Build your own weapon.
This came up in another thread, but I really hate how simple weapons are inferior to martial weapons to the point that it can kill character concepts. If I want to play a spear wielding Aiel(Wheel of Time), I am stuck with the spear or short spear which both suck compared to a longsword or greatsword. In theory, there is no reason why you couldn't have a special nastier version of a spear that was on par with a longsword or greatsword.
So, why let the rules get in the way of your character's concept?
Here are my first stab at building a set of rules for letting players create their own weapon.
Base stats -
All weapons are x2 and threat on a 20
Light weapon - 1d3 small or 1d4 medium damage
One Handed weapon - 1d4 small or 1d6 medium damage
Two Handed weapon - 1d6 small or 1d8 medium damage
Die sizes are 1d3->1d4->1d6->1d8/2d4->1d10->1d12/2d6->2d8->1d20/2d10
Damage increases
Increase threat 2 points
Increase crit multiplier 2 points
Increase damage by 1 die size 2 points
Decrease damage by 1 die size -2 points
Special properties
Trip, Brace, Monk, Reach - 1 point
Disarm, Double - 2 points
Range Increment - 1 point per 10 feet
Simple Weapon - 4 points
Martial Weapon - 7 points
Exotic Weapon - 10 points
Examples:
Greatsword - 2d6(4 points), 19-20/x2(2 points) = 6 points
Falchion - 2d4(2 points), 18-20/x2(4 points) = 6 points
Exotic Fighting Spear(two handed) 2d6(4 points) x4(4 points), brace, 10ft range = 10 points
Martial Fighting Spear(two handed) 1d10(2 points) x4(4 points), brace = 7 points.
Interesting. I houserule some weapons, like a two-handed hammer that does 2d6 bludgeoning.
What would you value weapon-finessable at? I'd love a finessable two-handed spear with a 10- or 20-foot range.
Of course, if you need 7 points to get a martial weapon, and greatsword costs 6 points, wouldn't it be a simple weapon? Perhaps larger weapon sizes use some points?
There's potential for abuse by dumping everything into one stat. Munchkin club is an exotic one-handed weapon that does 1d20 damage (10 points). Munchkin knife is an exotic light weapon with a critical threat range of 14-20 (10 points).
Build your own weapon.
This came up in another thread, but I really hate how simple weapons are inferior to martial weapons to the point that it can kill character concepts. If I want to play a spear wielding Aiel(Wheel of Time), I am stuck with the spear or short spear which both suck compared to a longsword or greatsword. In theory, there is no reason why you couldn't have a special nastier version of a spear that was on par with a longsword or greatsword.
So, why let the rules get in the way of your character's concept?
Here are my first stab at building a set of rules for letting players create their own weapon.
Base stats -
All weapons are x2 and threat on a 20
Light weapon - 1d3 small or 1d4 medium damage
One Handed weapon - 1d4 small or 1d6 medium damage
Two Handed weapon - 1d6 small or 1d8 medium damage
Die sizes are 1d3->1d4->1d6->1d8/2d4->1d10->1d12/2d6->2d8->1d20/2d10Damage increases
Increase threat 2 points
Increase crit multiplier 2 points
Increase damage by 1 die size 2 points
Decrease damage by 1 die size -2 pointsSpecial properties
Trip, Brace, Monk, Reach - 1 point
Disarm, Double - 2 points
Range Increment - 1 point per 10 feetSimple Weapon - 4 points
Martial Weapon - 7 points
Exotic Weapon - 10 pointsExamples:
Greatsword - 2d6(4 points), 19-20/x2(2 points) = 6 points
Falchion - 2d4(2 points), 18-20/x2(4 points) = 6 pointsExotic Fighting Spear(two handed) 2d6(4 points) x4(4 points), brace, 10ft range = 10 points
Martial Fighting Spear(two handed) 1d10(2 points) x4(4 points), brace = 7 points.
By these rules wouldn't a Longsword be a simple weapon? 1D6-1D8 = 2 points, 20X2 Crit - 19-20X2 Crit = 2 points. Same with Rapier 20X2 Crit - 18X2 Crit = 4 points
|
Good idea, though I have some suggestions:
I'd put a "limit 2" on both the crit multiplier increase and threat range increase, and note that you cannot have both of those properties on one weapon. That way you only have the normal 18-20x2, 19-20x2, 20x2, 20x3 and 20x4 but no overly powerful 19-20x3.
I'd lower the points allowed by 1 for each category. That puts the greatsword and falchion at exactly the threshold (as you statted them).
The club by these rules is a 0 point weapon so maybe there should be an "essentially free" category that holds 0 point weapons? Or maybe just give a price discount for weapons that don't use all their points?
I'd remove the 1d20/2d10 damage category, that's simply too much base damage for a normal sized weapon. I'd even consider removing the 2d8 or making it cost 4 points as it increases average damage by 2 (rather than 1 as the other increases do).
Your falchion calculation seems off since you list medium two-handed weapons as 1d8 start, which is also listed as equivalent to 2d4 and thus should cost 0 and make it a simple weapon (see point 2).
I would suggest having 1d8->2d4 and 1d12->2d6 cost 1 point, but allow them to go to the next one for only 1 more point. That way a 2d4 weapon costs more than a 1d8 and a 2d6 more than a 1d12, but not much more. They both have an average damage of 0.5 points higher (versus the normal 1 higher of a die size increase).
Given the above changes I'd allow this :)
You could also just take the "crunch" from an existing weapon and rename it. If a longsword (1H, d8, S, 19-20/x2) is balanced, then a warspear (1H, d8, P, 19-20/x2) would, presumably, be balanced as well.
I'd remove the 1d20/2d10 damage category, that's simply too much base damage for a normal sized weapon. I'd even consider removing the 2d8 or making it cost 4 points as it increases average damage by 2 (rather than 1 as the other increases do).
A level 20 monk does that much damage with their bare hands...
The main reason for allowing it is for players who want to wield a "Giant Longsword" as a two handed weapon.
A giant's longsword would be 2d10(8 points) 19-20/x2(2 points) = 10 points as an exotic two handed weapon.
Good idea, though I have some suggestions:
I'd put a "limit 2" on both the crit multiplier increase and threat range increase, and note that you cannot have both of those properties on one weapon. That way you only have the normal 18-20x2, 19-20x2, 20x2, 20x3 and 20x4 but no overly powerful 19-20x3.
18-20/x2 -> 1.15 average damage multiplier
19-20/x2 -> 1.10 average damage multiplier20-20/x2 -> 1.05 average damage multiplier
20-20/x3 -> 1.10 average damage multiplier
20-20/x4 -> 1.15 average damage multiplier
19-20/x3 -> 1.20 average damage multiplier
I would say you could have a 19-20/x3 weapon but the costs could be 6 points.
I'd lower the points allowed by 1 for each category. That puts the greatsword and falchion at exactly the threshold (as you statted them).The club by these rules is a 0 point weapon so maybe there should be an "essentially free" category that holds 0 point weapons? Or maybe just give a price discount for weapons that don't use all their points?
I am less concerned by weapons price as I am balancing simple vs martial vs exotic. Martial weapons are supposed to be better than simple weapons, but harder to use, just as exotic weapons are supposed to be better than martial weapons, but also harder to use. The idea is you get more crit/damage/special abilities for moving to a harder class of weapon.
Your falchion calculation seems off since you list medium two-handed weapons as 1d8 start, which is also listed as equivalent to 2d4 and thus should cost 0 and make it a simple weapon (see point 2).I would suggest having 1d8->2d4 and 1d12->2d6 cost 1 point, but allow them to go to the next one for only 1 more point. That way a 2d4 weapon costs more than a 1d8 and a 2d6 more than a 1d12, but not much more. They both have an average damage of 0.5 points higher (versus the normal 1 higher of a die size increase).
Probably not a bad idea.
By these rules wouldn't a Longsword be a simple weapon? 1D6-1D8 = 2 points, 20X2 Crit - 19-20X2 Crit = 2 points. Same with Rapier 20X2 Crit - 18X2 Crit = 4 points
I am still trying to work out where the boundary between a simple and a martial weapon should be. There are some simple weapons that have a lot of special abilities(like spears for example). While there are martial weapons that have no special abilities, like rapiers and longswords.
|
|
You could also just take the "crunch" from an existing weapon and rename it. If a longsword (1H, d8, S, 19-20/x2) is balanced, then a warspear (1H, d8, P, 19-20/x2) would, presumably, be balanced as well.
Good idea, I'll take a two-handed maul that follows scythe rules, thank you ^.^
(Seriously, why isn't there a maul weapon? Just a giant two-handed hammer.)Anyway, I thought of two more points for this idea:
1) What do you do for classes with extremely explicit proficiencies when you add more weapons? Would you allow them if the weapon seemed to have the right flavor? Personally I'd do an "exchange" (trade an old prof for the special one) if it was within the class's style. I can see an earth-style druid wielding a giant maul, for example, and would let them switch greatclub for it.
2) You may want to add a 1 point property that gives weapons multiple damage types as either an OR or an AND depending on weapon style (though no cost diff between them, since the difference is rather slight in most cases). An example would be a scythe that can do S or P, or a morningstar that does B & P.
3) This only really works for melee and thrown weapons. Ranged would need their own/modified rules.
4) Weapon finesse's applicability should be a property. Probably only a 1 point one.
My edited version:
All weapons are x2 and threat on a 20
Light weapon - 1d3 small or 1d4 medium damage
One Handed weapon - 1d4 small or 1d6 medium damage
Two Handed weapon - 1d6 small or 1d8 medium damage
Die sizes are 1d3->1d4-->1d6-->1d8->2d4->1d10-->1d12->2d6---->2d8
(Number of dashes indicates point cost, 1 point per dash)
Damage increases
Increase threat to 19-20* 2 points
Increase threat to 18-20 2 points (requires 19-20 threat range)
Increase multiplier to x3* 2 points
Increase multiplier to x4 2 points (requires x3 multiplier)
Increase damage (see damage chart above)
Decrease damage (ditto, but negative cost)
* These two properties are mutually exclusive.
Special properties
Trip, Brace, Monk, Reach - 1 point
Disarm, Double - 2 points
Range Increment - 1 point per 10 feet (thrown weapons only)
Additional damage type - 1 point (limit 1 extra damage type, DM approval required)
Weapon Finesse-able - 1 point
Simple Weapon - 3 points
Martial Weapon - 6 points
Exotic Weapon - 9 points
Fixed examples:
Greatsword; 2d6 (5 points), 19-20 threat (2 points) = 7 points [Exotic] <- oops!
Falchion; 2d4 (1 point), 18-20 threat (5 points) = 5 points [Martial]
Morningstar; 1d8 (2 points), B & P (1 point) = 3 points [Simple]
Scythe; 2d4 (1 point), S or P (1 point), x4 crit (4 points), trip (1 point) = 7 points [Exotic] <- oops! :P
Rapier; 18-20 threat (4 points), Finesse (1 points) = 5 [Martial]
Okay, so maybe a 4/7/10 thresh-hold works better.
A level 20 monk does that much damage with their bare hands...
The main reason for allowing it is for players who want to wield a "Giant Longsword" as a two handed weapon.
A giant's longsword would be 2d10(8 points) 19-20/x2(2 points) = 10 points as an exotic two handed weapon.
A level 20 monk is supposed to be special in that feature. At least in my mind.
A large greatsword would do 3d6 (average 10.5 damage), a 2d8 weapon is average 9. A 2d6 is average 7. 7->9 isn't a bad damage boost for an "exotically large" greatsword. Any more than that and I'd say it's just a bigger weapon.As far as the cost I gave 2d8, it might be worthwhile to give a slight (say 1 point) discount if a weapon requires a certain strength to wield (something like 15+) without taking an additional -4 penalty.
Greatersword; 2d8 (9 points), 19-20 (2 points), str req (-1 point) = 10 points [Exotic]
|
|
I am less concerned by weapons price as I am balancing simple vs martial vs exotic. Martial weapons are supposed to be better than simple weapons, but harder to use, just as exotic weapons are supposed to be better than martial weapons, but also harder to use. The idea is you get more crit/damage/special abilities for moving to a harder class of weapon.
True enough. Keep in mind that some weapons were promoted solely for their exotic-ness rather than their effectiveness. The exotic monk weapons are a good example as they completely suck (Simple weapon level) but are exotic anyway. If these rules manage to keep 70%+ of the weapons in the right category (and I think they do), they're probably on track.
I suppose cost, weight and damage type should be completely ad-hoc based on the weapon concept. It's not like they affect much under most circumstances (1st level cost matters, low-str weight matters, against DR damage matters, but all of those are minor or even out).
|
I agree with simple/martial/exotic.
Most weapons follow a careful, specific mathematical formula, with simple being the bottom of the barrel, martial getting a point, and exotic getting two points.
At least, from what I remember reading in a WOTC article some time ago.
Similarly, light, one-handed, and two handed.
I'd probably tell my player that if they have martial weapon proficiency, they could use the stats from a battleaxe as a short spear, or the stats from a scythe, switching trip for brace, as a longspear.
If they only had simple weapon proficiency, they'd have to spend a feat to upgrade to martial proficiency, but as per the feat which means they'd have to select a specific type of weapon.
Meh. Generally I simply do the following:
Take the exotic weapon feat -- you can take one martial weapon and "increase" it in one of the following ways:
Increased threat ranged by one.
Increase Critical multiplier by one.
Increase damage by one step.
Give it Reach.
Make it a monk weapon.
Reduce it's "Handiness"
Give it two of the following: Finessable, trip, disarm, binding
Make it a double weapon if normally one handed (either two of the one weapon or combined with another one handed weapon).
Ok, V 2.0
All weapons are x2 and threat on a 20
Base cost = min damage + max damage - 4
Small Weapon, Light Weapon: 1 point
Two handed weapon: -3 points
The cost cannot be less than 0 at this point.
Light weapon, monk, brace, reach: 1 point
Range Increment: 1 point per 10 feet
Disarm, Trip, Sunder: 2 points
Class Profiency, Double Weapon: 3 points
Increase threat, Increase crit multiplier: 4 points
Increased threat and Increased crit multiplier can only be taken twice, and you can take one or the other, not both.
Simple: 7 points
Martial: 12 points
Exotic: 18 points
Dagger 1d4(5 - 4 + 1 = 2 base cost), 19-20/x2 4 points, +1 for 10ft = 7 points
Shortspear 1d6(7 - 4 = 3 base cost), 20-20/x2 0 points, +2 for 20ft = 5 points
Spear 1d8(9 - 4 - 3 = 2 base cost), 20-20/x3 4 points, 20ft(2 points), brace(1 point) = 9 points
Quarterstaff 1d6(7 -4 -3 = 0 base cost), 20-20/x2, double, monk, monk profiency = 7 points
Greatsword 2d6(14 - 4 - 3 = 7 base cost), 19-20/x2 4 points = 11 points
Falchion 2d4(10 - 4 - 3 = 3 base cost), 18-20/x2 8 points = 11 points
Longsword 1d8(9 - 4 = 5 base cost), 19-20/x2 4 points = 9 points
Rapier 1d6(7 - 4 = 3 base cost), 18-20/x2 8 points = 11 points
Heavy Flail 1d8(9 - 4 - 3 = 2 base cost), 19-20/x2 4 points, disarm, trip = 10 points
(Seriously, why isn't there a maul weapon? Just a giant two-handed hammer.)
Because, from a historical standpoint, a giant hammer like you're envisioning is too slow and clumsy for effective use as a weapon. Seriously, look at warhammers in a museum; they're nothing at all like sledgehammers. (Rather, it's a very small hammer head backing a pick.)
Then again, the game does include silly crap like a two-bladed sword, so why not throw in a maul?
|
I've long used this site for building custom weapons. Gives a good guideline for making new weapons and even backtests them against the current equipment list (well not exactly current anymore but close).
(Seriously, why isn't there a maul weapon? Just a giant two-handed hammer.)Because, from a historical standpoint, a giant hammer like you're envisioning is too slow and clumsy for effective use as a weapon. Seriously, look at warhammers in a museum; they're nothing at all like sledgehammers. (Rather, it's a very small hammer head backing a pick.)
Then again, the game does include silly crap like a two-bladed sword, so why not throw in a maul?
Wow, why do people think this? The point of a heavy weapon is you CAN'T block it effectively, and if you're line fighting you can't dodge it. Your only choice is to stab them first or die. Your sword? Will not block the 14 pound hammer headed for your face. You arm will be pushed back and the weapon will meet your skull in a masterful display of the flying skull chunks and brain matter circus. Deflecting something that heavy with a shield is hard as well. If you can't deflect it, but you block it, there's this nice thing called blunt trauma that will injure your body on a good hit, even if it's blocked.
Despite not being good weapons for line fighting, maces and whatnot saw prolific use in skirmishing combat, especially amongst peoples who didn't have metal.
My spontaneous ranting aside, here's a weapon I have made for a warlike society with dragonriders. It's an all metal spear with a pommel counter-weighting it so it can be best used in one hand.
War-Spear
One-Handed
1d8 19-20 x3
Exotic
Range increment 10 feet
The reasoning for the high crit is that the head of the spear is broader, and there is examples for prior weapons using this kind of a crit scheme.
Using the point buy above (if I conclude that taking both crit effects costs an extra 2 points, bringing the above weapon's cost to 16), I might also give it brace.
I like making exotic weapons actually worth a feat, so I tend to make them a bit above the standard power scale of a one damage die increase.
My edited version:
All weapons are x2 and threat on a 20
Light weapon - 1d3 small or 1d4 medium damage
One Handed weapon - 1d4 small or 1d6 medium damage
Two Handed weapon - 1d6 small or 1d8 medium damage
Die sizes are 1d3->1d4-->1d6-->1d8->2d4->1d10-->1d12->2d6---->2d8
(Number of dashes indicates point cost, 1 point per dash)Damage increases
Increase threat to 19-20* 2 points
Increase threat to 18-20 2 points (requires 19-20 threat range)
Increase multiplier to x3* 2 points
Increase multiplier to x4 2 points (requires x3 multiplier)
Increase damage (see damage chart above)
Decrease damage (ditto, but negative cost)
* These two properties are mutually exclusive.Special properties
Trip, Brace, Monk, Reach - 1 point
Disarm, Double - 2 points
Range Increment - 1 point per 10 feet (thrown weapons only)
Additional damage type - 1 point (limit 1 extra damage type, DM approval required)
Weapon Finesse-able - 1 pointSimple Weapon - 3 points
Martial Weapon - 6 points
Exotic Weapon - 9 points
Spiked Chain
Two Handed 2D4 (1), Weapon Finesse (1), Disarm (2), Trip (1)So by your system, which I agree with, the spiked chain is sup-par for a martial weapon, little alone an exotic weapon :P
War-Spear
One-Handed
1d8 19-20 x3
Exotic
Range increment 10 feet
I would never allow a 19-20/x3, 18-20/x3, 19-20/x4, 18-20/x4 as these are all too powerful for any weapon. In the higher level game most of your damage is probably going to be coming from bonus damage, such as strength and power attack, which multiply with these effects. Things start to get really hairy when you apply improved critical or keen to them... Add in some of the critical effects, and I don't know what you might expect.
|
|
Wow, why do people think this?(Seriously, why isn't there a maul weapon? Just a giant two-handed hammer.)Because, from a historical standpoint, a giant hammer like you're envisioning is too slow and clumsy for effective use as a weapon. Seriously, look at warhammers in a museum; they're nothing at all like sledgehammers. (Rather, it's a very small hammer head backing a pick.)
Then again, the game does include silly crap like a two-bladed sword, so why not throw in a maul?
Because it's a historical fact. There is no historical precedence for such a weapon. As he said they are slow and clumsy, people who used them died horribly so they never caught on.
The point of a heavy weapon is you CAN'T block it effectively, and if you're line fighting you can't dodge it. Your only choice is to stab them first or die.
Which is generally what happened when people tried to make massive unwieldy weapons.
I would never allow a 19-20/x3, 18-20/x3, 19-20/x4, 18-20/x4 as these are all too powerful for any weapon. In the higher level game most of your damage is probably going to be coming from bonus damage, such as strength and power attack, which multiply with these effects. Things start to get really hairy when you apply improved critical or keen to them... Add in some of the critical effects, and I don't know what you might expect.
War-Spear
One-Handed
1d8 19-20 x3
Exotic
Range increment 10 feet
Well here is one that is already in play for the standard Pathfinder setting:
Falcata 18 gp 1d6 1d8 19-20/x3 — 4 lbs. S — PFC: AA
Statistics wise it should be as much as double the value of a x3 weapon. Monster weapons have also had these abilities for a decent amount of time. You shouldn't disallow something due to power, but instead put a point value on it with a point buy system. It would actually be a bit better if it was light...
Speaking of, is the +1 for light weapons an observational value or a personal opinion?
Speaking of, is the +1 for light weapons an observational value or a personal opinion?
Gut feeling, but looking at short sword vs longsword, it should probably be a +2.
Wow, why do people think this?
History, mostly -- as Ogre pointed out. Maces saw battlefield use. So did swords, and flails. War hammers with tiny little heads were used, but giant mauls were not. Coincidence? Oversight? Massive conspiracy on the part of all historians and museums to hide the truth? Or just plain not effective as weapons?
Also, part of the problem is that D&D has no clear rules for fatigue -- but after a couple of swings with a 20-lb. sledge, you're exhausted, whereas a guy with a 3-lb. sword is still killing guys left and right.
Spiked Chain
Two Handed 2D4 (1), Weapon Finesse (1), Disarm (2), Trip (1)So by your system, which I agree with, the spiked chain is sup-par for a martial weapon, little alone an exotic weapon :P
So what does everyone think of this???
|
|
So what does everyone think of this???
Spiked Chain
Two Handed 2D4 (1), Weapon Finesse (1), Disarm (2), Trip (1)So by your system, which I agree with, the spiked chain is sup-par for a martial weapon, little alone an exotic weapon :P
Since the old spiked chain (IIRC) could be used as a double-weapon and it should have a +2 cost from that (though maybe that should be lowered to +1, double isn't THAT great of a feature). Regardless it's in the 5-7 range, which makes it Martial in quality. I see nothing broken about that, it's just a finesse/tactical fighter's weapon.
How about this for double weapon rules: Build a one-handed weapon with 1 fewer point than normal, then double it OR Build two separate one-handed weapons with 3 fewer points than normal and attach them.
The following properties must be on both sides: thrown range, weapon finesse, monk
The following properties cannot be used: reach(?)
For simplicities sake, these may be required on both sides: Trip, disarm, brace
Maybe the system should have a separate "rare" tag that goes next to weapons that are never granted as proficiencies unless called out explicitly and move them into simple/martial/exotic based on power. And by that I mean as a house rule/variant, since it's way too late for core. The DM could also use that rare tag to say "Yeah, this isn't going to appear often."
Spiked Chain
Two Handed 2D4 (1), Weapon Finesse (1), Disarm (2), Trip (1)So by your system, which I agree with, the spiked chain is sup-par for a martial weapon, little alone an exotic weapon :P
V. 2.0
All weapons are x2 and threat on a 20
Base cost = min damage + max damage - 4
Small Weapon, Light Weapon: 1 point
Two handed weapon: -3 points
The cost cannot be less than 0 at this point.Light weapon, monk, brace, reach: 1 point
Range Increment: 1 point per 10 feet
Disarm, Trip, Sunder: 2 points
Class Profiency, Double Weapon: 3 points
Increase threat, Increase crit multiplier: 4 pointsIncreased threat and Increased crit multiplier can only be taken twice, and you can take one or the other, not both.
Simple: 7 points
Martial: 12 points
Exotic: 18 points
By this system, the spiked chain is base 6 pts (2d4), -3 (two-handed), +2 (disarm), +2 (trip), +1 (finesse) = 8 pts = martial.
Personally, I feel that the -3 for being two-handed is too large an adjustment; 2-hd. weapons get 1.5 STR and better use of Power Attack, after all, which are ADVANTAGES, not disadvantages. With that in mind, I'd peg the spiked chain as a 10-point (comfortably martial) weapon. Then again, I can't help but suspect that no exotic weapon on the list adds up to 13+ points.
Did anyone ask how much reach costs yet? It's interesting though, I've always wanted a ridiculously humongous hammer with a x4 critical or a finesse spear
Base stats -
All weapons are x2 and threat on a 20
Light weapon - 1d3 small or 1d4 medium damage
One Handed weapon - 1d4 small or 1d6 medium damage
Two Handed weapon - 1d6 small or 1d8 medium damage
Die sizes are 1d3->1d4->1d6->1d8/2d4->1d10->1d12/2d6->2d8->1d20/2d10Damage increases
Increase threat 2 points
Increase crit multiplier 2 points
Increase damage by 1 die size 2 points
Decrease damage by 1 die size -2 pointsSpecial properties
Trip, Brace, Monk, Reach - 1 point
Disarm, Double - 2 points
Range Increment - 1 point per 10 feetSimple Weapon - 4 points
Martial Weapon - 7 points
Exotic Weapon - 10 points
Well, with your method, a Composite Longbow would be 13 points.
0 pts - "2-handed" base damage
2 pts - increase crit multiplier
11 pts - 110 range increment.
The problem is, a composite longbow is martial, and your math puts it above exotic. You could add some rules like the following:
Simple: 4 points
Martial: 8 points
Exotic: 12 points
+2 points - per 10 ft range increment
-.1 point - per 1 gp in cost.
-4 points - weapon provokes attack of opportunity from threatening foes
-2 points - uses "cheep" ammunition (1 gp per 20 units)
-3 points - uses "moderate" ammunition (1 gp per 10 units)
-4 points - uses "expensive" ammunition (1 gp per 5 units)
-5 points - load weapon as a move action
-10 point - load weapon as a full round action
+1 point - weapon is a fantasy weapon (didn't exist historically)
-.5 points - weapon is fragile (bone, obsidian, etc)
0 points - weapon is resilient (treated wood, bronze, etc.)
+.5 points - weapon is sturdy (steel, etc.)
That would price the composite longbow at 8. The math would be:
0 points - "2-handed" weapon damage
2 points - increase crit multiplier
22 points - 110 range increment
-4 - weapon provokes AOO
-10 - 100 gp cost
-2 points uses "cheep" ammunition
It would price the heavy crossbow at 6:
0 points - "2-handed" wepon damage
2 points - increase threat
2 points - increase damage by 1 die size
24 points - 120 range increment
-5 points - 50 gp cost
-4 points - weapon provokes an AOO
-3 points - Weapon uses Moderately priced ammunition
-10 point - load as a full round action
That said there is a reason modern armies don't use muskets. Some weapons are simply better than others. I'm not convinced that "forcing" weapons to fit into some sort of hypothetical equality is a good thing.
|
|
<lots of stuff...>
Yeah, I mentioned that ranged weapons didn't work with the system in one of my above posts. It's probably worth it to have a fourth "base" template for ranged weapons that starts at 60ft range increment and increases 20ft at a time or something similar. Ranged-only weapons are already their own section in equipment chapters, so it only makes sense.
The problem is, a composite longbow is martial, and your math puts it above exotic.
In my homebrew rules it's exotic. Because it's, like, 20 times better than any of the martial weapons. Just saying.
Wow, why do people think this?History, mostly -- as Ogre pointed out. Maces saw battlefield use. So did swords, and flails. War hammers with tiny little heads were used, but giant mauls were not. Coincidence? Oversight? Massive conspiracy on the part of all historians and museums to hide the truth? Or just plain not effective as weapons?
Also, part of the problem is that D&D has no clear rules for fatigue -- but after a couple of swings with a 20-lb. sledge, you're exhausted, whereas a guy with a 3-lb. sword is still killing guys left and right.
You can't just use large scale battles as justification. If that was all we were using, everyone would be using polearms or bows aside from cavalry. Hell, if we're going that route then we'd be denied using any exotic weapon aside from the bastard sword. When you say history, you mean military history, not actual history.
A few swings with the maul may tire you out some, but if you're only fighting two people you only need two good swings. Shearing through armor with an axe or pick is sure to be good in a large scale battle, but it's best to go for the biggest, nastiest thing available if you want to end the fight quickly. If you have to march for weeks at a time and fight in hours long battles? You bet you want a lighter weapon. Most halberds and polearms were around 5 pounds. In another thread, someone said that those were too unwieldy to be considered weapons as well. Well, think about it this way. You don't have to fight very long, you want to end the fight quickly, and it can be used to drive in stakes. The perfect weapon for say, an archer? At Agincourt, nonetheless?
it's best to go for the biggest, nastiest thing available if you want to end the fight quickly.
Sorry, but I'm guessing, from your comments, that you lack any martial arts or other personal HTH combat experience? To end a fight quickly, I'd MUCH rather have even a knife than an overly-heavy, massive bludgeon -- a guy with a huge monster weapon swings once and misses, the knife guy steps in and stabs him like 10 times. It's no contest. A fairly light piece of metal pipe, on the other hand, is a dandy weapon.
Try it with a friend: give yourself a really heavy, two-handed thingie (well-padded, of course), and give your buddy a rubber knife. Unless he's totally inept, he'll win 9 out of 10 times, or even 10 out of 10.
Regarding exotic weapons not being used: largely correct. There are no historical records for a two-bladed sword, and indeed, the designers said point-blank that it was to remind people of Darth Maul in Star Wars. Scratch that one. Likewise, good luck finding a historical example, anywhere, of a double-battleaxe (heads on both ends of the shaft) intended for combat -- as opposed to a lajatang intended for use in performing martial arts katas, rather than for serious fighting. On the flip side, "kama" is Japanese for "sickle." There is no such "exotic" weapon, as distinct from a sickle (a simple weapon). And nunchaku are a straightforward derivative of? You guessed it: a light flail.
Regarding tent peg hammers at Agincourt, do you have any indication at all that (a) these were used successfully as weapons, compared to swords or even daggers; and (b) that we're talking 2-handed sledges and not 1-handed tent hammers?
---
None of that is to say that D&D should be in any way realistic, however. In a game that features fireballs, I see no reason why an Anime-style 15-ft. long, 600-pound hammer shouldn't be allowed as well. Just because something isn't historical doesn't mean it has no place in your game, if you want to include it.
|
|
Though a huge hammer isn't the preferred weapon in most realistic scenarios, I could see it being a good one if you were trying to knock out a heavily armored fellow who (for whatever reason) hadn't noticed you yet. A knife doesn't do much to full-plate, but a big hammer sure will.
That said, I wouldn't allow a 600 pound hammer unless someone had some SERIOUS strength. When I said Maul I was thinking something closer to a sledgehammer, but with a different appearance. Sure, an over-sized one would certainly look like the typical enormous maul type, but that's not something people typically have the strength to wield. I drew up brief rules for a player who wanted a maul/sledge type weapon for an earth themed druid and I put it at 12 pounds.
If I wasn't so lazy I might come up with a rule to determine (based on the weight and size of the weapon versus your load limits) whether you could actually wield something as a normal weapon, as a full-round-action-per-hit weapon or not at all (via weapon rules). This idea initially came up in a game where I had a character that (as medium size) had a 1000+ pound light load and saw a "by weight" improvised weapon chart in an extra book of some form (complete warrior?).
Maul
50gp 1d8(s) 2d6(m) x3 B 12 lb.
Though a huge hammer isn't the preferred weapon in most realistic scenarios, I could see it being a good one if you were trying to knock out a heavily armored fellow who (for whatever reason) hadn't noticed you yet. A knife doesn't do much to full-plate, but a big hammer sure will.
I'd rather have the knife in that situation. Daggers were historically the weapon to use on an armored knight who couldn't/wasn't fighting back (usually because he'd been disabled but not killed be being dismounted and such). Remember, with a small, thin blade, you don't have to go through the armor...you can go into the little spots it doesn't protect very well. ^_-
Stuff I'm tossing into the discussion:
There is a martial arts spear with two 'heads' (set at right angles to each other), the name of which I forget, but I must also point out that I have never seen it in use.
I spent several months learning both jo and bo staff and appreciate the Quarterstaff as a blunt force 'whack' weapon. My kendo instructor taught me to deal with a 'chain' weapon with about 45 minutes of savage instruction, then turned my incompetent tush loose on the touring proponent of such weapons, 3 of 5 wins to me. My reactions are pathetic, by the way.
My SCA experiences led me down the Sword and Board trail, though technically I wielded a short mace. I have faced the two handed club/maul. It is not effective primarily due to it's slow swing. The head makes it telegraph worse than Tim Tebow. Blocking with a shield is not a matter of just taking the hit, it's more important to deflect the force of the blow. Having been targeted several times with an SCA "axe", I lost any fear of getting hit by such. Even a plodder like me was easily able to evade the first blows and soon learned to 'crowd' the Axeman. Shields should be worth more in D&D, IMHO. I saw a 'knight' at Border Wars hide behind a dinner plate sized buckler while fighting 4 (later 5) opponents. He survived after 'killing' 3, using a 'short sword'. He deserved that White Belt!
Personally, I would love to see more rules that turn Simple or Martial weapons into Exotic weapons due to techniques and training. Sai are little better than metal rods in my hands, but I never won a fight with anyone trained (properly) with Sai. Mentally, I am either defending or attacking with a relatively simple weapon (Imagine my weakness once everyone figured this out!), so I see the difference between Simple and Martial. Using Feats allows us to add these abilities easily.
|
|
The problem is, a composite longbow is martial, and your math puts it above exotic.In my homebrew rules it's exotic. Because it's, like, 20 times better than any of the martial weapons. Just saying.
Basically composite longbow is better than any other ranged weapon. It is ridiculously better. You have to take 2 feats for the crossbow to even get in the ballpark.
it's best to go for the biggest, nastiest thing available if you want to end the fight quickly.Sorry, but I'm guessing, from your comments, that you lack any martial arts or other personal HTH combat experience?
I have around 3 years of direct training in a combined martial art, and weapons were covered so far as the staff and nunchaku. I also know roughly one class' worth of chinese spear. I have done sport fencing and boffer combat (Which doesn't really count). Sorry, but your guess is incorrect.
To end a fight quickly, I'd MUCH rather have even a knife than an overly-heavy, massive bludgeon -- a guy with a huge monster weapon swings once and misses, the knife guy steps in and stabs him like 10 times. It's no contest. A fairly light piece of metal pipe, on the other hand, is a dandy weapon.
Try it with a friend: give yourself a really heavy, two-handed thingie (well-padded, of course), and give your buddy a rubber knife. Unless he's totally inept, he'll win 9 out of 10 times, or even 10 out of 10.
Actually, a swing at about chest level while stepping in with a maul should stop someone with a sword, let alone a knife. Why? They need to step back to avoid the blow and then step in to attack. Using your superior reach and power, you could also bash the weapon out of the way and then follow it up with a strike to the upper body.
Padded fighting isn't something I would count on, since for safety purposes most of them require only a touch: In actual combat touching someone with your weapon will at best throw them off for a second. Real combat is about speed, technique and power. While swords may be fast, one could hardly say they can carry enough force to traumatize through armor. Plus, since most shields are made of wood, you could likely break them if they were blocked instead of deflected.
Being a spear fighter I know what you're saying with speed being important, but putting enough force behind a strike is sometimes more than enough to win the day. Suffice to say that not everyone is that strong. But to say it's unrealistic and talk only about how great the knife is? If the guy with the maul doesn't miss, he's breaking bones and liquifying muscle. In a large scale battle, you can't pay attention to every side of you and you can't dodge. A guy with a knife is dead, even in a "fair" fight. If the guy with the maul backs up after a miss and swings at the knife guy coming in, he has no choice but to back away AGAIN or get pulped. It could be in your experience you're putting a very good knife guy against an inexperienced fighter or someone who isn't used to controlling their opponent's range.
Regarding tent peg hammers at Agincourt, do you have any indication at all that (a) these were used successfully as weapons, compared to swords or even daggers; and (b) that we're talking 2-handed sledges and not 1-handed tent hammers?
It was covered in my History of the Longbow course, various archers up to the Tudors used Mauls or sledges as weapons. I found a book (Via wiki unfortunately) that backs up the claim: The Great Warbow. I haven't read it but it has gotten a few good reviews. Thing is a bit on the pricy side though.
None of that is to say that D&D should be in any way realistic, however. In a game that features fireballs, I see no reason why an Anime-style 15-ft. long, 600-pound hammer shouldn't be allowed as well. Just because something isn't historical doesn't mean it has no place in your game, if you want to include it.
Just because something isn't used in large scale military battles doesn't mean it's historically inaccurate. By that logic, no one should march out of formation in D&D until guns are introduced, and everyone should carry shields and spears if they're footmen, and sword/lance and board if they're mounted cavalry.
I'd rather have the knife in that situation. Daggers were historically the weapon to use on an armored knight who couldn't/wasn't fighting back (usually because he'd been disabled but not killed be being dismounted and such). Remember, with a small, thin blade, you don't have to go through the armor...you can go into the little spots it doesn't protect very well. ^_-
I don't get you guys, everyone knows that historically the guy that can shoot fireballs from his hand is going to kill everyone :P
I don't get you guys, everyone knows that historically the guy that can shoot fireballs from his hand is going to kill everyone :PNot necessarily. As the Battle of Felldoom Hammer amply demonstrates, fireball-reliant troops are quickly overwhelmed by fire giant shocktroopers. Lord Havel's insistence of sticking to the Pryonic Conventions during that battle cost the Grunisians dearly.
O you clearly haven't been introduced to the deity Jefe, the six armed god of insanity, from my campaign. The fire from his hands is divine so it overcomes resistance :P
Though a huge hammer isn't the preferred weapon in most realistic scenarios, I could see it being a good one if you were trying to knock out a heavily armored fellow who (for whatever reason) hadn't noticed you yet. A knife doesn't do much to full-plate, but a big hammer sure will.
Actually, the stiletto was a knife specifically designed for use against plate mail.
Basically composite longbow is better than any other ranged weapon. It is ridiculously better. You have to take 2 feats for the crossbow to even get in the ballpark.The problem is, a composite longbow is martial, and your math puts it above exotic.In my homebrew rules it's exotic. Because it's, like, 20 times better than any of the martial weapons. Just saying.
I agree, but then I also said that some weapons were better than others, and that I dodn't think making all weapons "equal" was a good thing. Or I said something like that, anyway.
That said, crossbows get the shaft in 3rd/3.5/Pathfinder/D20/OGL (pun intended). They were THE weapon of their time, and were so viscious that the Catholic church banned their use against Christians. This was at a time when torture was a common and accepted form of interrogation. I don't believe there were any other weapons of war that were banned untill Mustard Gas came around.
The roleplaying version doesn't do crosbows justice. But that's another topic.
|
|
The roleplaying version doesn't do crosbows justice. But that's another topic.Given that the crossbow was generally inferior to the longbow, it seems the game got it about right.
Crossbow was nasty because it had many of the advantages of the bow but could be fired by a fairly weak, untrained person. The Longbow was devastating in the hands of a Longbowman but typically required a lot of specialized training and specialized muscles which IMO makes it a good candidate for an exotic weapon.
More important from a game balance perspective the Composite Longbow is just ridiculous, in particular with a high point buy where you can max out both strength and dexterity (One more argument for reasonable point buy).
Madcap:
You don't step away from the person swinging a maul chest level. You step into them and close. Their attack is based solely on on leverage, leaves many places open, and they will hurt themselves striking your body with their forearm and a 20 lb weight away from them more than they will hurt you. Alternatively,you could step back durring the maul swing and up in the 2-3 seconds it takes to prepare the next. 2-3 seconds will result in them being dead. And a horrisontal swing will have almost no power behind it. Mauls are designed to get their power from gravity. You will get it up to a slower speed if you try to muscle it sideways, and since momentum is m*v^2 you will transfer less momentum, resulting in less power.
Archers used mauls as backup weapons because they couldn't afford better and were not given any training for better melee combat. A single swing against guys charging you can save your life, but archers were expected to die if engaged in melee with an opponent. Also, the most comon enemies to hit archer lines were cavalry. A maul knocks someone charging you off a horse, and they can't avoid it easily.
A couple comments:
19-20 X3 crit weapons already exist. Aldori dueling saber in the adventurer's armor is one. 1 handed, d8, 19-20x3, finessable, even when used in 2 hands. It must be used as a standard longsword if you do not have the EWP.
There have been a couple systems like this made before. The previous one I saw had special qualities costing the same as a damage die or increased threat range. They generally gave light weapons fewer and THW more points to buy their powers.
Madcap:
You don't step away from the person swinging a maul chest level. You step into them and close. Their attack is based solely on on leverage, leaves many places open, and they will hurt themselves striking your body with their forearm and a 20 lb weight away from them more than they will hurt you. Alternatively,you could step back durring the maul swing and up in the 2-3 seconds it takes to prepare the next. 2-3 seconds will result in them being dead. And a horrisontal swing will have almost no power behind it. Mauls are designed to get their power from gravity. You will get it up to a slower speed if you try to muscle it sideways, and since momentum is m*v^2 you will transfer less momentum, resulting in less power.
Archers used mauls as backup weapons because they couldn't afford better and were not given any training for better melee combat. A single swing against guys charging you can save your life, but archers were expected to die if engaged in melee with an opponent. Also, the most comon enemies to hit archer lines were cavalry. A maul knocks someone charging you off a horse, and they can't avoid it easily.
But if you step in, you're going to get hit not by their forearm, but by the weapon. Mauls are about the size of sledgehammers. Anyone who's swung a sledgehammer knows you grip it up by the top like a woodchopping axe. It may take a bit longer to "prep" a swing than a knife, but not that long. You can also slide your hand down the handle mid-swing to adjust your distance.
A horizontal swing will have less power than an overhead swing, but due to the weight of the weapon will send whatever it connects with twisting off in that direction. It's not as powerful as an overhead swing, but that's like me saying that cutting with a knife carries no power because of how light it is. Just because it's not the most damaging attack the weapon can be used for doesn't mean it's not effective. Also swings with a two-handed hammer can be fast. If you're not experienced fighting the weapon they can catch you on the backswing.
Plus, hitting someone with your forearm doesn't hurt you if you do it correctly. Okinawan Karate has numerous forearm strikes intended to empower a knife hand strike. You can't do the knife hand while holding a weapon, but you can still strike with your forearms. If we assume armor or no, the strike will still injure or deflect a blow.
Mauls at 23 pounds I could see your strategy working against. However, a more typical two-handed hammer would be closer to 4-8 pounds, perhaps 12 pounds using modern materials. Something of that size would likely be the weapon that archers would be transporting as opposed to just a tool. A 20 pound hammer, however, would definitely kill someone wearing armor: As you so succinctly point out, a charging man, especially one in armor, cannot avoid a strike. Something 20 pounds and up, losing power or not from the swing, would certainly kill someone with the first blow unless it glanced.
Also, you say that you should never retreat but then that you can retreat? Which is the option you're most familiar with?
The roleplaying version doesn't do crosbows justice. But that's another topic.Given that the crossbow was generally inferior to the longbow, it seems the game got it about right.
Again, it's another topic, but that is a myth perpetuated by the Battle of Agincourt, where large numbers of English longbows were used.
However, the part that everyone forgets is that the English had a serious advantage in terrain. They had the higher ground, while the French were attacking uphill, and the terrain funneled them into a very narrow front where the French forces were literally tripping over themselves. In addition, the thick mud made footing hazardous for the French, and many French soldiers fell and were trampled by those behind them. Essentially, most historians agree that the terrain, not the longbow, won the victory for the English.
The History Channel (or perhaps it was the Discovery Channel) even had a special on this battle, and they showed that the English arrows could not penetrate the breastplates of the French armor.
Conversely, most accounts of heavy crossbows tell that they had no trouble at all ripping a hole in a breastplate. The mechanical advantage of the crossbow (pulley, lever, or stirrup) allowed a crossbow to be drawn with a higher force than a man could do without the mechanical assistance. In essence, the crossbow held more potential energy when drawn.
were so viscious that the Catholic church banned their use against Christians.
It may be that "vicious" is the word you want. "Viscous" refers to slowly-flowing liquids (e.g., syrup).
Madcap:
You don't step away from the person swinging a maul chest level. You step into them and close. Their attack is based solely on on leverage, leaves many places open, and they will hurt themselves striking your body with their forearm and a 20 lb weight away from them more than they will hurt you. Alternatively,you could step back durring the maul swing and up in the 2-3 seconds it takes to prepare the next. 2-3 seconds will result in them being dead. And a horrisontal swing will have almost no power behind it. Mauls are designed to get their power from gravity. You will get it up to a slower speed if you try to muscle it sideways, and since momentum is m*v^2 you will transfer less momentum, resulting in less power.
Archers used mauls as backup weapons because they couldn't afford better and were not given any training for better melee combat. A single swing against guys charging you can save your life, but archers were expected to die if engaged in melee with an opponent. Also, the most comon enemies to hit archer lines were cavalry. A maul knocks someone charging you off a horse, and they can't avoid it easily.
But if you step in, you're going to get hit not by their forearm, but by the weapon. Mauls are about the size of sledgehammers. Anyone who's swung a sledgehammer knows you grip it up by the top like a woodchopping axe. It may take a bit longer to "prep" a swing than a knife, but not that long. You can also slide your hand down the handle mid-swing to adjust your distance.
A horizontal swing will have less power than an overhead swing, but due to the weight of the weapon will send whatever it connects with twisting off in that direction. It's not as powerful as an overhead swing, but that's like me saying that cutting with a knife carries no power because of how light it is. Just because it's not the most damaging attack the weapon can be used for doesn't mean it's not effective. Also swings with a two-handed hammer can be fast. If you're not experienced...
I do not say you never say you should never retreat. I said that you should step in, but if you don't you can also step in after the attack, since it is horribly inefficient.
A charging man may not be as able to avoid the strike, but the maul also has major issues in timing the strike. It is significantly slower than other weapons, and it telegraphs all movements.
Stepping into the blow so that the forarm hits would not hurt them from the impact, and I am not talking about a proper forarm strike, but an unintentional one. The momentum of a hammer head continuing and rotating the weapon is what would hurt their wrists/shoulder. Also if they haven't adjusted their grip yet, the handle could very easily drive into their ribs.
You can exert x ammount of force on a hammer. The hammers weight is w. a is acceleration, v is velocity, m is momentum. Momentum is what will do the damage in a collision. These equasions are for linear momentum but the concept doesn't change for angular, which this situation should use, it just gets more complicated
x/w = a
a*t = v
m=w*v^2
therfore:
m=w*(x*t/w)^2, or m=x^2*t^2/w
Assuming for 2 weapons you can apply the same force to the object and have the same time to strike, you can do more damage with a lighter weapon. The maul needs to increase time in order to equal lighter weapons. A knife is so light that it is hard to apply as much force to it. This limits the velocity you can achieve.
Little league baseball bats are a good example. They have varying weights that are allowed. Heavier bats with weight further from your body are more effective, but only if you can apply enough strength. If you do not have the strength to get it up to full speed, its better to move your bat size down. You will get more momentum out of the extra speed than out of the added weight, and thus you will hit the ball farther with a lighter bat.