Having seen and owned quite a few combat knives, I've yet to see one that isn't both an effective slashing and piercing weapon. Whether it's a Fairbarn-Applegate dagger, or a single-edge Japanese-style tanto, a fighting knife is an excellent slasher, and can pierce hard materials with a strong thrust.
Also, a lot of the swords in the game were both slashing and piercing weapons IRL. Would saying that daggers, short swords and long swords (perhaps others) did both slashing and piercing damage make them too good?
Probably. I've seen it said before that the hilt of a longsword is a perfectly fine way to trip, but to make the weapon a trip weapon would make it too good, so probably best to nip the issue in the bud and leave the damage types as is. Since real life clearly wasn't the main factor in determining which damage types were chosen then balance probably was. I've also seen it said that making a short sword piercing was so two weapon fighters could have both slashing in their main hand and piercing in the off hand.
Having seen and owned quite a few combat knives, I've yet to see one that isn't both an effective slashing and piercing weapon. Whether it's a Fairbarn-Applegate dagger, or a single-edge Japanese-style tanto, a fighting knife is an excellent slasher, and can pierce hard materials with a strong thrust.
Agreed that the game, in it's current state, does not take into consideration all the intricacies of weapons (which is a shame in my opinion). It is clear, however, that some weapons really do have a primary function. A rondel, for example, is almost exclusively a piercing weapon. Sure, it could be used for slashing, but that's not it's primary design, and might even do less "damage" by comparison. Similarly with shortswords - a primarily stabbing/piercing weapon.
Consider the gladius, when coupled with the Scutum in shoulder to shoulder Roman legion formations. The only truly viable way to utilize this sword while in formation would be via underhand/undershield thrust (stab). Once formations broke, anything is possible, of course.
You could houserule that using the weapon to cause a different type of damage reduces the damage die by one step. So short sword becomes 1d4, dagger becomes 1d3, etc.
Would saying that daggers, short swords and long swords (perhaps others) did both slashing and piercing damage make them too good?
In my opinion, no. Frankly the amount of DR that is damage type specific is so small that adding on the additional, logical damage type should be almost a non effect on the vast majority of games.
I know we allow slashing from any 'bladed' weapon and in 4 years of game it has come up exactly 0 times.
Obviously different play styles may vary but I am thinking that if you make the change it will in no way break your game.
Agreed that the game, in it's current state, does not take into consideration all the intricacies of weapons (which is a shame in my opinion). It is clear, however, that some weapons really do have a primary function. A rondel, for example, is almost exclusively a piercing weapon. Sure, it could be used for slashing, but that's not it's primary design, and might even do less "damage" by comparison. Similarly with shortswords - a primarily stabbing/piercing weapon.
Consider the gladius, when coupled with the Scutum in shoulder to shoulder Roman legion formations. The only truly viable way to utilize this sword while in formation would be via underhand/undershield thrust (stab). Once formations broke, anything is possible, of course.
It's true that many weapons were meant for certain attack styles. Many rapiers didn't have sharp edges along the length of the blade, but were only sharp at and near the tip; clearly a piercing weapon. Greatswords often had a section of the blade that you could "choke up" on, and use for closer combat than just swinging it wide, and could stab as well as slash.
Damage types don't come into play that often, and most melee characters will have back-up weapons for when they do, so it's not a big issue. I was just curious how other players handle the break from realism.
An idea that I just had:
If you have weapon focus with a weapon, you can forgo the +1 to attack and instead use a different damagetype, as long as it makes sense with the weapon.
Technically you can turn everything into a blunt weapon i guess when you strike with the hilt etc. But turning a club into a slashing or piercing weapon doesn't work.
Why Weapon Focus? Because it means you have more than just normal training with the weapon (which is proficiency), so you can do some special tricks with it, like slashing with a dagger, strike someone with the hilt etc, and still do comparable damage.
An idea that I just had:
If you have weapon focus with a weapon, you can forgo the +1 to attack and instead use a different damagetype, as long as it makes sense with the weapon.
Technically you can turn everything into a blunt weapon i guess when you strike with the hilt etc. But turning a club into a slashing or piercing weapon doesn't work.Why Weapon Focus? Because it means you have more than just normal training with the weapon (which is proficiency), so you can do some special tricks with it, like slashing with a dagger, strike someone with the hilt etc, and still do comparable damage.
That's a good idea. I know that knife fighters will use any part of their weapon (tip, edge, back edge or pommel)to gain an advantage. That seems like a fair houserule.
You could houserule that using the weapon to cause a different type of damage reduces the damage die by one step.
No need to house rule, RAW already covers this situation. If you bang someone with the pommel of your sword to deal bludgeoning damage, or whatever, you are using your longsword as an improvised bludgeoning weapon. Refer to improvised weapon rules.
I don't think Longswords are designed to be piercing weapons.
Though I don't see why shortswords and punching daggers (aka, Katars) aren't both.
Looking at the equipment section of the PRD, daggers are in fact listed as type "P or S."
I agree with Cartigan that short swords and punch daggers should also be both.
I don't think making these kind of changes are too game breaking... the only concern I can see is in very early levels, some monsters have damage-type based DR, such as zombies having DR 5/slashing. Determining whether a short sword beats its DR is something to consider. However, it doesn't strike me as a very big deal at all.
As for giving items other abilities they "should" have based on how weapons tend to be used "in the real world," I've thought about making some house rules to give a few weapons the bastard sword treatment --- i.e., so if you take an exotic weapon proficiency in a martial weapon (or maybe martial proficiency in a simple weapon), you get to do something extra with it.
For example, IRL, I've seen quarterstaves used to great effect to trip people. And yet it is not a trip weapon. Why? Because then it wouldn't be balanced to allow it to be a simple weapon, something, say, a sorcerer could easily pick up and use. But maybe if you have martial/exotic proficiency in a quarterstaff, it then becomes a trip weapon in your hands. A sorcerer however still can't use it to trip because he hasn't received the training in how to do so, but is still proficient in its simpler uses.
The game takes a lot of things out of "reality" and its overall a good thing. I can't think of trying to incorporate every advantage a weapon has... like swords being almost useless against heavy plate (hence the switch to maces, axes and hammers. Game mechanics wise swords and axes both do slashing damage, but an axe concentrates the force into a smaller area, and has elements of slashing (the edge) and bashing ( sheer brute force concentrated in a small area)
|
The game takes a lot of things out of "reality" and its overall a good thing. I can't think of trying to incorporate every advantage a weapon has... like swords being almost useless against heavy plate (hence the switch to maces, axes and hammers. Game mechanics wise swords and axes both do slashing damage, but an axe concentrates the force into a smaller area, and has elements of slashing (the edge) and bashing ( sheer brute force concentrated in a small area)
Also the "reality breaking" effect of having everyone wait their turn to attack...
Here's another one showing at 2-hander stabbing an oil drum and a car hood (and doing sick things to pig carcasses).
|
|
Here's another one showing at 2-hander stabbing an oil drum and a car hood (and doing sick things to pig carcasses).
You can always play Rolemaster. The only RPG system I have ever played with more than 1 hit location table for fish (depending on what weapon you used to attack the fish).
There are some house rules I came up with for the bludgeoning, slashing, etc. stuff that might be of use to this thread. Will post or link later.
Here's another one showing at 2-hander stabbing an oil drum and a car hood (and doing sick things to pig carcasses).
You can always play Rolemaster. The only RPG system I have ever played with more than 1 hit location table for fish (depending on what weapon you used to attack the fish).
I played a roll master campaign that lasted 2 years. We made characters, then I stabbed an octopus and we figured out the effects.
That was the campaign.
Ugh..turns out I only posted info on armor. However, looking at my stuff at home, I have several sets of rules when it comes to different damage types offered by weapons. I'm trying to figure out whether or not to go with the critical set or the effectiveness set...maybe I could get opinions here.
Masterwork Weapons Houserule- Critical/Condition Focused
- Masterwork weapons now have special qualities whenever a critical hit is confirmed using them. Bludgeoning weapons cause the Dazzled condition, Piercing weapons cause the Sickened condition for one round, and Slashing weapons do an extra single point of damage. Should other critical hits be scored in the same round that one has these conditions, they either stack in terms of penalty(Bludgeoning), duration(Piercing), or damage(Slashing).
Masterwork Weapons Houserule- Overall Effectiveness Focused
- Masterwork weapons have qualities involving critical hits depending on the type of damage done. Slashing weapons have their critical threat range increased by 1, piercing weapons have their critical threat multiplier increased by 1, and bludgeoning weapons cause creatures hit to make a Fort save against a DC equal to the damage done in the attack or be dazzled for one round.
This is the primary reason I am having difficulty using short swords. I dont like jabbing things with swords.
The way I see it is more based on where the damage comes from. Piercing weapons make smaller cuts. Heavier swords are slashing because there is more weight behind the blade, while Piercing swords cut in a finer way, cutting more with dexterity than strength. Weapon Finesse sort of supports this theory.
Now, all I need is somebody to come and verify the piercing sword physics. As I am making it up as I am going along. My characters are going to be slashing with short swords, but its still piercing damage.
The baseline shortsword (to the best of my knowledge) is the Roman Gladius, which was primarily used for thrusting (although I believe it was an acceptable slashing weapon as well, at least against unarmored targets.)This is the primary reason I am having difficulty using short swords. I dont like jabbing things with swords.
The way I see it is more based on where the damage comes from. Piercing weapons make smaller cuts. Heavier swords are slashing because there is more weight behind the blade, while Piercing swords cut in a finer way, cutting more with dexterity than strength. Weapon Finesse sort of supports this theory.
Now, all I need is somebody to come and verify the piercing sword physics. As I am making it up as I am going along. My characters are going to be slashing with short swords, but its still piercing damage.
As a Gladius, I would rate it as piercing no worries. But looking at the picture the Rulebook has for a short sword, I am not convinced. (P146)
Playing D&D right from the start but in 3E/3.5/Pathfinder I, sometimes, whished I had a bludgeoning weapon instead of a Slashing one, but...
...when do you wish to have a piercing weapon instead of a slashing one?
Here's another one showing at 2-hander stabbing an oil drum and a car hood (and doing sick things to pig carcasses).
Yes, longswords are pointy. You can, technically, stab things. But I don't think they are designed to be stabbing weapons.
Just like you could technically use a longsword to bludgeon some one to death.
Here's another one showing at 2-hander stabbing an oil drum and a car hood (and doing sick things to pig carcasses).
Yes, longswords are pointy. You can, technically, stab things. But I don't think they are designed to be stabbing weapons.
Just like you could technically use a longsword to bludgeon some one to death.
Cold Steel would seem to disagree with you. :)
A purpose built slashing/chopping sword is more like THIS which FYI is one of my favorite swords.
Here's another one showing at 2-hander stabbing an oil drum and a car hood (and doing sick things to pig carcasses).
Yes, longswords are pointy. You can, technically, stab things. But I don't think they are designed to be stabbing weapons.
Just like you could technically use a longsword to bludgeon some one to death.Cold Steel would seem to disagree with you. :)
No. It doesn't. They are demonstrating you can stab things with a longsword. I agreed with that. Would you actually use it like that IN COMBAT?
...Would you actually use it like that IN COMBAT?
Yes. Duels between armored opponents wielding Longswords usually ment Longsowrds of the pointy variety with strongly tapering blades. These were gripped in the "half-sword-style" (left hand actually gripped the blade about halfway to the point) in order to get superior stabbing stability.
In such duels you would stab your opponent through visors or in the groins/armpits openings.
...Would you actually use it like that IN COMBAT?
Yes. Duels between armored opponents wielding Longswords usually ment Longsowrds of the pointy variety with strongly tapering blades. These were gripped in the "half-sword-style" (left hand actually gripped the blade about halfway to the point) in order to get superior stabbing stability.
In such duels you would stab your opponent through visors or in the groins/armpits openings.
Thats a duel though. I don't know about trying for that level of precision in a pitched battle after you've been swinging that sword for an hour.
Playing D&D right from the start but in 3E/3.5/Pathfinder I, sometimes, whished I had a bludgeoning weapon instead of a Slashing one, but...
...when do you wish to have a piercing weapon instead of a slashing one?
Any underwater fight.
Ugh..turns out I only posted info on armor. However, looking at my stuff at home, I have several sets of rules when it comes to different damage types offered by weapons. I'm trying to figure out whether or not to go with the critical set or the effectiveness set...maybe I could get opinions here.
Masterwork Weapons Houserule- Critical/Condition Focused
- Masterwork weapons now have special qualities whenever a critical hit is confirmed using them. Bludgeoning weapons cause the Dazzled condition, Piercing weapons cause the Sickened condition for one round, and Slashing weapons do an extra single point of damage. Should other critical hits be scored in the same round that one has these conditions, they either stack in terms of penalty(Bludgeoning), duration(Piercing), or damage(Slashing).Masterwork Weapons Houserule- Overall Effectiveness Focused
- Masterwork weapons have qualities involving critical hits depending on the type of damage done. Slashing weapons have their critical threat range increased by 1, piercing weapons have their critical threat multiplier increased by 1, and bludgeoning weapons cause creatures hit to make a Fort save against a DC equal to the damage done in the attack or be dazzled for one round.
Thoughts? Not that I'm trying to be annoying or anything.
Thoughts? Not that I'm trying to be annoying or anything.
Why try when you can just be? (Kidding!)
It seems like a little much for my taste, but it adds a little something, and if that suits your game, it's fine.
I once had a Spelljammer game with sabers made from a rare metal that were generally better than other swords. All the PCs had them after a while. It wasn't game-breaking, and gave them a slight edge in most worlds.
If it works for your group, great! I'd get something like that ASAP, it's that good.
Having seen and owned quite a few combat knives, I've yet to see one that isn't both an effective slashing and piercing weapon. Whether it's a Fairbarn-Applegate dagger, or a single-edge Japanese-style tanto, a fighting knife is an excellent slasher, and can pierce hard materials with a strong thrust.
Also, a lot of the swords in the game were both slashing and piercing weapons IRL. Would saying that daggers, short swords and long swords (perhaps others) did both slashing and piercing damage make them too good?
While something like the aplegate fairbain knife would be good for slashing the soft unprotected skins of us puny humans, i wonder how it would fair slashing against a rhino, dragon, crocodile, or dinosaur that adventurers tend to stumble onto with surprising regularity.
Thoughts? Not that I'm trying to be annoying or anything.Why try when you can just be? (Kidding!)
HA!!!
It seems like a little much for my taste, but it adds a little something, and if that suits your game, it's fine.
I once had a Spelljammer game with sabers made from a rare metal that were generally better than other swords. All the PCs had them after a while. It wasn't game-breaking, and gave them a slight edge in most worlds.
If it works for your group, great! I'd get something like that ASAP, it's that good.
That's why I was trying to figure out which set of houserules I should go with. I like crits, but right now so little happens aside from increased damage, and I'm not a fan of crit-based feats for conditions as done by pathfinder. I wanted something that would help masterwork weapons stand out and cause trouble for those who were hit by them, and also have a player take time to consider whether or not they want to enchant a weapon instead of just dumping the crap in favor of an X +1.
|
Thats a duel though. I don't know about trying for that level of precision in a pitched battle after you've been swinging that sword for an hour....Would you actually use it like that IN COMBAT?
Yes. Duels between armored opponents wielding Longswords usually ment Longsowrds of the pointy variety with strongly tapering blades. These were gripped in the "half-sword-style" (left hand actually gripped the blade about halfway to the point) in order to get superior stabbing stability.
In such duels you would stab your opponent through visors or in the groins/armpits openings.
No in ANY armored combat that is the method of choice with a longsword...mass combat or individual. The other favorites being the murder stroke, which is a grip the blade and use the cross guards as a pick and the classic pommeled to death. Swinging a sword against full plate is pretty much wasted energy.
No in ANY armored combat that is the method of choice with a longsword...mass combat or individual. The other favorites being the murder stroke, which is a grip the blade and use the cross guards as a pick and the classic pommeled to death. Swinging a sword against full plate is pretty much wasted energy.
This is true. Armor, as it got better, nullified various weapons and tactics. Crossbows could pierce heavy armor, while swords got instantly dulled or simply broke.
Once guns were a real factor, armor was too much of a hindrance to be useful. It was dropped, altogether. Now that we have kevlar, things have changed, yet again.
PF presumes a medieval/renaissance setting where people can walk around dungeons in full plate. Not realistic, but it's a lot of fun.
In AD&D, weapons had optional adjustments vs. armor types and also had speed factors. I'm not suggesting that we need that level of realism. Most DMs ignored it, anyway, for the sake of fast play.
In PF, when I play a melee type, I like a big slashing weapon as my primary, with a morningstar (P+B) as a backup, and always a dagger, in case I get swallowed, or lose the other weapons.
RAW isn't broken, at all, regarding weapons and what they can do. It's just not realistic. Swords, as a rule, could slash and pierce. Slash to disable, pierce to kill.