Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="ve4grm" data-source="post: 4396921" data-attributes="member: 63492">So small characters in 4e can't use two-handed weapons, and can only use versatile one-handed weapons two-handed, gaining no additional benefit from it.So I have a couple questions.1) Does a versatile weapon (say, warhammer) wielded two-handed qualify for the two-handed weapon Fighter bonus?&nbsp; What about if it's manditory to wield it that way.&nbsp; If not, does this mean that build is basically useless to a small character?2) Why can a halfling wield a scimitar one-handed, and not a longsword.&nbsp; 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.3) Wouldn't you be able to design a +3/1d8/non-versatile weapon, call it a &quot;Long-ish sword&quot;, and use it one-handed as a halfling?&nbsp; This makes the whole issue of versatile weapons confusing to me.4) What do halflings and other small creatures get in return for this reduced weapon availability?&nbsp; Back in 3e, they got a +1 to attack.&nbsp; Now, I don't recommend we bring back this bonus, but they don't seem to get anything to replace it.&nbsp; Small characters moved from &quot;less damage, more accuracy&quot; to just plain &quot;less damage&quot;.Now, none of this is important if you're playing a rogue (they can use all light blades normally), wizard, warlock, or cleric, but the ranger (including bow ranger), fighter, paladin, and warlord are all one-handed or two-handed weapon users.What do you all do for this?&nbsp; Sure, for halflings, using the light blades or scimitars makes flavourful sense, but what about goblins (axes are big) or other small races?Opinions?&nbsp; Options?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="ve4grm, post: 4396921, member: 63492"] So small characters in 4e can't use two-handed weapons, and can only use versatile one-handed weapons two-handed, gaining no additional benefit from it. So I have a couple questions. 1) Does a versatile weapon (say, warhammer) wielded two-handed qualify for the two-handed weapon Fighter bonus? What about if it's manditory to wield it that way. If not, does this mean that build is basically useless to a small character? 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. 3) Wouldn't you be able to design a +3/1d8/non-versatile weapon, call it a "Long-ish sword", and use it one-handed as a halfling? This makes the whole issue of versatile weapons confusing to me. 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". Now, none of this is important if you're playing a rogue (they can use all light blades normally), wizard, warlock, or cleric, but the ranger (including bow ranger), fighter, paladin, and warlord are all one-handed or two-handed weapon users. What do you all do for this? Sure, for halflings, using the light blades or scimitars makes flavourful sense, but what about goblins (axes are big) or other small races? Opinions? Options? [/QUOTE]

Verification