Satyrn
First Post
I certainly don't want my PC looking like that.
He's gnot gnomish enough, and gneither are the weapons.
I am seeing just all sorts of confusing posts this week. First, that Barnes & Nobles physical stores still exist and now what seems to be an assertion that a gnome could have too many weapons?
What kind of crazy upside down statement is that?
Satyrn
First Post
No, you misunderstand me. It's not that he has too many weapons. He just has too many weapons that don't look like they're about to explode.
The 18 lb. pike still bugs the crap outta me
Psyzhran2357
First Post
That's basically a new heavy armour type. Blade armour.
jasper
Rotten DM
I caught a 17 pd 4 oz Pike in read dead what is your point.The 18 lb. pike still bugs the crap outta me
Dessert Nomad
Adventurer
It is funny to me how people take old 1e rules quirks and treat them as reflecting reality more than well-documented history. There really aren't 15 pound 2-handed swords and 10 pound morning stars out there that were actually used, but a number of people who started on old D&D think the actual weights are too light. If you try to fight a swordsman with a dagger he's always going to have initiative because of his reach and you will be reacting and looking for occasional opportunities to strike with a dagger, but because 1e gave him extra attacks and 2e gave him an initiative bonus some people think the dagger wielder should strike first or more often.
Last edited:
I always thought this was wonky with 2E, and liked how Runequest did it, with inverting the way D&D did it. Yeah, you probably can swing that dagger a heck of a lot faster than that guy who's got a Halbard, but he's still going to get a first shot at you.
Dessert Nomad
Adventurer
1e was even weirder, BTW. A guy swinging a dagger actually could swing TWICE AS FAST against an opponent carrying a fairly heavy weapon as he could against an unarmed or dagger-wielding opponent, and three times as fast against someone carrying an awl pike (the only weapon that speed factor ever gives three attacks against). The idea that you can get in more hits with a dagger if I'm fighting you with a two-handed sword than if I'm unarmed is really bizarre, and it's even more bizarre when you realize that the dagger gets two attacks against a footman's mace or a battle axe but not against a horseman's mace or any sword smaller than two handed.
But don't take my word for it, take the word of the man who came up with the idea: "Forget weapon speed factors! I must have been under the influence of a hex when I included them in the bloody rules." - Gary Gygax
