Small Characters and Weapons

[DevoutlyApathetic]

Given the ability to easily resize magical weapons I'm rather annoyed they ditched weapon sizes for PC's when it would have avoided this silliness.

 

[Kaldaen]

Given the ability to easily resize magical weapons I'm rather annoyed they ditched weapon sizes for PC's when it would have avoided this silliness.

Weapon sizes just exchange this silliness for a completely different kind of silliness. Like the iconic halfling rogue only dealing 1d3 damage with his classic dagger.

Furthermore, Mike Mearls has said on the WotC website that if you wield a versatile weapon in two hands, it counts as two-handed for the reading of powers and class features. Think of versatile weapons as being both one-handed and two-handed -- what matters is how you're using them right now.

 

[Gloombunny]

Look, the main point is, small races get a penalty with 4 of the 8 core classes. No other race in the PHB of MM gets this.

So what?

Seriously. Why is this important? Halflings have classes they're good at and classes they're not good at, just like every other race. So they're not good at certain classes in a way that no other race is not good at the classes it's not good at. It's not a significant distinction.

Halflings have this penalty because a 4' tall dude wielding a greatsword strains most players' suspension of disbelief. They don't have a bonus to make up for it like they did in 3.5, 'cuz then players would pick classes that don't care about the penalty and get the bonus for free.

 

[Danceofmasks]

Small creatures have to use smaller weapons.
List of available weapons is currently short of options for small characters.
There will be more weapon options later.

 

[fba827]

4) What do halflings and other small creatures get in return for this reduced weapon availability? Back in 3e, they got a +1 to attack. Now, I don't recommend we bring back this bonus, but they don't seem to get anything to replace it. Small characters moved from "less damage, more accuracy" to just plain "less damage".

Small creatures are, well, small, which provides bonuses of itself. As an example, in one of the Dungeon Magazine adventures that took place in a bar -- there was a specific statement that small-sized creatures could hide under the tables for cover during the fight... So basically, by virtue of being small in size they're able to find more places to get cover. Also I think stuff like the squeeze manuever depends on size and the like, so more spaces the halfling can squeeze through.

 

[Draksila]

I would also like to point out that the idea of resizing weapons to fit the races is unique to 3rd edition. Basic D&D, 1st Edition, 2nd Edition, and now 4th Edition all operated with a more technically oriented idea of what size and weight make up what kind of weapon from a historical standpoint. 3rd brought in the viewpoint that races would scale their own versions of a 'longsword' or 'dagger' to fit the needs of their own species. While this is an understandable viewpoint in a fantasy setting, it added to the complexity of treasure hoards with non-magical treasure and stretched disbelief with the concept of a halfling's dagger magically quadrupling in size to fit the hand of a minotaur, or a giant's magic club mystically shrinking to fit the hand of the party's pixie mage. Since 4th Edition seems to be about simplifying the game and the problem of weapon sizes really never became an issue prior to 3.x, they seem to have simply gone back to the old way of doing things to avoid any wierdness with treasure allocation.

Now I grant that this may not jive with a player's need for internal logic in the 'reality' that is their fantasy world, but it's frankly easy enough to houserule that it even happened in old TSR adventures on occasion. Want a halfling greatsword? Go to a halfling blacksmith, commission one, and invert the weapon size chart to find the damage for the thing. What you're basically getting is a longsword blade with a modified hilt, anyway. Or, alternately, deal with being a small creature in a world full of medium humanoids and learn to cope with using medium-sized weapons as that's what's most likely to turn up with nifty enchantments on it in a dragon's hoard.

Frankly, old-school halflings seemed to always have quips and comments in the books and TSR-sponsored comics about how quick and nimble they were compared to the oversized, plodding humans. It was part of their personality that they took solace in not being encumbered by something so unwieldy as a sword so long that it would drag the ground if they didn't wear it diagonally across their back. Without the greatsword, they were able to fit in smaller crawlspaces and elude the enemies that the burly human would be forced to confront. Wit versus aggression, as it were.

Note that all of the above is colored by my own opinion and years of playing D&D from the Red Box up, and I understand if you choose to disagree or call me a fuddy-duddy. I'm not campaigning on a platform of 'longswords for all sizes,' anyway, so I'll feel free to be a less politically correct DM and take comfort in the return of the idea that one size does not fit all.

 

[Draksila]

Also, the magic item resizing thing in 3.x? I threw that out pretty fast for weapons and armor, personally, given that my players used it as a cheat for finding the magic items in a pile of gear. "Hey, I need a new two-hander. You, halfling! Grab that orc's greatsword and see if it shrinks!"

 

[Hypersmurf]

Also, the magic item resizing thing in 3.x? I threw that out pretty fast for weapons and armor, personally, given that my players used it as a cheat for finding the magic items in a pile of gear. "Hey, I need a new two-hander. You, halfling! Grab that orc's greatsword and see if it shrinks!"

You didn't throw anything out, as it happens, at least for greatswords - weapons and armor didn't resize 3.5.

SIZE AND MAGIC ITEMS
When an article of magic clothing or jewelry is discovered, most of the time size shouldn’t be an issue. Many magic garments are made to be easily adjustable, or they adjust themselves magically to the wearer. Size should not keep characters of various kinds from using magic items.

There may be rare exceptions, especially with racial specific items.

Armor and Weapon Sizes: Armor and weapons that are found at random have a 30% chance of being Small (01–30), a 60% chance of being Medium (31–90), and a 10% chance of being any other size (91–100).

Cloaks, vests, gloves, boots, bracers? Sure. Armor and weapons? They have a specific size, and they don't adjust to the owner.

Though you could get the Sizing special ability from Magic Item Compendium for your weapon, for 5000gp.

(Magic armor did resize in 3E, but not 3.5; magic weapons in neither.)

-Hyp.

 

[Jhaelen]

Opinions? Options?

1) I'd allow it.
2) Because they were designed that way.
3) Yes, but why would you do it?
4) Halfling get the Halfling's racial abilities. That's enough to balance them against the other player races. Small races in the MM are NOT balanced against the PHB races. You may want to wait for them to get a full writeup before using them.

I've been wondering what's your reason for asking these questions?
Are you looking at this from a player's or from a DM's viewpoint?
Are you worried about the halfling being sub-par or about the rules for small creatures being not well though out?

 

[Moon-Lancer]

2) Why can a halfling wield a scimitar one-handed, and not a longsword. Both are roughly the same length (the illustration even shows the scimitar with a longer hilt than the longsword), both are mechanically balanced against each other (with Versatile seemingly being a nonability, with its own internal tradeoff of not using s shield), but the scimitar is mechanically superior by far, yet only when halflings are concerned.

my take? a scimitar is a one handed weapon in real life and a longsword is a two handed weapon...

sorry just being difficult. most likely its just a balance issue. I just ignore the names of weapons anyway and imagine the weapon to look whatever I like.