One of the things I've never liked about the change from 3.0 to 3.5 is the changes to weapon size, etc.
In particular, it makes no sense that a halfling's longspear has reach for a halfling, but wouldn't have reach if a human used it (in one hand or two hands). Can we just ditch the Small-sized longspears, spiked chains, etc.? I'm willing to accept that a Small-sized whip would have reach (although 10' reach makes more sense than 15' reach), but that's about it.
Considering most real life equivilents to D&D's reach weapons had haft lengths in the range of 10 + feet? I don't mind smaller versions having reach at all. If anything medium sized versions should reach farther. What we have in D&D are "Dueling" size pole arms, not the full on battle versions that are typically used in battle formations.
By the way where does it say that a small weapon doesn't have reach for a medium creature?
From a balance perspective, I would say no.
Small characters already have to contend with a number of issues which other PC races do not have to worry about. Limited equipment selection, contending with loot they cannot use, lower damage dice, slower movement, carrying capacity, and so forth. Eliminating the ability for small characters to use reach weapons just makes playing a small PC harder.
While from a purely simulation perspective it makes sense, it just makes things more difficult to play multiple character options.
On the carrying capacity I would point out a red herring...
Sure you only have 3/4 capacity, but your equipment only weighs 1/2 as much, that's actually a gain in capacity.
With most reach weapons (especially the martial ones) Haft length is the only major difference in how much of a reach weapon you have. Again I point the average length of real world polearms starts at 10 feet... so a halfling with a polearm with a 6-7 foot haft doesn't bother me in the slightest.
|
I agree that small sized items are silly.
Human has a longsword that does d8 damage, give it to the halfling and it shrinks down in size and does d6 damage??? Human picks it back up and it grows again...WTF???
OK I know it didn't actually transform in size, but the concept is just plain screwy. A Long Sword is a Long Sword period. It does d8+STR mod. You got a beefy halfling it does plenty of damage. You get a wimpy halfling and it does less damage.
Give them Monkey Grip or something since in the history they have had to learn to use larger weapons... anything, just drop this whole small weapon medium weapon crap. I shouldn't have to flip through charts and pages and read chapters just for the stupid little bugger to be able to hit somethiing. It's a freakin game. We are NOT dealing with reality here. Let's take a step away from reality and just go with something easy to work with.
Uggggg.
The sword doesn't shrink down, the halfling just takes a -2 penalty to hit with a medium sized longsword... makes sense to me... if you where to use a sword designed for a giant you'd have a hard time hitting with it too. Weapons of the wrong size give you a -2 penalty per size catagory difference.
I still can't find where a medium creature using a small reach weapon doesn't get the advantages of reach.
In "The Hobbit" Frodo used a dagger as a short sword.
From a balance perspective, I would say no.
Small characters already have to contend with a number of issues which other PC races do not have to worry about.
Be honest -- in your experience, how many small-sized characters have you seen who regularly use reach weapons?
I still can't find where a medium creature using a small reach weapon doesn't get the advantages of reach.
It's in the 3.5 FAQ, but it's not in the rules per se. But I think many DMs would get kind of peeved at the idea of a TWF rogue using an undersized spiked chain (or longspear or whatever) in one hand.
About as many as I see medium sized characters using reach weapons. Let's also remember that the reach weapons where normally used in mass against another mass of people. Expecting them to be great in single on single melee is a bit much.
|
I haven't seen any personally, most my players are loathe to play shorties. Unless it's to get the +1 size AC bonus for a caster.
And the halfling using a longsword, would be using that long sword two-handed...same as a human could use a halfling two handed sword, one handed. (with a penalty of course)
Monkey grip makes no sense either...at least not with that title...
About as many as I see medium sized characters using reach weapons.
Really? I've seen a variety of Medium+ sized character use a spiked chain or guisarme for tripping, but I've never seen a Small- sized character do the same. YMMV.
I have a couple of problems with weapon sizes. I realize that a 3 foot tall halfling or gnome will not be able to handle a human-sized weapon. So their version of a "longsword" should be smaller.
Having said that, look at the weapon tables. A small "longsword" has the same stats as a standard short sword, yet cost as much as a COST as much as a normal longsword. The same applies to the small "short sword" and a medium dagger or a small battleaxe and a medium handaxe.
It is cheaper to buy a medium short sword and change the hilt to fit the grip of a halfling than it is to buy small "longsword"
Their "object size" is even the same. A medium short sword is size tiny, while a small "longsword" is size tiny.
At the very least, small sized weapons should get a size cost adjustment.
Speaking of object-size, from the SRD:
A weapon’s size category isn’t the same as its size as an object. Instead, a weapon’s size category is keyed to the size of the intended wielder. In general, a light weapon is an object two size categories smaller than the wielder, a one-handed weapon is an object one size category smaller than the wielder, and a two-handed weapon is an object of the same size category as the wielder.
This means, by the RAW, a small glaive is size small (2' - 4'), while a medium glaive is size medium (4' - 8'). A medium short spear is the same size as a small glaive and it does not have reach.
While I agree that the small races are shafted a bit, some of the logic of small reach weapons doe not work for me. Of course, I am from the 1e/2e school of though the a longsword is a bastard sword for halflings and the short sword serves as their one-handed melee weapon.
|
|
Then by that logic you should have half squares for movement...and have 5' reach...putting then tiny creatures have 1/4 squares with 2.5' foot reach...
They put the rules in for balance sake. If you want to take reach weapons from small creatures, then add an additional +2 to dex as an ECL offset...
They put the rules in for balance sake. If you want to take reach weapons from small creatures, then add an additional +2 to dex as an ECL offset...
Seriously, where are all of these small characters with reach weapons? Do I just play in weird games where small characters are pretty much limited to rogues or spellcasters?
The "small reach weapons are necessary for balance" argument makes about as much sense (to me) as saying: "Medium-sized armor should give you a bonus on Hide skill checks so that medium-sized rogues are balanced with small-sized rogues."
just suspend disbelief and forget the whole thing... easier that way :) I mean really is the benefit worth the bookkeeping?
Forget which -- the change from 3.0 to 3.5 weapon sizes, or my proposed change from 3.5 to 3.0 weapon sizes? :-)
|
|
just suspend disbelief and forget the whole thing... easier that way :) I mean really is the benefit worth the bookkeeping?Forget which -- the change from 3.0 to 3.5 weapon sizes, or my proposed change from 3.5 to 3.0 weapon sizes? :-)
the change from 3.0 to 3.5
The whole adjustment of weapons for size was for "realism"
Well, show me a halfling in armor and using weapons and let's see how he really does do it? Nope, no halflings around to study. OK, how about a gnome then? Nope, none of them either.
It makes no sense to me to add a level of complexity for realism for something that isn't real to begin with. One can try to simulate realism, sure. But when you are trying to simulate realism for something that just doesn't exist, I have to wonder if the complexity is really necessary?
Prior to the change from 3.0 to 3.5, were there riots in the streets because small creatures and normal weapons were too unrealistic?
Does anyone REALLY gain that much satisfaction and delight that they could not live without small weapons rules?
*Just a hint- one of MY goals for PRPG is less superfluous bookkeeping*
I did some house ruling in my campaign as follows:
Using Larger Weapons: You can use some weapons that are up to 1 size category larger than you are without penalty. Light weapons that are one size larger can be used as one-handed weapons. Larger one-handed weapons must be used two handed. You can used two-handed weapons one size larger, but incurs the standard penalty.
Special Notes on Larger Weapons: The short bow (including composite) and the light crossbow including repeating) can be used without penalty even if they are one size larger. However, attempting to fire a larger light crossbow one-handed incurs all the standard penalties of a larger two-handed weapon PLUS the penalties for firing one-handed.
Additionally, because the spear has small striking zone and relatively easy striking motion, larger spears (but not long spears) may be used normally as two-handed weapons.
Also,because of its lighter blade and small striking zone, you may continue to use larger rapiers as one handed weapons (although you may not use Weapon Finesse with them).
Note that in order to use a larger bastard sword two-handed without penalty, you must have spent an exotic weapon proficiency on it. Using any weapon more than one size larger incurs all the standard penalties as laid out in the PHB.
Using Smaller Weapons: You can use some weapons that are up to one size smaller than you without penalty. Two-handed weapons that are one size smaller may be used one-handed. One-handed weapons that are one-size smaller are treated as light weapons and may be used with Weapon Finesse. Light weapons one size smaller are too delicate to use properly and incur the normal penalties.
Special Notes on Smaller Weapons: Obviously, long and short bows (including composites) must be fired two-handed. Reach weapons (such as spiked chains and some polearms) must also be used with two hands to maintain effectiveness. Crossbows continue to require two hands to load, but may actually be fired one-handed without penalty.
|
|
Actually there were a lot of complaints If I recall correctly hence why they introduced the new system from 3.0 to 3.5 (mostly because small sized creatures really got the kick in the teeth due to weapons)
mmm so my question would be this...
why would you take a race or races that are about on par with other races and nerf them so they can only be non melee chaarcters?
When was the last time you saw a halfling Fighter tank? Or a gnome Paladin? or a feasible small Barbarian? Not only are the attributes prohibitive to martial classes, but the equipment is prohibitive to it.
Why not go back to the days of elves are a class and make halflings just be rogues and gnomes can just be sorcerers?
The power of 3.x is versatility, the ability to play anything you can come up with... unless you are small.
Be honest -- in your experience, how many small-sized characters have you seen who regularly use reach weapons?
Any small character who invests in Ride and has martial weapon proficiency is going to use a lance, if not as a primary weapon, certainly as their riding weapon.
I have run NPC lancer goblins, and my fiancee played a halfling ranger lancer/thrower.
I can't say the same would hold true for the other reach weapons, but a goblin with a lance on a worg or wolf was a fairly common sight in one of my campaigns.
Say what you will about Ride, a mount with a climb or fly speed, or good racial bonuses to Jump and Climb is quite dungeon capable for a Small character.
|
mmm so my question would be this...why would you take a race or races that are about on par with other races and nerf them so they can only be non melee chaarcters?
When was the last time you saw a halfling Fighter tank? Or a gnome Paladin? or a feasible small Barbarian? Not only are the attributes prohibitive to martial classes, but the equipment is prohibitive to it.
Why not go back to the days of elves are a class and make halflings just be rogues and gnomes can just be sorcerers?
The power of 3.x is versatility, the ability to play anything you can come up with... unless you are small.
So your argument is to go back to a system that did them over even more?
Be honest -- in your experience, how many small-sized characters have you seen who regularly use reach weapons?
Any small character who invests in Ride and has martial weapon proficiency is going to use a lance, if not as a primary weapon, certainly as their riding weapon.
I have run NPC lancer goblins, and my fiancee played a halfling ranger lancer/thrower.
I can't say the same would hold true for the other reach weapons, but a goblin with a lance on a worg or wolf was a fairly common sight in one of my campaigns.
Say what you will about Ride, a mount with a climb or fly speed, or good racial bonuses to Jump and Climb is quite dungeon capable for a Small character.
That's true -- I forgot about lances. However, I still think a small lance (without reach) would be basically as good as a medium lance (with reach); I really don't think that the existence of small lances with reach is essential for small-sized characters to be "balanced".
If you take reach away from the lance, and all other reach weapons, then you eliminate the tactical reason to use a lance on a mount, versus a weapon with other tactical advantages.
If you are lancing from a mount, non-reach opponents cannot hit you back without a 5' step, you can safely attack without Ride By Attack, and generally be effective in ways that are encouraged by the reach lance.
Without reach, the lance only has the double damage advantage, and small lancers will not be as much of a threat as they could be.
Without reach, the lance only has the double damage advantage, and small lancers will not be as much of a threat as they could be.
"Only" double damage?! I thought that was the whole point!
|
|
So your argument is to go back to a system that did them over even more?
mmm so my question would be this...why would you take a race or races that are about on par with other races and nerf them so they can only be non melee chaarcters?
When was the last time you saw a halfling Fighter tank? Or a gnome Paladin? or a feasible small Barbarian? Not only are the attributes prohibitive to martial classes, but the equipment is prohibitive to it.
Why not go back to the days of elves are a class and make halflings just be rogues and gnomes can just be sorcerers?
The power of 3.x is versatility, the ability to play anything you can come up with... unless you are small.
How so? I propose allowing a longsword be a d8 for small races, rather than a d6, I propose allowing small characters use weapons without nerfing them and using reach?
Maybe I missed something before (very very very possible) How did 3.0 nerf weapon damage and such for small races?
|
|
Be honest -- in your experience, how many small-sized characters have you seen who regularly use reach weapons?
Any small character who invests in Ride and has martial weapon proficiency is going to use a lance, if not as a primary weapon, certainly as their riding weapon.
I have run NPC lancer goblins, and my fiancee played a halfling ranger lancer/thrower.
I can't say the same would hold true for the other reach weapons, but a goblin with a lance on a worg or wolf was a fairly common sight in one of my campaigns.
Say what you will about Ride, a mount with a climb or fly speed, or good racial bonuses to Jump and Climb is quite dungeon capable for a Small character.
lol reminds me of Labyrinth with that little dog-rodent knight on the English Sheep Dog. Hate to mess with him!
Gotta watch Labyrinth tonight... thanks :)
|
|
Lets see......
1 Small creatures could not use any large category weapon (eliminating scythe, Longbow, great sword ect).
2 small creatures had to treat one handed weapons as two handed (longsword, rapier ect) This meant they could not use shields with those weapons or two weapon fighting (Also a rapier could not be used with weapon finesse).
3 small weapons for halflings (short sword, hand axe ect) were treated as One handed meaning (Not light) Meaning you could not use a short sword in your off hand when using the two weapon fighting feat)
So the old rules eliminated about a quater of the players handbooks weapon options for halflings and Gnomes and about 3/4 of the other options were nerfed as well for shields and feats.
|
|
Lets see......
1 Small creatures could not use any large category weapon (eliminating scythe, Longbow, great sword ect).
2 small creatures had to treat one handed weapons as two handed (longsword, rapier ect) This meant they could not use shields with those weapons or two weapon fighting (Also a rapier could not be used with weapon finesse).
3 small weapons for halflings (short sword, hand axe ect) were treated as One handed meaning (Not light) Meaning you could not use a short sword in your off hand when using the two weapon fighting feat)
So the old rules eliminated about a quater of the players handbooks weapon options for halflings and Gnomes and about 3/4 of the other options were nerfed as well for shields and feats.
OK ignore those too :) problem solved :) lol
see, I just want to play a fun game and a fun evening with friends. I don't want to sit down and have to do conversions and calculus and physics... and yes yes yes I know, I can just choose to ignore the rule should I want too. :)
I am going to shut up now as I probably am not really helping in this thread :) sorry :)
|
|
I don't worry about reach for small races, in fact I gave kobolds long spears in Crown of the Kobold King, perhaps they were pikes in reality...but I wanted them to have some reach.
Reach has been a sticking point in 3.5e as it is.
I agree, I just get together to have fun with my friends and to provide them a challenge and fun to boot.
|
|
Dang it! I wanna make a halfling fighter in plate armor with a lance riding an english sheep dog!I'm an Osirion Halfling Bard with a Wand Rifle riding a Jackal.SWEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEET!!!!!!!!!!!!
sorry guys for threadjacking I will TRY to shut up now. :)
I'll take that as a compliment for my character concept... /bow
Dang it! I wanna make a halfling fighter in plate armor with a lance riding an english sheep dog!
Ambrosious! Turn around right now or I will never feed you again!
The power of 3.x is versatility, the ability to play anything you can come up with... unless you are small.
I completely agree with this, as will my entire D&D group. I have proven this theory while attempting to remake a Gnome 2-Weapon(handaxes/throwing axes) Fighter from 1E. By the time I was done remaking him 3-4 times, with DM approval, he was a Barbarian/Fighter Monkey Gripping Greataxe 2-Hander... At this point I assessed the amount of feats and hoops I had to jump through to make a character that was moderately effective and really really not the character(theme) I was looking to remake. *Trash*
But the Kobold Druid/Wizard mounted on a Boar, headed for Arcane Heirophant was absolutely amazing! Ever see a HUGE boar charge with Powerful Charge?(+11 @ 3d6+3d6+12 dmg) Leading me to the next thought...
I'm really not certain why small races got pigeon-holed into being Rogues, Sorcerers(& wizards), or Cavaliers(aka Mounted). If you're small, you want to do damage and you don't take one of those 3, just forget about it.
Here's another kick in the pants, go through the Monster Manual and look for a SMALL humanoid race that moves 20 foot. Short of Gnome & Halfling, you'll be hard pressed to find one. Why are SMALL player races slow and nerfed? Goblins - 30 feet, Kobolds - 30 feet, etc. (The list goes on, and continues in other Monster Manuals, those are the 2 biggest examples.)
Here's another kick in the pants, go through the Monster Manual and look for a SMALL humanoid race that moves 20 foot. Short of Gnome & Halfling, you'll be hard pressed to find one. Why are SMALL player races slow and nerfed? Goblins - 30 feet, Kobolds - 30 feet, etc. (The list goes on, and continues in other Monster Manuals, those are the 2 biggest examples.)
Hmm, that's complicated indeed. You reduce a goblin's speed to 20ft and suddenly they stop being scary at all as anyone could easily bail out of combat by simply outrunning them, which would apply to all small creatures. However, seeing a band of goblins easily catch up with a halfling on the sole grounds that his speed is 10ft lower because of some arbitrary restriction is a complete nonsense.
...scratch that, actually it's not complicated at all, if a Goblin's speed is 30ft so should a Halfling's, no way around it.
|
|
Here's another kick in the pants, go through the Monster Manual and look for a SMALL humanoid race that moves 20 foot. Short of Gnome & Halfling, you'll be hard pressed to find one. Why are SMALL player races slow and nerfed? Goblins - 30 feet, Kobolds - 30 feet, etc. (The list goes on, and continues in other Monster Manuals, those are the 2 biggest examples.)Hmm, that's complicated indeed. You reduce a goblin's speed to 20ft and suddenly they stop being scary at all as anyone could easily bail out of combat by simply outrunning them, which would apply to all small creatures. However, seeing a band of goblins easily catch up with a halfling on the sole grounds that his speed is 10ft lower because of some arbitrary restriction is a complete nonsense.
...scratch that, actually it's not complicated at all, if a Goblin's speed is 30ft so should a Halfling's, no way around it.
Yeah but compare a halflings racial modifiers with a Kobold or Goblin (All 3.5 versions)
Halfling +2 Dex -2 Str
Goblin +2 dex -2 str -2 cha
Kobold +2 dex -4 str -2 Con
Yeah explain that to the halfling when he gets caught.
"Yeah sorry we know you have a higher CR but they are faster than you, cause you have better stats than them."
...scratch that, actually it's not complicated at all, if a Goblin's speed is 30ft so should a Halfling's, no way around it.Yeah but compare a halflings racial modifiers with a Kobold or Goblin (All 3.5 versions)
Halfling +2 Dex -2 Str
Goblin +2 dex -2 str -2 cha
Kobold +2 dex -4 str -2 Con
You forgot the Gnome... +2 Con -2 Str
I'm not buying into the whole "your stats are better than mine, so I move faster" thing. (I'd also like to point out Kobolds/Goblins both have Darkvision 60 feet and Kobolds back that up with +1 Natural Armor.) Dexterity is typically adjusted by size... Small +2, Medium 0, Large -2. They all get a +1 AC due to size, but why did the Gnome get shorted on his Dexterity bump?
Speed is typically adjusted by size as well, Small 20, Medium 30, Large 40, that is unless you're a small humanoid "monster".
Strength should technically be Small -8, Medium 0, Large +8, but don't worry, in 4E Halflings are medium-size and Gnomes are replaced by a medium-sized fairy(Eladrin), not a big surprise. Probably due to many of the same debates and rantings.
If the races are experts at fleeing, it should be in their list of abilities/weakness, not some static adjustment that makes them better simply because they aren't a PHB race. As I mentioned above, it's not just Goblins and Kobolds either, there are a few(small humanoids) in each MM.