Small Weapons?

[TheEvil]

Not at all. Given that the small quarter staff has the same mass as a baton (stated as a club), why is it doing less initial damage at the same distance? Understandable that humans can use more 'ummph', but your still accelerating the same weighted weapon the same distance.

*SIGH* No. You are NOT accelerating it the same distance. Longer arms means you are accelerating it over a longer distance. Further, someone who has more mass hits with more more force then someone with less mass. There is a reason that boxing and wrestling are broken up by weight catagories. I am not sure why you are so determined to ignore some simple matters of physics.

 

[TheEvil]

1) An average person is using weapons that are off sized. How can a human use a longsword with 1" handle, then turn around and use a stilletto with a 1/2" to 3/8" handle? Also remember the, supposedly, your typical D&D character has been trained for some level of combat. Also, look at the variances in cooking knife size. Paring knife has a handle of 3/4" thick, 3/8" wide, and 4 inches long for a 2" blade. Does said cook take a -2 to use this tool? If not, then why is a human taking a -2 to use such a weapon? They use the same grip, and defence is handled well with Dex and armor (your problem is the fact that your trying to hit a moving, covered target with a weapon that does squat for damage). A himan has no problem handling this item. talk to husbands who have been assaulted by wives with this type of knife (yea, it does happen).

2) A three year old child can grip said handle just fine. Said 3 year old sytill can't lift 50 to 60 lbs (most anyway). A halfling of the same size with an 8 to 10 Str would have no problem manipulating the blade with the same sized hand.

Here we go, blow by blow...

1) People don't use longswords and stilletos in the same manner. Humans also don't tend to block longsword blows with a stilletto. At least not very often.

D&D characters are generally trained for combat, not trained martial artists (monks excluded of course).

A cook using TOOLS specifically designed for specific chopping and cutting tasks is not the same thing as trained fighters using weapons designed for combat.

Neither is spouses assaulting each other with kitchen knives. For the record, husbands also assault their wives with knives, as do girlfriends their boyfriends, boyfriends their girlfriends, and a host of other relationships. Why you would feel the need to add the 'it happens' is rather beyond me.

None of what you have said proves that a trained warrior is as effective as using a small weapon as they are using a properly sized one.


2) Any 3 year old can handle any shortsword grip? Are you sure you want to go out on that limb? In any case, Small in D&D covers 2'-4' tall. Are you saying that a pixie could use a human shortsword as a longsword? Why are you so obsessed with this one small part of D&D's inconsistancies and inaccuracies? If you really wanted to accurately reflect weapon handling, you would end up with a MUCH more complicated system then the current D&D system, or indeed any system I am familiar with. Since you started this thread as a complaint against needless complications, I am not sure what you are hoping to gain.

 

[Meeki]

Not at all. Given that the small quarter staff has the same mass as a baton (stated as a club), why is it doing less initial damage at the same distance? Understandable that humans can use more 'ummph', but your still accelerating the same weighted weapon the same distance.

Once again you missed my point. Small quarterstaff is going to have a smaller diameter than a quarterstaff. You cannot compare a small quarterstaff to a club because they are weilded differently and once again the medium sized club is going to have a larger diameter than a small quarterstaff, assuming a club is just a quarterstaff at 1/3 the length, because it is sized for different hands. This means that smaller hands will be able to weild the smaller weapon, which has less mass than a weapon of larger size, but to do so at the same acceleration requires more strength. Also you are disproving your own point, if they are accelerating a weapon of the same mass the same distance that means the smaller creature weilding the weapon has to have more strength, say 12, thus dealing the same amount of average damage as a 10 strength meduim sized creature. They can lift the same amount overhead and dealing the same amount of damage.

For some reason it seems you think the strength score is only based upon arm strength and that a dagger (same damage die as small rapier) can do as much damage as a medium rapier. Small creatures have bonuses and disadvantages. Smaller weapons have less mass meaning they deal less damage. This is like the third time this has been explained.

 

[Storyteller01]

Here we go, blow by blow...

1) People don't use longswords and stilletos in the same manner. Humans also don't tend to block longsword blows with a stilletto. At least not very often.

D&D characters are generally trained for combat, not trained martial artists (monks excluded of course).

A cook using TOOLS specifically designed for specific chopping and cutting tasks is not the same thing as trained fighters using weapons designed for combat.

Neither is spouses assaulting each other with kitchen knives. For the record, husbands also assault their wives with knives, as do girlfriends their boyfriends, boyfriends their girlfriends, and a host of other relationships. Why you would feel the need to add the 'it happens' is rather beyond me.

None of what you have said proves that a trained warrior is as effective as using a small weapon as they are using a properly sized one.


2) Any 3 year old can handle any shortsword grip? Are you sure you want to go out on that limb? In any case, Small in D&D covers 2'-4' tall. Are you saying that a pixie could use a human shortsword as a longsword? Why are you so obsessed with this one small part of D&D's inconsistancies and inaccuracies? If you really wanted to accurately reflect weapon handling, you would end up with a MUCH more complicated system then the current D&D system, or indeed any system I am familiar with. Since you started this thread as a complaint against needless complications, I am not sure what you are hoping to gain.

1) Not claiming that they can. the point is that the can wield them without penalty (a small shortsword is a Tiny Piercing weapon. How is this different from a stilletto?)

Combat training IS a martial art. Monks just study a different system.

Said tools use the same mechanics as a weapon. Heck, most weapons started as tools. And the point remains the same: A human has no problem manipulating tools and weapons whose weight and grip vary within a large margin. And, while these tools are designed for a specific function, so are the weapons that are modeled after them.

Given the wide range of weapons used by humans, and their comparitevly similar effects, what is a properly sized weapon?

As for the 'wife/hubby' example, the point was that humans can use smaller, misweighted items very effectively, with no further negative beyond skill. How much harder can it be for a fighter to use the same weapon?

2) I typed that a 3 year old can grip a shortsword ( and anything else 1" across). I also typed that a stronger halfling could manipulate said shortsword with the same grip.


3) How do you know that the system isn't on its way to said complexity in the first place (this being the basis of my obsession in the first place). There's already talk of a 4.0! Whether its true or simply a rumor, it gives cause for alarm. What else needs changing? You can say "just house rule it", but how often am I going to have to adjust my campaign/buy new core rules?

If I understood the rules, the weapons descriptions were abstractions for describing a number of weapons that fall roughly within the same perameters. It may not be called a longsword, but it fulfills the same function given the wide variances available. you not going to be able to accurately depict combat (its a slippery slope)

 

[TheEvil]

No. You are NOT accelerating it the same distance. Longer arms means you are accelerating it over a longer distance. Further, someone who has more mass hits with more more force then someone with less mass. There is a reason that boxing and wrestling are broken up by weight catagories. I am not sure why you are so determined to ignore some simple matters of physics.

Please respond to this post.
*Insert a bunch of opinions and anecdotal stories that are unverifiable, prove nothing, and convince no one. State them as unassailable fact.*

 

[TheAuldGrump]

People, he is not going to give it up, stop trying. No matter how you phrase it he will not agree with you.

I prefer the 3.5 version of handling weapons, so do most people here, If you like the new weapon size rules use them. If you are running the game and neither you nor your player like them then don't use them.

If you want people to agree with you then give it up, that isn't going to happen either.

If you are just arguing for the sake of arguing (IE Trolling) then just stop. (I don't yet think that is the case BTW, I think that you have chosen your ground and just don't want to give it up. But the longer this continues the less I believe that.)

The Auld Grump, who thought that this subject was covered at length months ago. Sheesh!

 

[TheEvil]

1) Not claiming that they can. the point is that the can wield them without penalty (a small shortsword is a Tiny Piercing weapon. How is this different from a stilletto?)

Combat training IS a martial art. Monks just study a different system.

Said tools use the same mechanics as a weapon. Heck, most weapons started as tools. And the point remains the same: A human has no problem manipulating tools and weapons whose weight and grip vary within a large margin. And, while these tools are designed for a specific function, so are the weapons that are modeled after them.

Given the wide range of weapons used by humans, and their comparitevly similar effects, what is a properly sized weapon?

As for the 'wife/hubby' example, the point was that humans can use smaller, misweighted items very effectively, with no further negative beyond skill. How much harder can it be for a fighter to use the same weapon?

2) I typed that a 3 year old can grip a shortsword ( and anything else 1" across). I also typed that a stronger halfling could manipulate said shortsword with the same grip.


3) How do you know that the system isn't on its way to said complexity in the first place (this being the basis of my obsession in the first place). There's already talk of a 4.0! Whether its true or simply a rumor, it gives cause for alarm. What else needs changing? You can say "just house rule it", but how often am I going to have to adjust my campaign/buy new core rules?

If I understood the rules, the weapons descriptions were abstractions for describing a number of weapons that fall roughly within the same perameters. It may not be called a longsword, but it fulfills the same function given the wide variances available. you not going to be able to accurately depict combat (its a slippery slope)

So it seems part of your complaint is about a problem that doesn't yet exist. That at least explains why pointing out why the existing system isn't unreasonable isn't making much headway with you.

With a nod to Auldgrump, I will take another stab at it. You seem to be confusing '-2 to hit' with 'not usable as a weapon'. As far as killing people with less then optimal weapons, people kill each other with TVs (among other odd 'weapons' of conventience) too, and the -4 to hit for improvised weapon didn't seem to be a big impediment. If a 1/2" grip is just as usable as a 1" grip, why do so many weapons have larger grips?

 

[Storyteller01]

*SIGH* No. You are NOT accelerating it the same distance. Longer arms means you are accelerating it over a longer distance. Further, someone who has more mass hits with more more force then someone with less mass. There is a reason that boxing and wrestling are broken up by weight catagories. I am not sure why you are so determined to ignore some simple matters of physics.

Not so for a buton. Your elbows stay close to the body, giving a relative rotation from shoulder to elbow of roughly 6" (dependant on body size, of course). The parts providing power are hips, forearms, and the clubs rotation in the hand. Given that a double weapon such as the quarter staff does require a longer arm reach to maintain stability, the distances would be comparable for those of a smaller creature.

Also remember that boxers and wrestles have weight divisions based on specific rules. Boxers and wrestlers are routinely beaten in fights by smaller opponents who don't follow those rules.

Side note: Brazilian Jujitsu, while a very nasty and effective grappling style, does not follow the rules of wrestling.

But these digress from the main point:
How is a small quarterstaff different form a medium baton?
How is a small great club different from a medium club?
How is a small shortsword diferent from a stilletto, and why are those able to use a dagger also able to use a stilletto?(piercing and slashing vs piercing)
Why is a human using a Two handed sword built for a large race taking penalties comparable to the same human using a small shortsword?

 

[Storyteller01]

People, he is not going to give it up, stop trying. No matter how you phrase it he will not agree with you.

I prefer the 3.5 version of handling weapons, so do most people here, If you like the new weapon size rules use them. If you are running the game and neither you nor your player like them then don't use them.

If you want people to agree with you then give it up, that isn't going to happen either.

If you are just arguing for the sake of arguing (IE Trolling) then just stop. (I don't yet think that is the case BTW, I think that you have chosen your ground and just don't want to give it up. But the longer this continues the less I believe that.)

The Auld Grump, who thought that this subject was covered at length months ago. Sheesh!

Sorry 'bout that. Not looking for trolling. Just needing convincing that 3.5 is neccessary or better, given the large amount of variance in human weapons.

 

[Storyteller01]

If a 1/2" grip is just as usable as a 1" grip, why do so many weapons have larger grips?

Why do switchblades use small ones?