Proposal for Weapon Speed Factors

[redkobold]

I have been thinking on weapon speed factors. That term may be loaded and carry too much baggage. I agree with Sean Reynolds rant:
http://www.seankreynolds.com/rpgfiles/rants/weaponspeeds.html

However it still seems to me that there could be a mechanism to differentiate how a weapon handles in terms of how quickly it can strike. Here is a different approach that how Sean tried to implement rules for speed factors.

Premise (Fluff):
There are simple and martial weapons.

Simple weapons are not complex mechanically or physically and are typically non-military common-use objects slightly modified or adapted for combat and require little training to use.

Martial weapons are more ergonomically developed, are physically more complex, and require extended use and practice to gain proficiency in their use. Often, (with many notable exceptions) they are single use and designed specifically for warfare.

Exotic weapons are very specialized weapons often with requiring complex maneuvers and manipulation to employ for combat.

Melee weapons are further broken down into light and 2-handed (2H henceforth).

From this I have decided that light weapons are governed more by coordination and speed so Dexterity is their governing or prime attribute.

2H weapons are heavier and although requiring coordination, primarily require a large amount of physical strength to effectively and speedily control.

Proposal (Crunch):

Simple, Light weapons may be used to strike faster at the expense of damage. For each +1 initiative taken the attacker takes, apply –1 damage to a successful hit.

Martial, Light weapons may be used to strike faster at the expense of damage. For each +2 initiative taken the attacker takes, apply –1 damage to a successful hit.
Exotic, Light weapons: I have skipped these for now but I think special rules for each weapon may be appropriate.

Either could be stacked for a cumulative effect but is limited by their Dexterity. The maximum initiative bonus an attacker may take is equal to their Dexterity modifier.
Monks may use their Wisdom modifier in lieu of their Dexterity modifier.

Simple, 2H weapons can deliver a more deadly strike that takes longer to execute. For each +1 damage attempted apply –2 initiative.

Martial, 2H weapons can deliver a more deadly strike that takes longer to execute. For each +1 damage attempted apply –1 initiative.

Exotic, 2H weapons: I have skipped these for now but I think special rules for each weapon may be appropriate.

Either could be stacked for a cumulative effect but is limited by their Strength. The maximum damage bonus an attacker may take is equal to their Strength modifier. The extra ½ Strength bonus for employing a weapon two handed does not apply to this.
Monks may use their Wisdom modifier in lieu of their Strength modifier.

Implementation:
There are a number of ways characters could be allowed these options.

Using these options would require the character announce it at the start of a round so that the referee could note their move up or down in the initiative count.

Most Open: Any character can use these options.

More Restrictive: The character must have the Simple Weapon Proficiency feat. This will allow the character to use these options with all simple weapons. Note that all characters except for druids, monks, rogues, and wizards are automatically proficient with all simple weapons. They need not select this feat.

More Restrictive: The character must have the Martial Weapon Proficiency feat. Taking this feat only allows the selection of one specific martial weapon not all martial weapons. Note that barbarians, fighters, paladins, and rangers are proficient with all martial weapons. They need not select this feat. A cleric who chooses the War domain automatically gains the Martial Weapon Proficiency feat related to his deity’s favored weapon as a bonus feat, if the weapon is a martial one. He need not select it.

Most Restrictive: The character must have the Weapon Finesse feat or Weapon Specialization feat and these options are added features of these feats.

Also, perhaps it would take a full round attack to use the weapon in this manner although multiple attacks could still be made with or without these options.

More Options:
A feat could expand these options allowing other Ability score modifiers like Intelligence, Charisma, or Wisdom to effect the limits.
A feat could also increase the bonus on initiative or damage (as appropriate) and reduce the penalties.
Perhaps the bonuses could be anchored to BAB and increase with the character over time.
Special magic weapons could allow a character to use these options in some form.

Now for comments, questions, and proposed revisions. Cut loose!

 

[Nifft]

Interesting, but most useful for those you might not be intending to help: Rogues.

Consider the TWF Rogue with a pair of shortswords. Surprise round, he charges a foe (or springs out of hiding, or whatever), and gets in one strike with some Sneak Attack dice.

Normally, he'd be in grave danger at this point. His friends are behind him, and he's got to kill the big lumbering monster before it stops being flat-footed. So, initiative roll is a very tense two seconds, and the monster has the opportunity to kill the Rogue. (This scenario is what keeps Rogues from doing the "charge-out-alone" thing too often.)

Now, with your rules, the Rogue can raise his initiative signfiicantly, becasue he does not care about weapon damage. He just needs to strike first to get his handfull of Sneak Attack dice, twice.

Consider this case well. Do you want to benefit the Rogue so much?

(What if you subtract from Attack roll instead of from Damage? Will this make up the difference, or is Flat-Footed just too easy to hit? Depends on the target, but it would seem to be more balanced...)

-- N

 

[redkobold]

Good thoughts. Perhaps requiring the martial or simple weapon proficiency feat as I mentioned would limit this a little to fighter and similar types.

Subtracting from the attack roll may make sense also since it is a d20 roll like initiative rather than the variable d4, d6, d8, etc. for weapons. A nicer ratio could be established with the init to attack roll.

Your suggestions would make these options very compatible with D&D's AC being a function of what it takes to cause damage (that problem with heavy armor making you harder to hit rather than harder to damage).

So...
Light weapons could be used faster but with slightly less accuracy and possibility of causing damage.

Heavy 2H weapons could be used slower but with more possibility of hitting/causing damage.

I'll thing on it more tonight but I like it.

 

[glass]

With your system, you could end up with a situation where a character can drop his greatsword, quickdraw a pair of shortswords, and attack with them quicker than he can attack with the greatsword.

A slightly contrived example, possibly, but it does illustrate the problem with mucking about with iniative after it has been rolled.


glass.

 

[Angel Tarragon]

This is definetely a throwback to second edition. And I would not be too happy if it made a comeback in any future editions.

 

[Aaron2]

With your system, you could end up with a situation where a character can drop his greatsword, quickdraw a pair of shortswords, and attack with them quicker than he can attack with the greatsword.

Or dropping your greatsword, drawing daggers in order to run away sooner.

Or wizards with daggers casting before wizards with staffs.

.....

These examples may be contrived, but I have yet to see a weapon speed rule set that can deal with them. Even limiting the Init bonus to people actually fighting has problems. Consider the following: You have two rogues standing next to each other, one wishes to charge an enemy the other wishes to flee. Why should wielding a light weapon make one character move before the other?


Aaron

 

[palleomortis]

I think it makes sense, even with the wiz. with the dagger and the wiz. with the staff. YOU pick up a greatsword and swing it, then grab some short swords and swing them.

That or try to complete a complex hand movement with a dagger in your hand compared to a staff. Another thing, is you might just add to the number of attacks the guy gets. Maybe like one extra every other turn or somthing.

But then again you can always "muck around with the inititive"(TOTALLY spelled wrong*he he*) by like one for the weapon he decides to draw.

 

[Aaron2]

That or try to complete a complex hand movement with a dagger in your hand compared to a staff.

Your casting your spells with the other, empty hand. You can't cast spells with somatic components without at least one empty hand.

But then again you can always "muck around with the inititive"(TOTALLY spelled wrong*he he*) by like one for the weapon he decides to draw.

But then your initiative changes after you have started your action. How's that supposed to work?


I few years ago I did a test with some wasters (weighted wooden swords). I found I was actually able to make forcefull blows faster with a two-handed swords than either a one-handed sword or a pencil (substituting for a dagger). You can try at home with a plastic lightsaber. By using both hands, you can swing the blade around quickly because your are moving the hilt at two different points just by moving your forearms.. Wielding the sword with one hand requires you to move your entire arm to generate a decent force. With a dagger, (assuming your opponent is about 3' away) you need to move your entire arm and upper body to strike with any power at all. Stand next to a tree and try it for yourself; you'll find you are suddenly tempted to give greatsword wielders an initiative bonus!

However, if you are right next to something, a dagger is superior but that is grappling which is an entirely different situation and one where daggers rule in the RAW.


Aaron

 

[Storyteller01]

I think it makes sense, even with the wiz. with the dagger and the wiz. with the staff. YOU pick up a greatsword and swing it, then grab some short swords and swing them.

That or try to complete a complex hand movement with a dagger in your hand compared to a staff. Another thing, is you might just add to the number of attacks the guy gets. Maybe like one extra every other turn or somthing.

But then again you can always "muck around with the inititive"(TOTALLY spelled wrong*he he*) by like one for the weapon he decides to draw.

But weapons with shorter ranges aren't nessecarily faster. They DO require a more aggressive fighting style, especially against weapons with a longer reach (like the staff). Aggressive tactics can be mistaken for speed.

In a situation of daggers against longer weapons, you won't get more attacks; you're too busy getting out of reach after the first one! You wouldn't be the first attack either: Going through the defenses of someone with reach means you've opened yourself. Guess whose getting attacked first.

Personally, weapons speed shouldn't be an issue. Those fighting against opponents with faster weapons will be using tactics that lower or negate that advantage, just as attackers fighting with daggers will be attempting to negate another's reach advantage (I'm talking about longswords and rapiers here, not weapons with Reach as defined by the PHB ).

Just leave it to the character's skill, and throw some fluff in to show the players what they had to go through.

My two pesos...

 

[palleomortis]

Ok, I can see that, but what happens when you have a puny little human weilding a greatsword with a low strenght, agains a quick little guy with a couple dagers. The human's only going to get in a few swings. Sure, you have to look out for those, but then you have twice the speed and controll, and should be able to get a couple of good swings in befor his next. That, and it helps if the knifer uses his head. Using his knifes as a ranged weapon can prove usfull to some of them.