Anonymous User 553's page

Both 3.0 and 3.5 has a bunch a flaws when it comes to weapons. I would let logic dictate when a weapon of one size can be used as another weapon of a different size.

It really depends on the type of weapon it is, whether it can be used by creatures that are larger or smaller than for the creature size it was designed for.

If a creature can use a sword like blade, then it surely would be able to use sword like blade for creatures of different sizes, by treating the weapon as the equivalent sized weapon suitable for the creature. A dagger would be a perfect sword for a tiny creature, while a two handed sword word be a sword for a large creature, while a short sword for a huge creature.

[Cross]-bows on the other hand is rather restricted to the creature size it can be used. Though a long bow could easily be treated as a short bow for large creatures.

The general applying rules of either system to weapons, simple don't work. Each weapon type should be looked at individually with suitable rules provided for the weapon type.

It would just be nice to see that in the rules instead of having to house rule it.

Since my group is play testing, we are being careful not to impose any house rules.

hogarth wrote:

OneWinged4ngel wrote:

ShadoCat wrote:

That made much more sense.

...No, no it didn't.

It certainly made more sense than having a small longspear have the same reach as a medium longspear.

What's worse, getting one reach weapon wrong or getting the entire weapon size system wrong?

Unless there's a plausible explanation - clearly something I haven't been able to come up with - why non-Medium races are too inept to fashion weapons appropriate for their size I agree with OneWinged4ngel.

I think that each race would build weapons sized to themselves. However, a human who picks up a halfling two handed sword would likely wield it as a longsword rather than be totally inept with it.

Also, while I'm on the subject, a centaur has a human sized torso. So, why does it wield large sized weapons?

I've been working on a new character generator for d20. In the future I hope to have versions usable for all major d20 subsystems, but the initial launch version has been done for Pathfinder specifically. I know that I myself find it a lot easier to test out the possibilities in a system if I'm not having to character creation by hand.

It will, of course, be riddled with errors. So, I'd appreciate it if people would try it out and give me some feedback.

http://chargen.motime.com/

I'm using: b15

I've just been playing with it.

If I try to do a fighter 1 / Wizard 3 character, appraise is a cross class. It is cross class regardless of whether the fighter is at level 1 or level 2.

Also, it does not seem to pick up the fighters armor proficiency for the "arcane armor training" feat.

Can we try to do away with the 3.5 small/medium/large weapons?

Our group thought the 3.0 way of doing it was much better: A medium dagger was wielded as a small short sword or a tiny long sword.

That made much more sense.

It also made it much easier to outfit your characters without a weapon shop handy.

ShadoCat wrote:

It is rolled into Acrobatics.

Your point?

That would tend to make it a change from 3.5. Or is Table 5-3 only for *some* of the skill changes from 3.5?

"Once a creature’s attitude is shifted to helpful,
the creature gives in to most requests without a check,
unless that check is against their nature or puts them in
serious peril."

The last "check" should be either request or action.

It is rolled into Acrobatics.

20th level power: One of us: "At 20th level, you form begins to rot" should be "...your form...."

Under Terrifying Howl, there is a reference to "howl of the wild". This is likely a hold over from a previous version.