Swords. More swords.

[dangerous jack]

Honestly, I'd like to drop the entire simple/martial/exotic system of weapon tiers, which this reminds me very strongly of. I don't think that kind of system really helps the game, and it just swells the weapon list. I'd much rather see real weapon diversity than seeing the same weapon copied three times with slightly better damage each time. I also don't really like the effect the exotic weapon proficiency feats have on feat choice and character versatility. I also don't care for various perfectly fair weapons to be rendered exotic just because their names are not European.

Can't XP you, but I actually agree here. I only separated them to hint at things that could be in a Basic set (dagger & sword, along with "Common Armour", "Common Classes", "Common Races", etc.) vs what the full list would have, but I could have laid it out better (as "Basic Weapons List" and "Expanded Weapons List" and repeated dagger & sword). My campaign is full of PCs using "exotic" weapons like a greatspear (instead of a basic pike / two-handed spear / longspear) and greataxe, and it annoys me.

 

[enigma5915]

Jester, regarding the comment you made concerning Gladii and Shortswords. . .

Actually there is an incredible difference, starting with metallurgy -the gladius was carbon steel which was pliant, incredibly sharp, light weight and prone to dulling and rusting quickly. Bladed only on one side, it was excellent for hewing and slicing, but not thrusting. A shortsword on the other hand was crafted of a more substantial steel which was incapable of holding the same edge, but also did not dull as quickly or succumb to the elements as immediately. It was designed with a piercing point to penetrate segmented armour and break through chain, with a more rigorous steel so it would not lose what edge it had by being constantly hammered against hard surfaces -such as metal armour- which also made it more prone to snapping. In any case, they had different designs, different compositions and different uses. In short, a Roman Gladius would be great if you wanted to kill someone wearing leather armour or lacking any entirely, but once the standard soldier began sporting chain mail on the battle field a shortsword was necessary.

While a filet knife and a butcher knife will spread margerine as well as a butter knife, that does not in any way make them all somehow equivilent to one another.

 

[The Human Target]

Put me down for having super generic weapons divided up by groups.

If I see the words "ranseur" and "glaive" on the same page my nose will bleed.

 

[trancejeremy]

Jester, regarding the comment you made concerning Gladii and Shortswords. . .

Actually there is an incredible difference, starting with metallurgy -the gladius was carbon steel which was pliant, incredibly sharp, light weight and prone to dulling and rusting quickly. Bladed only on one side, it was excellent for hewing and slicing, but not thrusting.

I'm not even remotely an expert on swords, but virtually everything I've seen or read about the gladius was that is was used for stabbing and thrusting, and was also double edged for cutting/slashing.

Gladius - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

edit: Just me say I'm not saying you're wrong (I have no idea), but at least that is what the popular conception of a gladius is

 

[Connorsrpg]

I just want weapon choice to mean something again.

I would like to see each with different properties to distinguish them (not just price, weight and damage). And many of those ideas have been mentioned.

Perhaps it could go further, like one of my favourite Dragon articles on the very topic of swords. Each had different uses/abilities based upon Proficiency and then Specialisation. Each opened new options.

Maybe this could actually be a way to distinguish a fighter. Who knows? But fighters might gain extra features with each different weapon.

Not sure if I would go these routes, but I certainly want something more to make weapons important and INTERESTING again.

 

[imurphy943]

IMO, the way that Gygax got all the polearms in 1e to have substantially different stats was with the Weapon vs. AC table. I've never played 1e before, so though it sounds cool to me, I can't vouch for it beyond the fact that just keeping a small reference sheet within reach doesn't sound that hard.

I would love more swords. I'd like to pull out an estoc to pierce through my enemies' plate armor like a bullet, then chop some pike heads with a flamberge. Probably the best thing about including more swords would be an end to cheesy illustrations of greatswords two feet wide and longswords shaped like something designed for cleaning large fish.

Spatha, Carp's tongue blades, Smallswords, Falcata, One-handed Falchions, Foils, Court Swords, Schiavona, Kilij, and Baliswords! Viva la Espada!

 

[Andor]

In a game that doesn't track the difference between getting whacked with a club and stabbed with a spear, or between spending two weeks sleeping rough in ditches and eating old uncooked iron rations vs getting bed rest and plentiful hot food as they impact fighting ability: What is to be gained by differeantiating between a epee and a rapier? Or a medieval archers short sowrd and a roman legionairres gladius? (And are we talking about the bronze gladius or the steel gladius? And the classic leaf bladed pattern, the middle pattern or the gladius hispanica?)

Swords are not 300 distinct archtypes, there was no clear line of demarcation between the broad sword, long sword and bastard sword excpet in game books. Sowrd technology varied continuously based on local materials, skill of the craftsman, popular fighting styles, the armour they were intended to face and even sumptuary laws, not to mention who was buying them and for what purpose.

I think on the whole it would be better for the weapons system to provide a few iconic types of weapons (Short sword, long sword, great sword, spear, bow, club, etc) which can then be expanded upon with a modular system of attributes. The attributes can then illustrated with specific real world examples.

EG: We take a long sword and apply a "Fencing weapon" mod to it, it now has reduced weapon speed, but is less effective vs heavy armour. We call it a Rapier. You can also apply the "No edge, sharp tip" mod and it becomes and epee and changes from a 19-20 crit range to a x3 crit. We give it a chisel tip to allow it to penetrate heavy armour and it becomes an exotic weapon for which we hold up the 'Estoc' as an example.

I'll leave the build-your-own-polearm table to others.

 

[gyor]

Ignoring variation based off of size, there are pretty much four kinds of swords, I think.

1) Straight, broad swords, typically with two edges and a good stabbing point. The classic longsword is the archetypical example.

2) Narrow straight swords designed to stab things. Daggers, rapiers, estocs, and smallswords define this set.

3) Swords that curve backwards to facilitate smooth cutting. Sabers, scimitars, and katanas all fit this mold.

4) Swords that curve forwards to focus the blow like an axe chop. Kukris, falchions, and falcatas fill this category.

If you combine these four shape types with a general range of sizes (going from small knives to large two-handed weapons), you can pretty much cover any kind of sword or blade. Any finer level of distinction won't be too useful...

I'd put claymore in a different category because they are hollow I believe and filled with a heavy metallic fluid that radically effects thier usage and the power of the blow.

 

[TarionzCousin]

IMO, the way that Gygax got all the polearms in 1e to have substantially different stats was with the Weapon vs. AC table. I've never played 1e before, so though it sounds cool to me, I can't vouch for it beyond the fact that just keeping a small reference sheet within reach doesn't sound that hard.

But we also had to keep another reference sheet within reach for weapon speed, and a sheet for to-hit tables, and one for piercing/slashing/bludgeoning. In 1E we looked stuff up in the books all the time.

But that was the only way to play in those days. So we didn't complain... much.

However, having been able to play combats without a mental calculator and spreadsheet has broadened my horizons significantly. I enjoy combat where I can concentrate on tactics and strategy, not spend my time doing math.

 

[TarionzCousin]

If I see the words "ranseur" and "glaive" on the same page my nose will bleed.

They're on this page together at least twice.

In fact....


Maybe extensive polearm tables could be part of the "Epic Gygaxian™" modular option book(s). I'm sure it would only be a few thousand pages of material.