PDA

View Full Version : weapon speeds

fil kearney
2010-10-12, 03:32 PM
This topic is inspired by Tatsel_Ganav in his houserule thread located HERE (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=9352424#post9352424).

His thoughts on the subject was as such:

Weapons: Add a Speed rating to each weapon. The Speed rating determines the iterative attack penalty with that weapon. This carries with it a number of other potential changes, but that's the basis. If you're one of my players or close associates, you know what I'm talking about here. The following table explains the iterative penalty. No magic items or spells will affect weapon Speed, at all, ever, period. One feat will, and a mithral weapon will have Speed +1. Two-Weapon Fighting will also interact with weapon speed.
2|-10
3|-7
4|-5
5|-4
6|-3[/table][/QUOTE]

the Everquest RPG used this system... It works very similarly..
2 = very slow = -10
3 = slow = -7
4 = average = -5
5 = fast = -4
6 = very fast = -3
AFB... I'll need to see if EQ has different penalties... but this looks right.
the gist is... BAB iterative attacks depend on the difference of base bab and the weapon's penalty.
Fighter 20 has bab of 20....
very slow: +20/+10
slow: +20/+13/+6
average: +20/+15/+10/+5 <-- dnd standard!
fast: +20/+16/+12/+8/+4
very fast: +20/+17/+14/+11/+8/+5/+2

There were a lot of "holes" in the system, like size changes, wielding multiple weapons... here's some spackle to make it usable:

-- 2 weapon fighting defaults to the slowest weapon used... and then degrades a level.... so longsword(average)/shortsword(fast) defaults to the longswords's speed of average then is penalized to slow. (all very slow weapons are already 2 handed, and thus cannot contradict this progression)
so the longsword/shortsword in fighter20's hands is
longsword: +20/+13/+6
shortsword: +20/+13/+6
The shortsword alone would have granted 5 attacks..
+20/+16/+12/+8/+4
... the real bonus here is that the actual attacks are all at higher to hit+.. may be worth it. :)

--any fast or very fast weapon can use weapon finesse-- but if 2 weapon fighting.. BOTH weapons must be fast or very fast to retain weapon finesse... even if they degrade to average speed.. for example: a short sword (fast) can benefit from weapon finesse. if fighting with 2 of them; the speed degrades to average... but since both weapons are fast alone; the finesse benefit may still apply.

--damage scales differently for weapons... it was something like;
very slow: like d12-3d6
slow: like 2d6-2d8
average: like 2d4-d12
fast: like d6-d8
very fast: d3-d4
this was a balance for the very slow weapons being a single attack / round weapon until level 11. it doesn't hit often.. but when it does, it HURTS.

--size changes: there's two dynamics at work.. the size of the weapon, and the size of the wielder. the speed changes with the relationship between these two factors...
for example:
a medium sized long sword isd8 damage.
give it to a tiny creature, it becomes very slow, requiring 2 hands
give it to a small creature, it becomes slow
to a medium sized creature, it is average as it should be.
give it to a large creature, it becomes fast
give it to a huge creature, it becomes very fast
a small sized long sword is average speed deals d6 damage.
give it to a diminitive creature, it becomes very slow, requiring 2 hands
give it to a tiny creature, it becomes slow
to a small sized creature, it is average as it should be.
give it to a medium creature, it becomes fast
give it to a large creature, it becomes very fast

--if a weapon does not require 2 hands but you choose to do so; it will improve weapon speed 1 step... very fast weapons cannot benefit from this. In addition; average and slow weapons may gain the 1.5xstrength as well... but fast and very fast weapons do not gain extra strength damage... when this tactic is used, weapon finesse may apply to the weapon while wielded 2 handed... thus, a longsword (average) wielded 2 handed gains the benefit of 1.5 strength to gamage, becomes (fast) and can use weapon finesse.

--haste spells in EQ were very complex, depending on the level of caster.
5-8 | improve speed by 1 (max is (very fast))
9-12|speed remains the same: 1 extra attack at top BAB
13-16|improve speed by 1: 1 extra attack at top BAB
17-20|improve speed by 2 (max is (very fast))
21-24|improve speed by 2: 1 extra attack at top BAB
25-28|improve speed by 2: 2 extra attack at top BAB
29+|improve speed by 3 (max is (very fast)): 2 extra attack at top BAB
[/table]
this was a lot of trouble! best to leave haste as is for DnD...

--weapon speed enhancement property improves speed 1 step for every +1 added to the weapon... a 2 handed sword of speed +4 would be a very fast weapon still wielded with 2 hands (the exception to the 1.5 strength/very fast paradox) THIS is a better solution to the clumsy haste above... it could also be a feat or a class feature at level 7 and 13; to improve all relative weapon speeds... it would be a pretty obvious "gotta have it" feat... and pretty sweet for 7th and 13th level fighters to get their sword and board up to very fast speed with an average weapon, or to average speed with a massive fullblade.

feedback always appreciated... this is simply here for reference sake, if anyone likes it.

firemagehao
2010-10-12, 05:42 PM
I have been waiting for a rule like this for a long time.
I always felt that (for example) there should be a difference between a dagger and a greatsword as far as ease of use.

Knaight
2010-10-12, 07:41 PM
In that the dagger wielder is screwed in an open space due to a crippling reach disadvantage? Granted, that is a bit overstated, but weapon speeds are rarely very realistic, if anything it should be secondary to more detailed reach, and tweaking something this much in D&D is a bad idea without very careful monitoring.

Esser-Z
2010-10-12, 08:10 PM
I have been waiting for a rule like this for a long time.
I always felt that (for example) there should be a difference between a dagger and a greatsword as far as ease of use.

Dagger is simple, greatsword is martial. :smalltongue:

As for daggerman being screwed, depends on how fast he is. If he can get within the rather wide arc of the big sword....

Knaight
2010-10-12, 08:49 PM
Like I said, it was an exxageration. However, most two handed weapons are still fast, realistic use of a two handed sword isn't lots of incredibly slow swings. Its more the ability to close range given an opportunity, and the ability to create those opportunities to begin with.

2010-10-12, 11:24 PM

http://www.seankreynolds.com/rpgfiles/rants/weaponspeeds.html

Kellus
2010-10-12, 11:31 PM
The very first thing anybody will think of with modifying game material is adding 'realism'. This is usually a bad thing. It generally takes the form of more realistic critical hits, unarmed damage, targetting, called shots, or in this case weapon speeds.

Here's the thing: the game is abstract. It's abstract for a reason. Adding on needless rules just makes it more complex. It adds more finnicky rules to go through on every round of combat, and combat (let's be frank) takes long enough as it is.

What you really need to ask yourself about something like this is whether what it adds to the game makes up for its disadvantages in added complexity and time.

warty goblin
2010-10-12, 11:47 PM
Dagger is simple, greatsword is martial. :smalltongue:

As for daggerman being screwed, depends on how fast he is. If he can get within the rather wide arc of the big sword....

In which case the swordsman is a moron. You don't swing a sword like that from side to side, but make rapid cuts along vertical or diagonal lines. Moreover a skilled swordsman will never arrest the momentum of their weapon, but instead maintain it throughout the entire series of attacks. There's no arc to get inside. Even if the daggerman somehow gets close, the sword remains effective, either through use of a half-sword grip, strikes with the quillons and pommel, or simply striking with the strong/forte of the blade. It's not impossible for the dagger fighter to win, but given anything like equal skill I'd give at least 80 - 20 odds in the swordsman's favor.

If you want to differentiate heavier weapons from lighter, a fatigue system is the way to go, because they take a lot of effort to use.

The very first thing anybody will think of with modifying game material is adding 'realism'. This is usually a bad thing. It generally takes the form of more realistic critical hits, unarmed damage, targetting, called shots, or in this case weapon speeds.

And if you're going for adding realism, have some understanding and experience in the shortcoming you're trying to address. Called shots don't add realism; in a fight between unarmored people the first is going to cripple if not kill. All you need to do is to hit, where is mostly irrelevant. Between armored people anybody with any sense will be trying to hit where the armor isn't. Obviously this is harder, and adequately represented by armor's increase in AC.

Milskidasith
2010-10-13, 08:07 AM
I'd like to point out that this weakens melee a lot since nothing but the fastest weapons aren't weakened in this variant. It also further nerfs TWF, which is already underwhelming.

Esser-Z
2010-10-13, 10:19 AM
In which case the swordsman is a moron. You don't swing a sword like that from side to side, but make rapid cuts along vertical or diagonal lines. Moreover a skilled swordsman will never arrest the momentum of their weapon, but instead maintain it throughout the entire series of attacks. There's no arc to get inside. Even if the daggerman somehow gets close, the sword remains effective, either through use of a half-sword grip, strikes with the quillons and pommel, or simply striking with the strong/forte of the blade. It's not impossible for the dagger fighter to win, but given anything like equal skill I'd give at least 80 - 20 odds in the swordsman's favor.

Yeah, I'm aware of this. I was also oversimplifying.

fil kearney
2010-10-13, 04:23 PM
As stated, this concept was initially put out by EQd20 RPG. This is part of their core rules.. but their writers didn't fill in all the pieces... this stuff works if you want it to, and is actually a reply to Tatsel_Ganav's desire to HAVE weapon speeds in his game.

Please refrain from arguing about levels of realism in a fantasy RPG
(though I too could go on ad nauseum regarding actual techniques)
Please refrain from offering your opinion that this is a needless complexity

Thanks for being passionate. :D

I think everyone will agree it's actually appropriate to discuss the actual mechanics presented here.. like, offering alternate mechanics that would more "effectively" address various weapon speeds.

I will point out that SAGA (IIRC) did away with iterative attacks altogether... instead would assign extra damage (and I believe a bonus to a single attack roll) to represent rapid fire or full automatic fire... that is actually a MUCH more elegant solution... but it's not what is being addressed here.

I'd like to point out that this weakens melee a lot since nothing but the fastest weapons aren't weakened in this variant.

The above system doesn't work properly unless you rescale damages for various sized/speeded weapons. I might(not) get around to it; if someone else wants to take on that task, please be free.

It also further nerfs TWF, which is already underwhelming.

can you demonstrate how?

Arutema
2010-10-13, 04:44 PM
Melee has enough problems without nerfing two-handers (which would be the slow weapons in this system). I'd suggest something more like.

{table=head]Weapon type|Penalty|Full attack at BAB 20
Two-handed|-5|+20/+15/+10/+5 (no change)
One-handed|-4|+20/+16/+12/+8/+4
Light|-3|+20/+17/+14/+11/+8/+5/+2[/table]

This would give no penalty to the current heavy weapons, but buff the one-handed and light weapons to the point they possibly become worth using.

For two-weapon fighting, remove the -2 penalty, but reduce the speed of each weapon by 1 step. This will help keep full attacks with two light weapons from taking forever to resolve.

Mikka
2010-10-13, 05:32 PM
If you want combat realism you should try out Riddle of Steel, its even had a medieval swordfighting expert guy say that its a very realistic system.

It has different speeds, reaches, differenet maneuvers you can do with different weapons and so on and so on. It makes the simple "I attack" of D&D into a very tactical strategic thing. I was very intrigued by it. Go check it out : )

fil kearney
2010-10-14, 05:25 AM
Melee has enough problems without nerfing two-handers (which would be the slow weapons in this system). I'd suggest something more like.

{table=head]Weapon type|Penalty|Full attack at BAB 20
Two-handed|-5|+20/+15/+10/+5 (no change)
One-handed|-4|+20/+16/+12/+8/+4
Light|-3|+20/+17/+14/+11/+8/+5/+2[/table]

This would give no penalty to the current heavy weapons, but buff the one-handed and light weapons to the point they possibly become worth using.

For two-weapon fighting, remove the -2 penalty, but reduce the speed of each weapon by 1 step. This will help keep full attacks with two light weapons from taking forever to resolve.

This is very elegant!

removing the -2 for the off hand and just slowing down both weapons is smart.
you you still tack on the normal penalties assigned to 2wf? how would you assign feats (if any) to improve/allow 2wf?

Knaight
2010-10-14, 08:22 AM
Of course, if you wield a one handed weapon in two hands, and it doesn't get counted as a two handed weapon, then it becomes the new top weapon. Unless you can wield a light weapon in two hands.

Arutema
2010-10-14, 05:15 PM
This is very elegant!

removing the -2 for the off hand and just slowing down both weapons is smart.
you you still tack on the normal penalties assigned to 2wf? how would you assign feats (if any) to improve/allow 2wf?
I'd have something like -4 penalty to each hand without the Two-Weapon Fighting feat, but no need to take future feats to improve it. I already see improved/greater TWF as an unnecessary feat tax. Rangers would get the Two-Weapon Defense line at 6 and 11.

Of course, if you wield a one handed weapon in two hands, and it doesn't get counted as a two handed weapon, then it becomes the new top weapon. Unless you can wield a light weapon in two hands.

True. Perhaps force you to take the slower speed if you're wielding it two-handed. Light weapons cannot be wielded two-handed by 3.5 RAW.

Knaight
2010-10-14, 05:24 PM
Light was as I remembered, which means that everything is close to balanced. The rogue gains a bit of damage potential, no big deal. Martial adepts are slightly depowered relative to everyone else, again no big deal.

Eldan
2010-10-15, 01:16 PM
I agree at least on that five categories are two much. Three seem better.

How about mithral weaponry? that could move weapon speed up one step.

fil kearney
2010-10-15, 05:41 PM
I wonder how much playtesting was done on the EQ RPG rules.
I always wonder how much practical application rules have before being introduced.
I admit I have only used the system as In the OP for about 3 weeks.. It wend smoothly enough for a light weapons 2wf user. but dmaage needs to be controlled.