Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Willie the Duck" data-source="post: 8672490" data-attributes="member: 6799660">I think it also wasn't well communicated exactly what this was about or why one would want it. With regards to realism, the wargamers originally thought to be the primary buyers of the initial game would know (at least vaguely) about this weapon being great against lightly- or unarmored foes but bad against mail or plate, and this other weapon being specifically designed for plate, and so on. The HS or college kid who ended up being the bread and butter buyer BITD? Maybe, but certainly not in total. There needed to be a sales pitch, and the game never really did it (I'm guessing because Gary himself wasn't really that into that part of it, and included it most to satisfy the base that did). With regards to gamist reasons to want it, it makes all the sense in the world when you are doing Chainmail unit vs. unit clashes, but less so in D&D (especially AD&D and oD&D post supplement I). In Chainmail, perhaps you know (or see on the sand table) your opponent is playing 4rd century Visigoths with mail, spear and shield and thus you knew to bring the right troops with the right kit to defeat that (or, if already in-play, which units to bring forward to face them). In D&D there aren't as many instances where you can have pre-knowledge of your opponents, and (barring more bags of holding than you'll ever need for treasure hauling) are unlikely to carry around a weapon for each situation. Even less so once you have some magic weapons, and thus any minor benefit you get from optimal weapon vs. armor setup is competing with one of the items getting +X to all attacks (and damage). Even more less so once the variable weapon damage came into being and the answer to every question became 'longswords, greatswords, and longbows whenever possible. Daggers and halberds if the DM bothers with weapon reach or cramped quarters issues.' Throw in some other D&D game conceits and the WvsAC table ends up seeming like a distraction (again, one that never received a great pitch for why one would want it). Things like some characters only being able to use some weapons*; monsters which can only be hit by magic; some monsters skin types clearly correlating to a given armor type but many others not; and perhaps most importantly weapon proficiencies making weapon choice have to be done at a several-level timeframe, rather than when one knows they are about to face opponents with a given type of armor. *and the magical mace or warhammer probably going to the cleric because that's all they can use, rather than being kept for the fighter when up against a platemail wearing opponent</blockquote>

Verification