Weapon Speed

[Water Bob]

Two things....

First, for those of you that agree with Jimlock (that a 6th level ranger, with three attacks, using daggers, getting an extra 2 points of damage on average per round is too much), the solution is simple.

Don't remove the STR mod from the Speed Attack because that reduces your Speed Attack to exactly 1 extra point of damage per interval (interval depends on the hit die: once every four rounds for a d4 weapon; once every six rounds for a d6 weapon; and so on). Doing that makes the Speed Attack rule useless. You're better off not playing with it.

The solution (if you agree with Jimlock that the extra d4 attack every round from a 6th level ranger using daggers getting 3 attacks per round will unbalance the game) is to make the Speed Attack a true Attack of Opportunity. It is provoked by the "1" thrown on the damage die, and a character can only make one AoO each round unless he has the Combat Reflexes Feat.

That should balance things out to your liking.





Second, I've come up with a way to employ a speed rule in the game that is more like the original 1E AD&D rule, is still easy-cheesy to use in the game, and acts on the attack roll instead of the damage roll.

I'd tell you about it now, but I'm due at a benefit. Gotta go. Will log in later and explain an alternate approach to adding weapon speed easily to your d20 game.

We can hash out the pros and cons of the new system then.

 

[Jimlock]

Besides what I said in my first response (that the Speed Rule might as well be ignored if you don't use STR mod on Speed Attack damage), what you're talking about here is an extra 2 points of damage, on average, per round.

That's not acceptible? With a character class that is designed to fight this way?

2 extra points of damage per round is abuse?

I say it's boosting small, light weapons, making them a tad more viable.

at this level it is acceptable.

Remember that i'm on your side here. I like the rule in general, and i want to incorporate a version of this rule in my game as well.

But as i said,

All the above calculations stand for a 6th lvl TW fighter... imagine the chances at higher levels due to combination of iterative attacks with feats such as "improved two weapon fighting" and "greater two weapon fighting"... also imagine the complications with magical/powerful weapons. Personally i can easily see this as getting abused.

....i mentioned abuse in respect to greater levels, in respect to the increase of iterative attacks (even bigger chances of getting a speed weapon attack), in respect to some feats and in respect to powerful weapons.

what happens when a characters chances to score at least one speed weapon attack fly past 50% (and consequently, his chances to score at least two go to about 20%), while at the same time he wields a +3 Flaming Burst dagger and a +2 Wounding Dagger?

Where do you draw the line?

Do you want a rule that u can use in CERTAIN cases? Is that acceptable to you?

I want a rule that i can ALWAYS use...no matter the character level or the player's options.

Now you can say: Is the above character going to be less broken just by removing his Str bonus to damage from his speed weapon attack?

Well removing the Str bonus, removing precision damage, and allowing only ONE free attack per hand/weapon does make this character a lot less broken than he is. (i have mentioned these changes in my first post in this thread)
In fact at this point, if he is still broken it is not because of the speed weapon rule.

If by balancing the rule for all levels, that means that i'm gonna have a less effective rule for the early levels... well then so be it... In fact, this answers nicely to my sense of "in game" realism, for when the rule is gonna matter most, is when the PC is gonna have the adequate experience to use such weapons to the full.

Moreover i would certainly not accept a rule that says: He is not allowed to use his weapons "magical" powers when making a speed attack... or one that says: after X level something Y happens and the ability ceases to increase. This is the case of a bad rule which makes no other cense than to cap an ability that gets broken after a certain level.

Perhaps my "adjustments" to the rule are not the best one can figure out. To that i agree. Perhaps you, or someone else in this thread can figure out another, better way for balancing out the rule for all levels. Until then, this is the best i can think of...

 

[Theo R Cwithin]

I think this is why Water Bob suggested making it a true Attack of Opportunity. In that case, a PC effectively forces his opponent into provoking an AoO, thus giving the PC the choice to expend an AoO (possibly his only one, mind you)-- but, of course, this is done at the expense of other AoOs.

Run that way, these speed weapon attacks are drawn off a pool of limited resources already established within the framework of the game, which balance them out nicely. Imho, that's a really good compromise. It preserves the idea that one can only do so much in a round.

 

[Jimlock]

Don't remove the STR mod from the Speed Attack because that reduces your Speed Attack to exactly 1 extra point of damage per interval (interval depends on the hit die: once every four rounds for a d4 weapon; once every six rounds for a d6 weapon; and so on). Doing that makes the Speed Attack rule useless. You're better off not playing with it.

Well, you say it's useless,
...while i say it's not, because with the number of speed weapon attacks a character is going to be making after a certain level, the damage is going to start making an impression, no matter the Str bonus.

The solution (if you agree with Jimlock that the extra d4 attack every round from a 6th level ranger using daggers getting 3 attacks per round will unbalance the game) is to make the Speed Attack a true Attack of Opportunity. It is provoked by the "1" thrown on the damage die, and a character can only make one AoO each round unless he has the Combat Reflexes Feat.

That should balance things out to your liking.

Now such a ruling renders the rule even more powerless than my version. Not only speed weapon attacks have nothing to do with AoOs but it also leaves you with ONE (in most cases) speed attack per round. In my version you get one attack per hand/weapon... + plus you get to keep your AoO... in which you also have a chance to do a speed weapon attack...

Honestly i do not see how this is better.

 

[Jimlock]

I think this is why Water Bob suggested making it a true Attack of Opportunity.

I only saw his last post after i posted my answer...

 

[Water Bob]

Let's talk about another way (possibly a better way?) to incorporate weapon speed into your d20 game (be it Conan, D&D, or some other version).

Before I lay the new idea on you, let's review the inspiration for this rule. In 1E AD&D, weapon speed was handled thusly...

1. A d6 was thrown for each combatant. This was called "initiative", though the throw was implemented differently than what we do today with an "initiative" throw, and there were no die modifiers on that throw. It was a straight, opposed d6 throw. The higher of the opposed roll indicated who was allowed to strike first in the round.

2. When a tie occured, the weapon with the lower Speed Factor attacked first. But there was more: (from pg. 66 of the 1E AD&D DMG) "This number (referring to weapon's Speed Factor) is indicative of the wieldiness of any particular weapon, how long it takes to ready the weapon against an opponent, or how long to recover and move it in its attack mode." When the tie occured, weapon speed factors were compared. If a weapon's speed factor was at least twice that of a smaller weapon, the smaller weapon was given 2 attacks during the round (one extra attack). If the difference between the two factors was 10 or more, then the smaller weapon was given 3 attacks during the round (two extra attacks).





I've thought up a similar method to bring weapon speed to a d20 game. I'll tell you how it works. You tell me what you think. Maybe we can make some adjustments to it, if needed.



WEAPON SPEED

1. On the attack roll, there is a single number on the die that, if rolled, indicates an extra speed attack. That number is one digit less than the weapon's Critical Threat number(s). Thus, if a weapon scores a critical threat on a 19 or 20, it's speed attack number will be 18.

This is akin to the tie on the d6 throw* in the 1E AD&D rules.



2. The Speed Number is always thrown on the attack of the smaller weapon (see the Size Categories below). There is no Speed Number on the attack throw for a weapon that is of bigger size or the same size as that of the opponent's weapon.



SIZE CATEGORIES

Light
One-Handed
Two-Handed



3. When the speed attack number is thrown, and the attack is a success, the weapon size categories are compared. A smaller weapon is given an extra attack for every size category is it removed from the larger weapon.

This is akin to the Speed Factor comparison in the 1E AD&D rules.






EXAMPLE 1

Vladir the Vanir warrior fights with a two-handed greatsword. Cael the Cimmerian fights with a dagger.

The dagger scores a critical thread on 19-20, so it's Speed Number is 18.

On the Cimmerian's turn, his dagger attack throw results in a natural 18. This means that we compare the size of the dagger to the size of the great sword. The great sword is two categories higher than the dagger, so the Cimmerian is given two extra attacks that round with the dagger.





EXAMPLE 2

Rodus, the Aquilonian, fights Pri the Pict. Rodus uses a broadsword and Pri uses a club.

Speed Attacks are not possible with this example because both weapons are in the same size category--they're both in the one-handed weapon category.



EXAMPLE 3

Taurus, the Brythunian thief, uses a stiletto in a combat against a member of the town guard. The guardsman uses a scimtar.

Since the short stiletto throws a Critical Thread on a natural roll of 20, it's speed number is 19.

If Taurus throws a natural 19 on his attack throw and is successful hitting the guard, he will get one additonal speed attack (because the stiletto is a light weapon, and the scimtar is one size category larger as a one-handed weapon).





I think this is easy-cheesy and even a bit more intuitive than my original rule (that I posted at the start of this thread). I also think this rule is more like the original 1E AD&D rule that inspired it.

*One thing to know is that the Speed Number will come up slighty more often. It's a 5% proposition to throw a single number on a d20 where as it is a 2.7% chanc to throw matching numbers on two single d6 throws. But, at the same time, the size categories are broader with the d20 game when compared to a weapon's speed factor from 1E AD&D.

For example, in 1E AD&D, a Hand Axe has Speed Factor 4, while a Dagger has Speed Factor 2. Under the 1E AD&D rule, the Dagger could get an extra speed attack against the Hand Axe.

In the d20 game, both weapons are classified as Light weapons, and thus neither would gain an extra Speed Attack against the other.

So...eventhough the check to see if a Speed Attack is possible occurs twice as much with this rule vs. the 1E AD&D rule (5% vs. 2.7%), the actual Speed Attacks will happen less often because of the broad size categories.





Folks, I think this is a better rule than the original one we've been discussing.

Thoughts? Comments?

 

[JamesonCourage]

Out of curiosity, why not just make the speed factor the same as the critical threat range? It's a little easier to remember. Now, my group could remember your rule fine, but I'm just asking for your thoughts on it.

 

[Jimlock]

Folks, I think this is a better rule than the original one we've been discussing.

Thoughts? Comments?

Honestly Water Bob, your original rule is much much better!!! (with my adjustments of course!!)

No seriously the first one is a lot better...

Here's why:


1-Critical range is not related in any way to the weapons speed. With this new rule. you make depend the weapon's speed on it's critical range.

2-The number of attempts to strike your opponent in a given time is not dependent of the enemies weapon. This rule makes depend one's speed with a light weapon on the opponent's type of weapon.

3-Even slightly this rule is more complicated, IMO it ruins the combat's flow.
You have to remember two numbers: critical range + weapon range (=critical range +1). Then you have to compare weapons and figure out the extra attacks... Lengthy....
With the previous rule: You see 1 on your damage die? you know you're there! ---> you automatically roll for the extra attack.
Much faster! (For my game this little things count a lot... i don't want to lose out on combat drama by figuring out weapon tables)

The previous rule is great because the chances of rolling ONE specific number on the damage die is automatically related to the weapon's speed..
1d6 -> 16% 1d4 -> 25%.... that's brilliant! and you don't loose time!

You know what the say WB... the first idea is usually the best...

 

[Jimlock]

...One more thing.... I really respect the old D&D... the old school if you may.
In fact 2e is my favorite edition!!
...and i'm sure 1e was just as great to play...

However this does not mean that the game was not raw...and with many flaws...
this one IMO was not a great rule.

I mean its great that it took account of the weapons' speeds!!! Don't get me wrong! ...but it was badly resolved if you ask me.

 

[Water Bob]

Out of curiosity, why not just make the speed factor the same as the critical threat range? It's a little easier to remember. Now, my group could remember your rule fine, but I'm just asking for your thoughts on it.

I don't want to give an extra attack and a chance at a critical at the same time. That seems overkill to me. So, I made it the number below the critical range. Easy to remember. 5% shot of happening with each attack (provided the weapon is smaller than your opponent's).

this one IMO was not a great rule.

I love that old rule. There was something about dicing that d6 and then seeing the double come up. It was exciting, like rolling a natural 20 for double damage. That was more exciting than rolling a critical threat then rolling a check to see if the extra damage occurs.

Honestly Water Bob, your original rule is much much better!!! (with my adjustments of course!!)

1-Critical range is not related in any way to the weapons speed. With this new rule. you make depend the weapon's speed on it's critical range.

The critical range really has no impact on it. It's a flat 5% chance that the speed check will come up, just like in the 1E AD&D game it was a flat 2.7% chance.

I picked the number one lower than the Critical Range because its easy to remember--but every weapon has the same shot at checking for a Speed Attack. Then, instead of comparing speed factors, you just compare weapon size category. All Light wepons vs. Two-Handed weapons get two extra attacks. All One-Handed weapons vs. Two-Handed weapons get one extra attack. And so on.

We could limit elligible weapons. For example, the whip would be excluded.

With some weapons, you could make a special note (off the top of my head) "A Hunting Spear is rated as a Light weapon when considering Speed Attacks", if you want to give particular weapons more umph.

2-The number of attempts to strike your opponent in a given time is not dependent of the enemies weapon. This rule makes depend one's speed with a light weapon on the opponent's type of weapon.

Well, yeah. Like the original 1E AD&D rule. This way, a dagger gets three attacks against a two-handed great sword but two attacks against a battleaxe. That makes sense to me. The great sword is taking longer to wield and recover before a strike. It gives the dagger user time to get inside and take his extra jab.

So, it is about weapon speed. Light weapons are "faster" than One-Handed weapons, and One-Handed weapons are faster than Two-Handed weapons.

That's pretty much how the other rule worked out--it just did it in a different way.

3-Even slightly this rule is more complicated, IMO it ruins the combat's flow.
You have to remember two numbers: critical range + weapon range (=critical range +1). Then you have to compare weapons and figure out the extra attacks... Lengthy....

I don't think it's that hard.

You've got one number that is your Speed Number. And there are only three categories: Light, One-Handed, and Two-Handed.

You could set the Speed Number to 15 for every weapon. That would be easy to remember.

With the previous rule: You see 1 on your damage die? you know you're there! ---> you automatically roll for the extra attack.

If you see your Speed Number....

Or, if you see a 15 on your attack throw, you know you're there.

Same thing, I think.

The previous rule is great because the chances of rolling ONE specific number on the damage die is automatically related to the weapon's speed..
1d6 -> 16% 1d4 -> 25%.... that's brilliant! and you don't loose time!

I like that part of the first rule, too. But, you, yourself, have a problem with the dagger being used by a 6th level ranger under the first method. With this new method, there is no problem with the 6th level ranger because his chance for a Speed Attack attempt is always 5%--not 25% with the dagger.

One of the things I like best about the new rule is that it comes on the attack throw. You attack and know you're getting extra attacks or not almost instantly.

There's something that doesn't quite sit right with me on figuring the Speed Attack on the damage throw. It works, true. But, if I had my rathers, I'd rather it be on the attack throw.

You know what the say WB... the first idea is usually the best...

I like both rules for different reasons. What to choose, what to choose....