D&D 5E Older editions weapon damage size modifiers--anyone remember why?

[Mouseferatu]

I was recently reminded of the fact that, in 1E and 2E, weapons did different amounts of damage based on whether the target was Medium or smaller, vs. Large or larger.

Does anyone happen to know/recall why that was done? I'm interested on whether Gygax et al. ever gave solid reasons for it--both on a mechanical level and on an "in world" level. I don't remember seeing any such reasons myself, but my knowledge of older editions isn't encyclopedic.

 

[Zardnaar]

It was to make them better IIRC. two handed swords for example were not very good (1d8 vs 1d10) but aginast larger foes they deal 3d6. Some weapons were just trash though like crossbows.

 

[flametitan]

I've got sup I Greyhawk; all it has to say on the matter is that it is an option for expanding the combat system presented in Men & Magic (OD&D book I)

The reason variable weapon damage exists at all was because when everything did 1d6 damage, Gygax's players were canny enough to stick with Iron spikes, the cheapest of the weapons. Presumably Weapon damage based on size was added on top of variable weapon damage dice in order to assist even further with making certain weapon choices seem more logical and thematic, rather than purely pragmatic.

 

[CapnZapp]

In short: it was a kludge, and I do not recommend you add it back.

Much easier to do the same damage against every opponent, and just make larger opponents have inherently more hit points than smaller ones.

 

[Mouseferatu]

In short: it was a kludge, and I do not recommend you add it back.

Oh, I've no intention of adding it back. I just found myself curious if there had ever been a reason/justification given for it, especially any sort of in-character/in-continuity one.

 

[Zardnaar]

I would not add it back but when I play AD&D I actually enjoy it as we use weapon speeds. We have thieves using longswords again. Maces, daggers, longswords, shortswords, bastard swords, maces, polearms, spears, daggers, darts get used.

5E does tend to slew heavily towards 3 or 4 weapons (greatswords, rapiers, longbows, longsword)+ whatever feat you picked.

Seeing monks use spears and Barbarians using greataxes is sort of interesting though.

 

[fjw70]

I thought it was that some weapons would be able to more easily dig into larger opponents than other weapons. So a long sword hit a larger area and dealt more damage but a dagger would be like a pinprick to a giant so it dealt less. Been ages since I've looked at that though so I could easily be wrong.

I seem to remember reasoning along these lines. Don't know from where however.

 

[delericho]

I thought it was that some weapons would be able to more easily dig into larger opponents than other weapons. So a long sword hit a larger area and dealt more damage but a dagger would be like a pinprick to a giant so it dealt less.

That was my memory too. Maybe it's in the "Arms & Equipment Guide", or something?

As a game construct, it's probably to try to help differentiate weapons. Especially with the attack modifiers vs different armour types being relegated to an optional rule in 2nd Ed.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

It was to make them better IIRC. two handed swords for example were not very good (1d8 vs 1d10) but aginast larger foes they deal 3d6. Some weapons were just trash though like crossbows.

Not always better. Daggers, knives, and broadswords dealt decreased damage to large foes.

I assume this was done because the increased verisimilitude appealed to the wargamers who played with Gygax--just as the AC-by-weapon-type tables did. If you know medieval weapons well enough to know that a lucerne hammer is going to be particularly effective against chain mail, and that a little dagger doesn't have much chance of deeply wounding a rhino or a grizzly bear, it might be fun for the game you play to acknowledge that.

 

[AaronOfBarbaria]

The reasoning I thought of as a youth when reading the weapon tables in the 2nd edition PHB was simple; to create a "right kind of weapon for the job" situation. Big weapons are best for big enemies, but smaller weapons work fine for smaller enemies.

Though later 2nd edition sort of turned that around on me by having the optional critical tables make bigger weapons better for critical hits no matter what sort of enemy you were facing, but especially if the monster was a smaller size category than your weapon.