[Homebrew concept] Weapon speeds

[Neek]

2nd edition had weapon speeds listed with all its weapons, an interesting concept that give a little edge to combat: Even if you rolled a good initiative, you could still be slowed by your weapon. This concept was not carried over in 3rd edition, but I was thinking of bringing it back:

Weapons can slow you down if they're too big. When wielding one, you still act on your same initiative that you rolled. However, depending on the modifier, the act is not resolved until your modified initiative.

Light weapons impose no penalty to your initiative when wielded. You act on the same initiative you make your attack.

One-handed weapons impose a -1 penalty to your initiative when wielded. You declare your action on your initiative, but it is not resolved until your modified initiative.

Two-haded weapons impose a -2 penalty to your initiative when wielded. You declare your action on your initiative, but the attack is not resolved until your modified initiative.

[Optional] To speed up combat, you simply rule that your initiative is after your weapon modifier is applied. That's when you declare your action and make your attack in the same instance.

The former has its benefits: If you take another action, such as moving, casting a spell, or drinking a potion, you shouldn't be slowed by the weapon you're wielding. The latter does also: Creatures that you threaten can move out of your threaten range (still imposing an AoO) before your attack comes to fruition, which can be annoying.

Either way, here's a bonus feat:

Quick Swing
You are fast in making attacks with weapons.

Prerequisites: BAB +1, Str 13+ or Dex 13+
Benefit: Select a one-handed or a two-handed weapon. When wielding this weapon, it counts as one size category smaller when determining initiative modifiers (that is, a one-handed weapon is considered a light weapon).
Special: You can gain this feat multiple times. Each Its effects do not stack. Each timeyou take this feat, it applies to a new weapon.

A fighter may take this feat as one of his bonus feats.

Questions/comments/criticisms?

[Lord Iames Osari]

I'm ambiguous about this, but I do have a critique: The penalties are, IMO, too large. If you absolutely must give one-handed weapons a penalty, then I would halve the penalties across the board.

[Seraph]

bit of a serious penalty. color me biased, but someone with training using a zweihander can swing it pretty damn fast, unlike all this media crap about how big weapons are these heavy monstrosities that are impossible to carry by any mere mortal.

[Neek]

bit of a serious penalty. color me biased, but someone with training using a zweihander can swing it pretty damn fast, unlike all this media crap about how big weapons are these heavy monstrosities that are impossible to carry by any mere mortal.

A swing of a dagger is faster than a swing of zweihander, no matter in whose hands they belong. However, I agree that the penalties are a bit too much on second look.


I'm ambiguous about this, but I do have a critique: The penalties are, IMO, too large. If you absolutely must give one-handed weapons a penalty, then I would halve the penalties across the board.

I had a problem with this as well. I felt they were a bit stiff, but didn't stick with my instinct with my post. Then perhaps just reduce it by one per size category rather than 2? So Light/One-handed/Two-handed are 0, -1, -2 respectively?

[Lord Iames Osari]

That was my thought.

[Triaxx]

A dagger swing will always be faster, but it's an inaccurate comparison. Closer would be to a long, or bastard sword.

[Neek]

That was my thought.

It's been fixed.


A dagger swing will always be faster, but it's an inaccurate comparison. Closer would be to a long, or bastard sword.

You're right. Either way, the point is made: great swords being swung by a competent soldier is a lot faster than what we'd take them for, but they're still not as fast as other weapons.

[Zeta Kai]

I agree that at the extreme, light weapons like the dagger should be faster than say, a battleaxe. Perhaps the lightest of weapons should get a +1 initiative bonus, the heaviest should get a -1 initiative penalty, & the rest of the weapons should be +0.

[DonBiscuit]

Maybe base it off of weight?

Generally, light is lighter than one-handed, which are generally lighter than two-handers, but there are some weapons that defy this rule.

Just glancing at the SRD, rapiers and whips weigh 2, quaterstaffs (staves?) only weigh 4, and dwarven waraxes weigh 8 pounds.


Also, how would this apply to two-weapons? If you're wielding a one-handed weapon and a light weapon, would your overall attack be at -1 initiative? Or would your one-handed weapon attack after your light weapon?

[Joltz]

It's a functional mechanic, but it doesn't make sense from my experience. In a rl fight between a guy with a greatsword, and a guy with a dagger, the greatsword gets the first attack every time. There's something about a 3' reach difference that does that.

This reminds me of the time I was considering adding penalties for people with polearms fighting in a 5' corridor (you can't swing a glaive in that). After thinking about it for a while, I realized that even though a large weapon can't get a full swing in that space, you can't properly dodge or advance against them either. The first time I fought someone who preferred a glaive, I learned that any form of direct advance will get you stabbed in the chest (or ribs, or groin, or...) I finally decided that the difficulties of dodging a large weapon without space to maneuver balanced out the difficulties of swinging it without enough space and left it alone.

[Umarth]

Take a look at how EQRPG does weapon speeds. I'm using that rule in my game and haven't had any problems so far.

Basic idea behind it is that weapon speed changes when you get itterative attacks.

So a standard (5) speed weapon you get your first itterative attack at +6/+1.
If you had a fast (4) speed weapon you'd get your first itterative attack at +5/+1.
Simerally a slow weapon (6) delays your first itterative attack until +7/+1.

The fastest you can get is speed 2 (quick weapon, +feat, +magic) and the slowest you can get is 8. You also wind up having to tweak the damage on a lot of weapons that wind up being quick or slow using this method.

If your intrested in more details on it send me a PM and I'll forward you a copy of my Narrowlands PHB that covers it all and has a few speed related feats.

[Jack_Simth]

Umarth:

So... a Rogue-20 with the feat (for the weapon - I presume they're specific), the magic quickening on two daggers, and the two weapon fighting chain gets... what, something like +13/+11/+9/+7/+5/+3/+1/-1 on the primary (+15/.../+1 with a -2 penalty for two-weapon fighting with daggers) and +13/+8/+3 (-5/-10 penalty progression is specified by the TWF feat chain) on the secondary, all with Sneak Attack attached? Or something else?

[Neek]

Maybe base it off of weight?

Generally, light is lighter than one-handed, which are generally lighter than two-handers, but there are some weapons that defy this rule.

Just glancing at the SRD, rapiers and whips weigh 2, quaterstaffs (staves?) only weigh 4, and dwarven waraxes weigh 8 pounds.

Weight was an issue I had mainly because it might have made things too complicated. Things being set in neat little categories makes our lives easier. Though weight wouldn't be too hard to do...

I did not consider multiple weapons before, and I'm still having to work them in my head...


It's a functional mechanic, but it doesn't make sense from my experience. In a rl fight between a guy with a greatsword, and a guy with a dagger, the greatsword gets the first attack every time. There's something about a 3' reach difference that does that.

Triaxx said it as I didn't, but a longsword versus greatsword, the longsword is probably going to swing first if they both started their swing at the same moment. It wasn't exactly 100% realistic in 2nd edition when it was used, and it's main purpose was to drive a penalty for wielding large weapons.

@Umarth, if you want to post it here, that's fine. You won't be stealing my thunder any, or you can PM It.

[Umarth]

Rogue with a speed 2 weapon one handed would be 15/13/11/9. You still get a max of 4 attacks in a round.

I didn't see a convincing/non broken/easy way to change the TWF tree so it would like this with TWF, IMP, GTWF

Primary Hand: 13/11/9/7 Off hand 13/6/1

I've found this brings a bit more balance to TWFs vs 2hnders. Plays arround some with how well power attack is going to work and how often TWF hits.



Here's the table:

{table=head]BAB:| Preternaturally Quick (2)*|Very Quick (3)| Quick (4) |Standard (5) | Slow (6) | Very Slow (7) | Ponderous (8)
0 |0 |0 |0 |0 |0 |0 |0
1 |1 |1 |1 |1 |1 |1 |1
2 |2 |2 |2 |2 |2 |2 |2
3 |3/1 |3 |3 |3 |3 |3 |3
4 |4/2 |4/1 |4 |4 |4 |4 |4
5 |5/3/1 |5/2 |5/1 |5 |5 |5 |5
6 |6/4/2 |6/3 |6/2 |6/1 |6 |6 |6
7 |7/5/3/1 |7/4/1 |7/3 |7/2 |7/1 |7 |7
8 |8/6/4/2 |8/5/2 |8/4 |8/3 |8/2 |8/1 |8
9 |9/7/5/3 |9/6/3 |9/5/1 |9/4 |9/3 |9/2 |9/1
10 |10/8/6/4 |10/7/4/1 |10/6/2 |10/5 |10/4 |10/3 |10/2
11 |11/9/7/5 |11/8/5/2 |11/7/3 |11/6/1 |11/5 |11/4 |11/3
12 |12/10/8/6 |12/9/6/3 |12/8/4 |12/7/2 |12/6 |12/5 |12/4
13 |13/11/9/7 |13/10/7/4 |13/9/5/1 |13/8/3 |13/7/1 |13/6 |13/5
14 |14/12/10/8 |14/11/8/5 |14/10/6/2 |14/9/4 |14/8/2 |14/7 |14/6
15 |15/13/11/9 |15/12/9/6 |15/11/7/3 |15/10/5 |15/9/3 |15/8/1 |15/7
16 |16/14/12/10 |16/13/10/7 |16/12/8/4 |16/11/6/1 |16/10/4 |16/9/2 |16/8
17 |17/15/13/11 |17/14/11/8 |17/13/9/5 |17/12/7/2 |17/11/5 |17/10/3 |17/9/1
18 |18/16/14/12 |18/15/12/9 |18/14/10/6 |18/13/8/3 |18/12/6 |18/11/4 |18/10/2
19 |19/17/15/13 |19/16/13/10 |19/15/11/7 |19/14/9/4 |19/13/7/1 |19/12/5 |19/11/3
20 |20/18/16/14 |20/17/14/11 |20/16/12/8 |20/15/10/5 |20/14/8/2 |20/13/6 |20/12/4
[/table]

You can view the weapon speeds and new damages here on a page one of my players through up with a few of the rules. http://www.freewebs.com/narrowlands/weaponsandarmor.htm

Here are some example feats I use in my game:

Double Attack [General, Fighter]
You’ve learned to attack more quickly than most.
Prerequisites: BAB +4, Weapon Focus (Any)
Benefit: Weapons you wield act as if it where one speed faster for determining iterative attacks.
Special: A fighter can select Double Attack as one of her fighter bonus feats.

Heavy Blows [General, Fighter]
You know how to use the extra weight of your weapon to smash your opponent.
Prerequisites: BAB +6
Benefit: When wielding a Slow, Very Slow, or Ponderous weapon it deals damage as though it where one size larger.
Special: A Fighter may take this as a fighter bonus feat.

Flurry [General, Fighter]
Prerequisites: Base Attack +7, Dex 16, Double attack.
Benefit: You may attack as though your melee weapons speed where two categories lower for a number of rounds equal to your constitution. After Flurry expires treat your melee weapon as though it had a delay three categories higher until you are able to rest without strenuous activity for the number of rounds you Flurried for or double the number of rounds Flurry was active. If this would increase your weapon speed above 8 you are to tired to use the weapon until you have a chance to rest. You may not Flurry if you are still winded from your last Flurry.

[Lord Iames Osari]

Your table is a bit messed up, there.

[Umarth]

Your table is a bit messed up, there.

Good catch thanks. It's fixed now.

[Jack_Simth]

Where do Flasks of Acid, Alchemist's Fire, Thunderstones, and the like fit in there?

[Umarth]

You know I haven't had anyone in one of my games throw those.

I'd have them be a standard speed weapon. Keep in mind though that if you don't have quick draw at most you'll be able to throw 2 per round.

[Matthew]

I agree that at the extreme, light weapons like the dagger should be faster than say, a battleaxe. Perhaps the lightest of weapons should get a +1 initiative bonus, the heaviest should get a -1 initiative penalty, & the rest of the weapons should be +0.

Yeah, that's pretty much how I do it for my House Ruled AD&D Game:

Light: +1
One Handed: +0
Great: -1

...more or less.

[Cybren]

If we're going to get into this level of detail a lot of the "advantage" of a fast weapon is lost when you consider how much reach you lose.

[Matthew]

That's true as far as initial contact is concerned and one idea that is occasionally raised is to only apply Weapon Speeds to tied Initiative results (which is the version I usually end up using). If you are interested and haven't seen them before, you might like to take the time to look at some relative Reach Rules I have been messing around with: [House] Melee Reach (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=50830).

[Dark Missionary]

The problem with using weapon speeds as suggested (either penalties based on light/one-handed/two-handed, or individually as in 2nd ed.) is that they really don't take into account either A) relative weapon length, or B) realistic weights. Take, for example, the typical medieval arming sword (what D&D calls a "longsword). Blades averaged around 32 inches in length (normally in the 27-36 inch range), and the weapon weighed on average about 2.5 lbs (as opposed to the 4 lbs. in 3.5 D&D). Daggers, on the other hand, had blades on average 12 inches long (plus hilt, so they average about a foot and a half overall) and were about a pound or so. Yes, the dagger is "faster" (although not necessarily used in the flashing-quick speed of a modern tactical knife which has a much narrower and shorter blade). But that really only comes into play in a toe-to-toe, immobile fight. The swordsman would be traversing and backstepping the whole time, ideally holding his shield out to keep the dagger-wielder at bay. End result? The swordsman can actually strike before the dagger-wielder, and usually more often. While D&D'd 5-foot spaces do not really allow for fine detail in weapons' reach, I do not believe a character in a 5-foot space should be assumed to be just standing still and swinging away. No, he is instead stepping ever so slightly back and forth, side to side, adjusting his footwork and balance to gain the best advantage in leverage, angle of attack, and cutting off his opponents' lines of attacks in order to maximize his own defense, depending on everyones' relative stances. Also, he is going to time the speed of his strikes with the speed of his footwork - no matter how fast the hand moves, it can strike no faster than the feet allow him to travel. D&D is, and I think, should remain fairly abstract in that sense, and as such, I actually support 3rd ed's stance that all weapon speeds are equall, and initiative should be more dependant on the warrior's training and combative instincts than what weapon he wields.

One another note, however, one change I would support is having a weapon speed rating limiting the number of attacks per round a weapon may make (perhaps including attacks of opportunity, even). That's not just an issue of weight, but balance. A battleaxe or mace, with its weight concentrated at the business end, will have slower recovery time and follow-through than a sword, whose balance is usually anywhere between 2 and 9 inches in front of the hand, depending on its balance between thrusting and cutting utility. In fact, having a weapon speed rating, allowing for a maximum number of attacks, could be employed as an additional balancing factor between weapons stated as being simple, martial, or exotic. For example, you could house rule that a battleaxe actually deals 1d10 damage, and still have a x3 critical, but limit it to three attacks per round. This arguably only affects high-level characters, but then again, I have some of my own house rules as to how multiple attacks (or multiple actions) in a round should work.

I know this was kinda a long-winded remark for my first post on this forum, so let me say "hello" to all here, and let me know what you think, I'm actually quite interested in this topic.

- Terrick, the Dark Missionary

[Dark Missionary]

Note to self - fully read a thread before posting.

I have to apologize, for I had half my attention pulled aside when I read the thread for the first time, and just now, after reviewing it, realized that all I had done was reitterate some of what Joltz and Umarth had said. Wasn't trying to steal your shine, gents, but I hope to I was able to reenforce your ideas.

- Terric, the Dark Missionary

[Skjaldbakka]

Why make a houserule that makes fighters suck more? I'm sorry, I'm sure you were expecting a comment along those lines at some point. Weapon speed should give you a bonus for using certain weapons, not a penalty.

Some Ideas:

Faster Iteratives:

Light Weapons get iteratives every 5 BAB instead of 6

Parry Bonus:

Light Weapons give a +1 dodge bonus to AC when using combat expertise or fighting defensively. (original source is AE for this, although it uses specific weapons, not categories).

To-hit bonus:

Light weapons give a bonus to hit against an opponent that is using total defense, fighting defensively, or using combat expertise, while 2handers give a bonus to hit against armored opponents.



I also agree that two-handers tend to get in hits first, they just are a disadvantage once the opponent gets in close.