. Used to crush him and raise his temperature a little

 

[Artoomis]

Actually, what REALLY happens is that as a weapon gets beyond its "ideal" weight it is capable of dealing more and more damage. It's also true that it won't do as well if it's too light - ususally because it will break.

Assuming you can still swing it. And, as it becomes more awkward to use, your defense goes down as you can't parry as effectively.

Since this gets too compicated to figure our effectively for D&D, the simple answer is usually the best - leave it out!

The rules, as writen, are acceptable, if not entierly realistic. They give options - maybe they should be done better, but, what the heck, at least someone else wrote them up, eh?

 

[Umbran]

My point of view about weapon weight vs speed is drawn from my (somewhat lacking) experience in armed martial arts (kenjutsu, iaijutsu and bojutsu) and LARPG.

And like I said twice already, my simple model was an over-simplification of the issue. I only wanted to show that WotC's argument about heavier weapons and mercurial weapons are - for lack of a better word - stupid. Physics can get highly complicated in "real-life" situations. That's the reason why engineers exists. Therefore, WotC should stick to magic and trash their pseudo-physics.

Um, hold on a second....

You state your own position comes from "(somewhat lacking) experience". Yet you use it to devise an admittedly oversimplifed model. You then use that to criticize someone else for using science when they don't know much, and to call their argument "stupid".

Look at that logic for a moment. Perhaps you want to rethink your position.

 

[Bastoche]

Um, hold on a second....

You state your own position comes from "(somewhat lacking) experience". Yet you use it to devise an admittedly oversimplifed model. You then use that to criticize someone else for using science when they don't know much, and to call their argument "stupid".

Look at that logic for a moment. Perhaps you want to rethink your position.

You missed my point entirely.

I will reexplain again.

WotC writes in MoF that heavy weapon deals higher damage because they are heavier. The physics behind this statement seems to be false to me.

Analysing the damage evolution as a function of weight is highly complicated, so complicated that using physics as an argument for a (useless) rule is at best innapropriate.

My model no matter how simple points out issues about the MoF's argument. My small experience in armed combat drives me to believe that weapons that are too heavy will deal less damage, and I have a model that proves this point.

If a fantasy role-playing game want to create weapon that deals better damage, instead of using tavern physics, they should use magic. And it's already being done. Therefore, I conclude that no matter the weigth, weapons should always deal the same damage.

Instead of uselessly bashing my model, why don't you tell us if you agree with the MoF's rule about heavy weapons ? If you think that this rule is as silly as I think it is, then we'll be over with that pointless arguing right ? If not, then I either ask you to demonstrate to me how and why that rule makes any sense or I'll just shut up.