Results 1 to 7 of 7
Thread: Weapon Stats in Rulebook
-
11-30-1997, 12:00 AM #1
- Join Date
- Aug 2006
- Posts
- 75
- Downloads
- 0
- Uploads
- 0
Weapon Stats in Rulebook
> Something to remember is that a renaissance rapier is not a foil. It has a
> 11/2 to 2 inch blade. It's a real sword, albeit an agile one.
Gives a whole new meaning to 'shortsword'.
"The last we saw of your father before they shut the city's gates on
us he was charging alone against the entire Turkish army armed with
nothing but a fruit knife."
;-)
John.
"Once I was a lamb, playing in a green field. Then
the wolves came. Now I am an eagle and I fly in a
different universe."
"And now you kill the lambs," whispered Dardalion.
"No, priest. No one pays for lambs."
- David Gemmel, Waylander
-
02-26-1998, 09:00 PM #2Mark A VandermeulenGuest
Weapon Stats in Rulebook
Hello All,
I was reading through the Rulebook today while making up a Brecht NPC, and
I noticed something. In reference to Table 9, p. 18, does it strike anyone
else as odd that the rapier causes more damage (1d6+1) than the
cutlass(1d6)? Now, I'm no martial artist or military historian, but I
always thought that the rapier was designed to take advantage of the
user's speed and agility while the cutlass was more designed to take
advantage of strength. Part of the reason the designers might have done
this was to account for the rapier's ability to strike unarmored areas and
holes in armor or through widely-spaced ring/chain mail. After thinking
about it a bit, it struck me that a sollution could be attained for this
discrapancy very easily: all that needs to be added is a rule that says
that a fighter cannot add strength bonuses to damage when using a rapier.
I'm considering using this rule, and would appreciate some feedback from
others on this list as to whether this seems like a good idea.
Mark VanderMeulen
vander+@pitt.edu
-
02-26-1998, 09:39 PM #3prtr02@scorpion.nspco.coGuest
Weapon Stats in Rulebook
> I was reading through the Rulebook today while making up a Brecht NPC, and
> I noticed something. In reference to Table 9, p. 18, does it strike anyone
> else as odd that the rapier causes more damage (1d6+1) than the
> cutlass(1d6)? Now, I'm no martial artist or military historian, but I
> always thought that the rapier was designed to take advantage of the
> user's speed and agility while the cutlass was more designed to take
> advantage of strength. Part of the reason the designers might have done
> this was to account for the rapier's ability to strike unarmored areas and
> holes in armor or through widely-spaced ring/chain mail. After thinking
> about it a bit, it struck me that a sollution could be attained for this
> discrapancy very easily: all that needs to be added is a rule that says
> that a fighter cannot add strength bonuses to damage when using a rapier.
> I'm considering using this rule, and would appreciate some feedback from
> others on this list as to whether this seems like a good idea.
Something to remember is that a renaissance rapier is not a foil. It has a
11/2 to 2 inch blade. It's a real sword, albeit an agile one.
The damage printed in the rulebook is wrong. Compare it to a sabre and what's
said about that weapon. To paraphrase- a sabre is heavier and does more damage
than a scimitar. Yah. Sure. Not by the printed rules.
scimitar:d8/d8
sabre:d6+1/d8+1 (same a rapier printed in the BR rulebook)
Throw in the (correct) observation about the cutlass, and one would think we've
reasoned the conclusion that the damage is wrong.
But wait. If our own rules interpretation is somehow not enough, check out
PO: combat and tactics. This tome, written by one of the main BR authors lists
the rapier as d6/d8 and sabre as d6+1/d8+1. Conclusion? The damage listed in
the rulebook table for rapiers is a typo.
Case closed?
Rules Lawyer Randax
PS IMO many weapons in D&D are underrated in regards to their relative damage
potential and some (ie the longsword) are overated. Is it worth it to redo
every weapon and the combat system? Not on your own. I've tried it. It
doesn't make that great an impact on the game and it sure is a headache for
the DM to interpret every peice of source material into the "new" system.
-
02-27-1998, 12:10 AM #4Daniel McSorleyGuest
Weapon Stats in Rulebook
>PS IMO many weapons in D&D are underrated in regards to their relative
damage
>potential and some (ie the longsword) are overated. Is it worth it to redo
>every weapon and the combat system? Not on your own. I've tried it. It
>doesn't make that great an impact on the game and it sure is a headache for
>the DM to interpret every peice of source material into the "new" system.
Actually, I saw something in a recent Dragon from the editors, basically
inviting letters on just this topic. It was hypothetical, I think, but ran
something like, if there were a third edition AD&D, would you want some
weapons to remain clearly superior (longsword...), or would you want them to
be more balanced.
Daniel McSorley
mcsorley.1@osu.edu
ICQ:5299865
-
03-01-1998, 08:54 AM #5Tim NuttingGuest
Weapon Stats in Rulebook
> PS IMO many weapons in D&D are underrated in regards to their relative
damage
> potential and some (ie the longsword) are overated. Is it worth it to
redo
> every weapon and the combat system? Not on your own. I've tried it. It
> doesn't make that great an impact on the game and it sure is a headache
for
> the DM to interpret every peice of source material into the "new" system.
The longsword may be wildly unbalanced, I am not altogether convinced as I
have never been able to find any renaisance or medieval blades that truly
fall into the category. Mostly all I can find are bastard swords and
broadswords. I don't know how the conclusions of damage to larger than
human objects were reached, so I remain stumped on the 1d12 rating of the
long sword.
However, the key here, IMO, is that the damage codes are based around
0-level spuds and 1-HD monsters. A solid hit from a soldier using a
braodsword has the serious potential to kill an orc, and a thief attacking
in the night from behind with a dagger is a serious threat to just such
targets. Naturally, as characters advance the weapon damages seem
ludicrously small, and yes that is perhaps a weakness of the system,
depending on what you're looking for. I have found dozens of systems that
have more "realistic" combat systems (Rolemaster boggles the mind...) but
none of them engender the same sense of fantasy heroes and terrible
monsters that D&D has, and I think thats what the game was designed to do.
If we really want to worry about propper damages, I strongly suggest
I.C.E.'s "Arms Law & Claw Law," a part of the Rolemaster RPG. It used to
be sold separately, but I'm not sure anymore. Each weapon type has its own
20 column chart with over 150 entries of possible damage codes, referencing
5 critical hit tables per weapon type (slash, puncture, bludgeon, claw,
etc., etc., ad nauseum.) As unwieldy as that sounds (it is!) it can be
made simpler by giving each player a photocopy of his weapon pages, though
this is of questionable legality. I believe, however, that copyright laws
allow for personal use within reason - but then, what do gamers care!?
Legal or not, the Xerox is our best friend! :)
If the hypothetical game group is REALLY detail oriented, they just might
want to try the entire Rolemaster RPG. It is not entirely compatible, but
conversion is certainly possible and allowed for in the main books. I have
no idea how you would convert Birthright over, but it would be a MAJOR
undertaking. However, the game awards XP for just about anything
(including walking from A to B) and you get more for doing something for
the first time, but less as time goes on, until you receive none for the
routine (you can learn nothing new from it). The spell system is
fantastically detailed and allows healing on a range perhaps only matched
by Harn.
Good Gaming
Tim Nutting
-
03-01-1998, 03:54 PM #6Samuel WeissGuest
Weapon Stats in Rulebook
Tim Nutting discussed Rolemaster and Birthright.
Actually, I don't think converting it over would be that hard. You would
have to write up new racial templates, but that isn't that har since they
published rules for it. Blood abilities become the various advantages
possible in the system.
The main difficulties are proper spheres for certain specialty priests and
paladins. But you can handle that by just shifting things around and
ignoring the set materials. Realm spells, which are possible with all the
stuff on nodes and arcane magic. And the combat system. The reason I don't
like the combat system is that it is way too critical hit reliant. Maybe
AD&D weapons do too little damage at high level, but I really don't want my
10th level fighter getting offed by an orc with that incredibly lucky roll
as can happen quite easily in Rolemaster. That has always been the real
problem with critical hit systems in AD&D. Everyone likle the idea of
killing a dragon with one shot, no one likes the idea of their character
going down the same way.
Which is why I won't convert over.
Samwise
-
03-04-1998, 06:29 PM #7prtr02@scorpion.nspco.coGuest
Weapon Stats in Rulebook
> > Something to remember is that a renaissance rapier is not a foil. It has a
> > 11/2 to 2 inch blade. It's a real sword, albeit an agile one.
>
> Gives a whole new meaning to 'shortsword'.
>
> "The last we saw of your father before they shut the city's gates on
> us he was charging alone against the entire Turkish army armed with
> nothing but a fruit knife."
>
> ;-)
Hehehehe, that made a bad day lots brighter. :)
HeeYa! *swish* Those Jannissaries don't stand a chance!
Randax
Thread Information
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Similar Threads
-
Rulebook
By Kami in forum The Royal LibraryReplies: 16Last Post: 07-01-2007, 08:18 AM -
Weapon Stats
By Arjan in forum TemplateReplies: 0Last Post: 05-16-2007, 09:28 AM -
BR 3rd Edition Rulebook
By OrangeArmlessMonkey in forum BRCS 3.0/3.5 EditionReplies: 9Last Post: 10-21-2005, 06:04 AM -
New RuleBook
By HCD or Spud in forum MPGN Mailinglist archive 1996-1999Replies: 0Last Post: 01-16-1998, 12:08 AM
Bookmarks