Does Roleplaying affect your Weapon Decisions?

[Snownine]

My last (and first) group got scrapped after our first game so I am re-rolling a new character for a new campaign. I have decided to go with a dwarven fighter and have come across a, minor, dilemma; should I go with the greatsword or greataxe? The greatsword is a slightly superior weapon mathematically but I find axes to be quite a bit cooler than swords. In addition an axe seems to fit a dwarven fighter better than a sword. So my questions to you fine folks is, would you go with the technically superior weapon or the one you thought fit your character better? Is the difference enough to really worry about?

By the way this campaign will not be optimized or min/maxed in any way.

[Jormengand]

So my questions to you fine folks is, would you go with the technically superior weapon or the one you thought fit your character better?

By the way this campaign will not be optimized or min/maxed in any way.

You've pretty much answered your own question here.

[Matticussama]

I often choose weapons based on the character, rather than what is strictly the best. Especially in games where there is only a moderate amount of optimization, sacrificing a minor bit of power on a weapon isn't as big of a deal in the long run. If you have a decent build and a good choice of feats, that extra bit of power that a Greatsword has over a Greataxe doesn't make a very big difference; those are the instances where little touches like the axe instead of the sword can help give your character the look and feel that you want.

[Yora]

I always pick weapons, armor, and race first, based entirely on what I think is cool.
After that I start considering if I am going to build the character towards any specific tricks that could be done with the gear.

[Alex12]

Yes.
For example, my backup character in the campaign I'm currently playing is a scythe-using Dread Necromancer. Are there better/more useful weapons? Sure! But the symbolism of the scythe on a dread necromancer is just perfect.

[Theobod]

Been in a game alongside a dread necro with a scythe once.... that was his phylactery..... ahh early days.

More on topic, generally my groups have gone for sub standard weapons even in high op games, really if it fills what you want (reach or no, light one or two handed) the rest is largely academic, as crits are largely meh unless you build around it (or in my games, if you can afford it, but i use an Incremental masterworking homebrew in my games, and its expensive).
Examples I have DM'd for:
Gestalt cleric barbarian, greataxe user (ex woodsman turned wanderer)
Fighter with bastard sword proficiency..... uses it two handed :) likes the 'feel' over those clunky greatswords (character is a poor knight and an earls youngest)
Dwarvern Barbarian, with an Urgosh.
Someone even played a soulknife once.

In game I have Sword and Boarded before and i have a warmage with a shortspear and buckler cos of the standard warmage piccie, i loved the feel.... mines a halfling though :D
Also had a dual hand crossbow rogue cos of flavor.... initially, i then realised what that could do and hot daym, i opped the knackers of that.
Last ones a bad example :P

[rockdeworld]

No, I prefer the options that make my characters much more powerful. Then I roleplay it.

[Slipperychicken]

Take the axe. The difference is small enough that, if you built him competently, it won't matter.

[Kudaku]

I have no problem choosing a suboptimal weapon to fit my character.

That said, I am reluctant to pick weapons that are utterly terrible purely for RP reasons - in that case I'd rather ask the GM if I can use a similar but less terrible weapon and simply describe it as the former.

For instance I might ask to refluff a dagger as a bronze knife if I'm playing a pirate character, or a longsword as a khopesh if I'm playing an osirian character.

[ArcturusV]

Near as I'd say, it doesn't really matter. The difference between having a 2d6 weapon and a 1d12 weapon is going to be negligible at all but the lowest levels of play. That said, if I was playing a dwarf, my choice of weapon would probably be neither. I mean what does a race of squat tunnelers have that really screams "Axe". Axe seems like the wrong kinda weapon for tunnel fighting. Least to me. I'd probably therefore go Spear based/polearm. Thrusting weapon makes more sense in crowded tunnel fighting. After that, maybe something like a Pick, as I can see that culturally developing from an improvised weapon to an actual weapon.

But that's just how I'd look at it.

[Barsoom]

My last (and first) group got scrapped after our first game so I am re-rolling a new character for a new campaign. I have decided to go with a dwarven fighter and have come across a, minor, dilemma; should I go with the greatsword or greataxe? The greatsword is a slightly superior weapon mathematically but I find axes to be quite a bit cooler than swords. In addition an axe seems to fit a dwarven fighter better than a sword. So my questions to you fine folks is, would you go with the technically superior weapon or the one you thought fit your character better? Is the difference enough to really worry about?

By the way this campaign will not be optimized or min/maxed in any way.

I have a revolutionary idea for you: use a Greataxe, but ask your DM to use the damage stats of the Greatsword (you still use the other, non-damage, stats of the Greataxe, such as it's mostly made of wood, not metal, etc). I had a DM who allowed those little adjustments, and it was all good.

Having said that, the difference between 1d12 and 2d6, as mentioned, is negligible, and you may even not notice it ever throughout your character's career.

[PraxisVetli]

I mean what does a race of squat tunnelers have that really screams "Axe". Axe seems like the wrong kinda weapon for tunnel fighting. Least to me. I'd probably therefore go Spear based/polearm..
Well if he wanted to cross some beams there, he could go Halberd. Bit weird though, I think, a dwarf with a Hally.
Pick seems nice, Hammer goes along the same route. And there are some mighty big hammers out there, i.e., goliath and greathorn minotaur..

[Eldonauran]

Does Roleplaying affect your Weapon Decisions?

In one word, yes.

In more words; I never build a character around specific weapon if it doesn't fit the concept of the character. For example, I would never dream of using a lance in the game unless I was making a knight-ish character and then, never unless he was mounted. Same thing that goes for reach weapons. I generally never use them unless the character had reasons to have them. A spiked chain weilder? Never going to roll one up unless inspiration strikes me.

Have I made a character around a specific type of weapon? Absolutely. Normally I determine who the character is and what he does before I go around determining how he does it. For example, a recent character I made was a Titan Mauler/Viking Halfling that was bent on taking down creatures larger than himself (which is just about everything). I originally determined to have him use a dwarven waraxe to reflect his upbringing but settled on an earthbreaker (2d6, 1d10 small). Mechanically, it was only the difference of an average 1 dmg. Thematically, it made the character 'pop' in my eyes.

Roleplaying doesnt just affect my weapon decisions, it defines them.

[JaronK]

Near as I'd say, it doesn't really matter. The difference between having a 2d6 weapon and a 1d12 weapon is going to be negligible at all but the lowest levels of play. That said, if I was playing a dwarf, my choice of weapon would probably be neither. I mean what does a race of squat tunnelers have that really screams "Axe". Axe seems like the wrong kinda weapon for tunnel fighting. Least to me. I'd probably therefore go Spear based/polearm. Thrusting weapon makes more sense in crowded tunnel fighting. After that, maybe something like a Pick, as I can see that culturally developing from an improvised weapon to an actual weapon.

But that's just how I'd look at it.

Dwarven War Pike! Free proficiency (using the Complete Warrior rules for racial weapons), it's actually a Dwarf weapon, it works in tunnels, and it's basically a spear axe. Plus it has reach!

JaronK

[Erik Vale]

I have a revolutionary idea for you: use a Greataxe, but ask your DM to use the damage stats of the Greatsword (you still use the other, non-damage, stats of the Greataxe, such as it's mostly made of wood, not metal, etc). I had a DM who allowed those little adjustments, and it was all good.


Or just do it anyhow. I'm paying for the stats, not the picture.

That said, I rarely play characters were weapon choice is important. Only time really is PF going Dwarven Chain Flail on a area control fighter, Reach and the ability to use the weapon without reach should I need it, I'll take that thanks.

[kreenlover]

No, never ever choose mechanics over RP (unless it is the best most broken thing that you are sacrificing RP for)

In the fight between greataxe and greatsword, you get one weapon that make crits more swingy, or one that crits more often (an extra 5% of the time)

But, in the end, its an RP thing. Don't see the dwarf with a giant sword? Then skip it! The sword is going to be taller than they are anyways :smalltongue:

Only time I chose weapon first was for a build that got instant critical hits with every single attack. And he was an evil sadistic bastard, because the build mandated that. But, never ever ever do what I did. It just don't fit.

[Ninja_Grand]

My char now has a box of throwing axes. Cool, but sup par.

[TuggyNE]

My last (and first) group got scrapped after our first game so I am re-rolling a new character for a new campaign. I have decided to go with a dwarven fighter and have come across a, minor, dilemma; should I go with the greatsword or greataxe? The greatsword is a slightly superior weapon mathematically but I find axes to be quite a bit cooler than swords. In addition an axe seems to fit a dwarven fighter better than a sword. So my questions to you fine folks is, would you go with the technically superior weapon or the one you thought fit your character better? Is the difference enough to really worry about?

In this specific case, it doesn't matter much; greatswords are slightly better, but not enough to worry about.

In the general, though, roleplaying should certainly affect weapon decisions, but equating "roleplaying" with "funky unique weapon choice" is entirely fallacious. Playing a realistic character will generally involve some reasonable attempt to be good at that character's job; a melee fighter (Fighter or otherwise) might indeed start with some quirky weapon, but it's likely that their training would beat that out of them if the chosen weapon wasn't really much good. On the other hand, if their fighting style takes advantage of a weapon's characteristics to be as effective as most conventional warriors, that would be fine, because that's a sensible choice as well (especially if, for example, the style is hard for most to counter, or has some other situational advantage).

[Big Fau]

I don't particularly care for spiked chains, and usually don't utilize them on characters I build (I think they are rather stupid-looking). I prefer the Glaive+Armor Spikes method for most AoO builds, and a Greatsword/Longsword for most everything else.

[Slipperychicken]

My char now has a box of throwing axes. Cool, but sup par.

Yeah, being awesome is worth losing out on a few points of damage.

[Namfuak]

I tend to play casters, so half my weapon decisions are quarterstaves anyway since it practically doesn't matter. I suppose if I wanted to be optimized I might take a longspear instead (if I have all simple weapon proficiency), but I just like the image of a caster with a quarterstaff he eventually learns to enchant into a runestaff.

For melee characters, if I don't have a specific look in mind I'll probably choose an optimized weapon, but usually my build idea ends up having a clear winner for the weapon beyond its base stats, so it doesn't come up much. I suppose the main place where I break this is that I'll usually take morningstars on clerics, but that's because the difference between a morningstar and a mace is so ridiculous.

[Vultawk]

Role-playing affects all my character building decisions.

[Aegis013]

As a DM, I encourage a bit of weapon re-fluff if the player feels it would be better for the character. For example, one of my players refluffed a greatsword (only mechanical change was damage type became bludgeoning) to be a 2 handed maul for his character.

Changes like that seem rather inconsequential to me, since DR/(specific damage type) is pretty rare, I've found, and that's just about the only time I can think of where such a thing would really make a difference in the gameplay, and it's not enough of a difference for me to concern myself with.

[Grayson01]

This is just me but the first question I ask when making a CHarcater (Mellee or caster) is what weapon will he use? To me (and it is probably only me) but the weapon a character weilds is one of the most important development points. I mean the weapon says it all: Artemis's Dagger, Drizzit Scymitars, Lego's Bow, Gand the whites Sword and Quarter Staff, Jaralxels throwing daggers, The Gythyanki Sliver Sword, Saint Cuthberts Cudgle, Thor and his Hammer, and so many others. The weapon is their trademark it sells them. So when I think of or make a character that's what it starts with.

[ericp65]

For me, it's character concept first, then using a given system's mechanics and options to best represent it. That's why my two favorite characters, the arcane caster I've revised and the knightly combatant I'm currently revising, won't be fully optimized. They'll be about as close as they can get while fitting the concepts.

[Chronos]

Quoth ArcturusV:

That said, if I was playing a dwarf, my choice of weapon would probably be neither. I mean what does a race of squat tunnelers have that really screams "Axe". Axe seems like the wrong kinda weapon for tunnel fighting. Least to me.
In my current group, we're all playing dwarves, because the DM had an idea for a campaign that depended on that. The fellow playing the ranger chose to dual-wield a warhammer and a pick, with the reasoning that that's what he was familiar with from the mines. He was surprised when we pointed out to him that both of those had good crit multipliers.

[Lightlawbliss]

To me, I usually change weapons so often (If I use weapons at all) that I don't worry about picking just the right weapon to start with. The only time I worry about the actual weapon at all is on a build that focuses on a weapon or when I need a specific property or set of properties (like for the rare crit monger build, A weapon that is good at ___, or a weapon that gets past/doesn't care about ___, or if the weapon is light/one handed/two handed). For most of the time, a greatsword or a great axe: eather works. The power gamer in me says neither, it wants a Falchion or Scythe to abuse the improved average damage the higher crit range/multiplyer (respectivly) gives when added to the character's likely higher then normal strength.

[almightycoma]

This is just me but the first question I ask when making a CHarcater (Mellee or caster) is what weapon will he use? To me (and it is probably only me) but the weapon a character weilds is one of the most important development points.
I completely agree with this.At character creation I think, i wanna kill people with rocks or, that stick covered in antlers from frost burn. The rest of it comes after that.
role play would only change that if something happened to my character in game. example: accidentally kills loved one and vows never to use that weapon type again, or loses an arm so he switches to 1handers from 2h weapons.

[Snownine]

Thanks a lot for the input everyone, I appreciate the feedback. I think the next time I see my DM I will ask him if I can use 2d6 for the greataxe instead of 1d12. If he says yes I will take the axe, if he says no I will still take the axe anyway as it is how I picture my character.

[TuggyNE]

This is just me but the first question I ask when making a CHarcater (Mellee or caster) is what weapon will he use? To me (and it is probably only me) but the weapon a character weilds is one of the most important development points. I mean the weapon says it all: Artemis's Dagger, Drizzit Scymitars, Lego's Bow, Gand the whites Sword and Quarter Staff, Jaralxels throwing daggers, The Gythyanki Sliver Sword, Saint Cuthberts Cudgle, Thor and his Hammer, and so many others. The weapon is their trademark it sells them. So when I think of or make a character that's what it starts with.

I can't comment on most of those, but Legolas switched from a longbow (unnamed) to a shortbow (also unnamed) over the course of Fellowship, and Gandalf picked up a sword more or less on the spur of the moment after defeating some random trolls. Sure, it was nice, and even had a name, but Gandalf's signature was much more his magic, or even his (unnamed) staff or mount Shadowfax; all five wizards had a staff, as a symbol of office and aid to casting.

Now, if you'd said Aragorn, that would have made a whole lot more sense, because it's his ancestral weapon, a symbol of his heritage and power. But he spent a good 64 years* adventuring and patrolling without being able to use it for anything especially dangerous, so he must have used other weapons most of that time. Similarly, the hobbits picked up various useful knives, but they never trained specifically to use them, and those were never a defining characteristic; Gimli had an axe, because Middle Earth dwarves are very big on axes culturally, and Boromir had a sword, but we don't know even whether those were one- or two-handed weapons, and the weapons do not define them at all.

In any case, all of the examples I can speak to show that mechanical effectiveness is at least as important as individuality: Legolas didn't use a bow because he wanted to be his own person, he used a bow because he was good with it and it was a good weapon.

*He was 20 when he left Rivendell after dropping the name Estel, and 84 when the Fellowship succeeded.

[Azoth]

I don't so much pick a weapon first, but settle on my main weapon(s) once I have decided how I want the character to fight. After that it becomes a question of what feels right for that character. Occassionally, I have to sit with a DM and try to get a few things approved for the thematic choices but it is woth it to me.

Funny thing is that I usually end up showing lesser used weapons more love than any others. Greatswords/axes are fine, but for me there is something more fun about going into a fight using punch daggers, tridents, bolas, ect. Just makes a character more exciting for me.

[Spuddles]

I only use the mechanically best weapons for the archetype I'll be playing.

[Corndog]

I'm more of a roleplayer than a min/maxer. I will take the crappiest weapon and armor if it fits the character concept

[LordBlades]

The way I do it: if my idea of a character includes weapon/armor, then I use that/ If it doesn't I use the best weapon for the job.

[DigoDragon]

My players generally pick weapons that fit their theme for RPing. My wife loves to play boisterous barbarian types so she favors two-handed weapons. Daggers are a favorite for sneaky types. One player had a bard "swashbuckler" who loved hand crossbows and whips.

My current wizard character is a former blachsmith apprentice from a village off the beaten path. He knows a lot about the skills that go into building weapons and armor, but nothing about wielding them. He used a sling for quite some time until the party ninja "taught" him to use a crossbow.

[ahenobarbi]

In D&D context I pick up what's most efficient for the concept Because I'm playing a homimostrocidal hobo who in order to live should make the best choices it can.

In other RPGs... it really depends on what we're playing. In WoD I'll pick up basics means of fighting juts in case figting happens. I Neuroshima I'll pick whatever suits character combat...

[Suteinu]

I've seen remarkable changes in character along the lines of this "the clothes make the man" question. For example, eveyone knows that barbariabs use big axes and Conan-swords. Give him a rapier, and suddenly he's a brash, passionate swashbuckler, maybe even Porthos. Everyone knows that hobb- er, halflings are throw-meisters. Give him a greatsword, throw-in Improved Trip and Combat Reflexes, and suddenly he's a battlefield obstical. Bassically (Geezer Butler), go with cool and turn it into awesome. If we don't play for fun, why play?

[cerin616]

im just saying, the difference in damage is a modifier of .05

so lets just say your axe is averaging out at 100 damage a hit, your sword is going to do 5 more on average.

TL;DR
It doesn't matter.

[TuggyNE]

im just saying, the difference in damage is a modifier of .05

so lets just say your axe is averaging out at 100 damage a hit, your sword is going to do 5 more on average.

That's not precisely correct, according to AnyDice (http://anydice.com/program/26e9/graph); the difference is actually never more than .5 damage total, unless you have some specific effect that only triggers on a crit and doesn't care about multiplier.

[LordBlades]

Greatsword is however a lot more predictable than greataxe.

Greataxe damage distribution is flat (equal probability of rolling anything from 1 to 12) and damage spikes (Crits) occur rarely (5% of the time roughly) and for great amounts (x3).

Greatsword damage distribution is a curve
http://www.thedarkfortress.co.uk/tech_reports/tech_assets/2-dice-charts.gif

And spikes occur more often (10% of the time) but are smaller (x2).

All in all, you can usually count on a Greatsword to produce average damage with a lot more regularity than the greataxe, but spiking somebody for x3 damage is a lot more spectacular than x2 IMO.

[Darth Stabber]

Actually, I do the whole process backward. Weapon choice affects resulting roleplay.

In a 4e campain I was playing a human fighter using some kind of dwarven hammer thing. Then I decided to grab the cleric multiclass feat for easy access to self healing, to save the leader some trouble. So THEN is started on the back story. He was a human orphaned by a gnoll attack, and was rescued by a group of passing dwarves. Having been raised by dwarves he became a worshiper of moradin, believing that the dwarffather had sent the rescue party, and that he is destined to help defend his adoptive clan's hold and honor.

This is part of why the stormwind fallacy is a fallacy (there are other reasons too). But I sometimes have a hard time coming up with a backstory after years of roleplaying, and when I optimize I have all these weird things that must be taken into account when I come up with it, restrictions breed creativity and all. Sometimes I will deoptimie a choice or two to keep from getting too far out there, but that's moving the goal posts and feels like cheating. That is how you have your cake and eat it too, go backwards.

[Razgriez]

Yes, yes, and a hundred times more, yes. Optimization is not something you should absolutely follow without any divergence. Optimization is more of a general guideline to "If your placed into a *Generic encounter type*, what's your most likely options available to face it?"

If you feel your character is more likely to carry an Axe over a sword, due to tastes, then use the axe. Besides, it's a game. Games are designed to be fun, and if your not going to have fun following the cookie cutter build, then why use it? What's the worse that happens if you use your favorite weapon over the build optimized sword? A few less points of damage? Ok, big deal. don't worry about it. make up for that with your character's roleplay. I've found that often the best characters are the ones who might not be able to handle as many situations as possible, but the ones with the best story.

[ArcturusV]

Lord of Blades:

Yes, but at a certain point the fact that the great sword reliably averages 7 damage, and the Greataxe is thoroughly random, stops mattering. I'm not even sure it takes all that long for that to be the case.

Take level 1. If you're a fighter you're rocking 18 str most likely. If not more. Probably have Power Attack even though you cannot fully utilize it yet if you're picking two handed smashers.

Which means your average damage on an attack, barring conditional stuff, is going to be 2d6 + 6, or 1d12 + 6. In the case of the great sword your expected average damage is almost already matched by your bonuses to damage. So you can safely say that half the damage you do is your weapon, half is your own skills. At any point an expected 13 damage is generally enough to drop most anything you fight at level 1 except the big bad bosses.

At level two, it jumps up to +8 as the bonus damage. So already by level 2 your own "talents" are more important to damage than your weapon you're packing. Least on average. But it's still not inconsiderable. I'd say that the average roll of 7 (With a 1/36 chance of min or max), versus the more variable 1-12 (with a 1/12 chance of any number), probably balances out in the long run.

[LordBlades]

Lord of Blades:

Yes, but at a certain point the fact that the great sword reliably averages 7 damage, and the Greataxe is thoroughly random, stops mattering. I'm not even sure it takes all that long for that to be the case.

Take level 1. If you're a fighter you're rocking 18 str most likely. If not more. Probably have Power Attack even though you cannot fully utilize it yet if you're picking two handed smashers.

Which means your average damage on an attack, barring conditional stuff, is going to be 2d6 + 6, or 1d12 + 6. In the case of the great sword your expected average damage is almost already matched by your bonuses to damage. So you can safely say that half the damage you do is your weapon, half is your own skills. At any point an expected 13 damage is generally enough to drop most anything you fight at level 1 except the big bad bosses.

At level two, it jumps up to +8 as the bonus damage. So already by level 2 your own "talents" are more important to damage than your weapon you're packing. Least on average. But it's still not inconsiderable. I'd say that the average roll of 7 (With a 1/36 chance of min or max), versus the more variable 1-12 (with a 1/12 chance of any number), probably balances out in the long run.

Fully agree. As you go up in level and/or power, most weapon stats cease to matter, except for crit properties (threat range and multiplier) and some special properties (reach, trip etc.). That's why for a high enough damage Falchion is actually better than both greatsword and greataxe vs. anything that's not immune to crits.

[Krazzman]

Yes. The reason my Warblade uses a Spiked Chain is because he's a follower of Kossuth whos Favoured Weapon is a Spiked Chain.

My Cleric uses a Mace (or Morning Star, unsure atm) because he just grabbed an easy weapon to use. And more simple than Bash head in is quite hard to find.

Most of the times I think about a Char and go: that weapon would fit or that build would fit with that weapon. (Wanted to try out a Bloodstormblade using a Scythe... generally wanting to play a char using a scythe).