Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Griffith Dragonlake" data-source="post: 3594356" data-attributes="member: 40379">*Yawn*&nbsp; Yet another arbitrary weapon grouping that has more to do with a convenient catalog than how the weapons are actually used.One-handed clubs, maces, axes, and picks are all basically short hafted weapons with a large and/or heavy head.Likewise for two-handed clubs, maces, axes, and picks.Greatsword and two-handed bastard sword are both used in almost the same way but are a far cry from fighting with a longsword.Dagger, Shortsword, Rapier, Sabre, and Scimitar are close enough to keep in a single group.&nbsp; It's not unrealistic to include one-handed spears in this category also.A one-handed flail is very different from everything else except the nunchaku.A two-handed flail also stands alone.Spears are very different from polearms,&nbsp; Polearms actually have more in common with two-handed maces, clubs, axes, and hammers.&nbsp; Spears are never swung.&nbsp; Thrusting with a polearm is a secondary attack and gets very tiring after a while.Why are peasants proficient in any weapons at all?&nbsp; If they spend any time at all fighting in the militia then they most likely have levels in Warrior instead of Commoner.Bucklers and spike shields are both punching shields.&nbsp; Medium and Large shields are not.&nbsp; If you allow characters to fight with tower shields then lump them in with the medium and large shields.After 30 years of D&amp;D, I'm just very tired of seeing the contintual academic grouping of weapons into proficiencies based on type (axe!, sword!, &amp;c.).&nbsp; It's like saying I'm taking a proficiency in Israeli arms (uzi, desert eagle, galil) but I can't use a MAC10, Browning M1910, or an M-16.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Griffith Dragonlake, post: 3594356, member: 40379"] *Yawn* Yet another arbitrary weapon grouping that has more to do with a convenient catalog than how the weapons are actually used. One-handed clubs, maces, axes, and picks are all basically short hafted weapons with a large and/or heavy head. Likewise for two-handed clubs, maces, axes, and picks. Greatsword and two-handed bastard sword are both used in almost the same way but are a far cry from fighting with a longsword. Dagger, Shortsword, Rapier, Sabre, and Scimitar are close enough to keep in a single group. It's not unrealistic to include one-handed spears in this category also. A one-handed flail is very different from everything else except the nunchaku. A two-handed flail also stands alone. Spears are very different from polearms, Polearms actually have more in common with two-handed maces, clubs, axes, and hammers. Spears are never swung. Thrusting with a polearm is a secondary attack and gets very tiring after a while. Why are peasants proficient in any weapons at all? If they spend any time at all fighting in the militia then they most likely have levels in Warrior instead of Commoner. Bucklers and spike shields are both punching shields. Medium and Large shields are not. If you allow characters to fight with tower shields then lump them in with the medium and large shields. After 30 years of D&D, I'm just very tired of seeing the contintual academic grouping of weapons into proficiencies based on type (axe!, sword!, &c.). It's like saying I'm taking a proficiency in Israeli arms (uzi, desert eagle, galil) but I can't use a MAC10, Browning M1910, or an M-16. [/QUOTE]

Verification