Darts are Deadly
cdavis
I had a player that was a fighter throwing Darts.
The Rate of Fire was 3 per Turn I think...at 1d2 or 1d3 dmg
I forget the exact Specs.
But anyway that gave him 3 attacks per round, and you just
can't miss with 3 attacks.
The problem was when he added the Strength Bonus for the darts.
+5 Dmg on every hit. Which means at least 6 dmg every hit.
Possibility of all three would hit, at 18 dmg Minimum per round.
And this is a range attack?
Now this may be nothing in your world, but think about when that
same fighter starts getting 2 attacks per round or more.
Thats 6 darts per round x6 minimum damage, 36 dmg MINIMUM, if they hit!
IN ONE ROUND, And all this from range!
He was shooting darts like a cannon shoots cannonballs.
Is this correct? Or even plausible?
What should I do about this character?
I could take away his Guantlets of Ogre Strength, but its his only
Magic Item, And he loves them.
|>> /\ |>>
| /__\ |
Chadwick Davistein [------]|{}|[------]
cda...@sequent.com | {} |_| |_| {} |
| |
Can I Animate Dead and still be Lawful Good? |_____[_||_]_____|
John Morgan Little
are kinda light, and you don't really put your arm into it to
throw them accurately.
Alternatively, make him take off the gauntlets, or face penalties
for wearing them. A large, clumsy metal and leather glove isn't
really great for handling the small darts. Spears, maybe. Darts,
no.
Dave Harper
>Anybody out there have a problem with Darts?
>I had a player that was a fighter throwing Darts.
>The Rate of Fire was 3 per Turn I think...at 1d2 or 1d3 dmg
>I forget the exact Specs.
>But anyway that gave him 3 attacks per round, and you just
>can't miss with 3 attacks.
>The problem was when he added the Strength Bonus for the darts.
>+5 Dmg on every hit. Which means at least 6 dmg every hit.
>Possibility of all three would hit, at 18 dmg Minimum per round.
>And this is a range attack?
>Now this may be nothing in your world, but think about when that
>same fighter starts getting 2 attacks per round or more.
>Thats 6 darts per round x6 minimum damage, 36 dmg MINIMUM, if they hit!
>IN ONE ROUND, And all this from range!
>He was shooting darts like a cannon shoots cannonballs.
>Is this correct? Or even plausible?
>What should I do about this character?
>I could take away his Guantlets of Ogre Strength, but its his only
>Magic Item, And he loves them.
1) A house rule I use is that a strength bonus is limited to +1 hp
per 2 hp damage max of the weapon--you can use your own rules, but a
minimum of +1 per 1 should be the rule--thus a dart which does 1d2 hp
damage (1d3?) would only get the benefit of a +2 to damage--after all,
what's the difference between a weightlifter and a simply strong man,
throwing a dart? (Range, maybe)
2) Correct me if I'm wrong, but the ranged attack rules (3/1 attacks,
etc) are supposed to REPLACE the fighter's # of attacks, not add to
them. A fighter goes up in # of attacks with ranged weapons only if
specialized, and then gains only those attacks as shown in whatever
source you use for specialization. So he'd still get three attacks,
but when he gets 2/1 attacks, he stil has 3/1 attacks with darts,
making swords a lot more attractive to him/her/it.
3) Speaking of swords--keep in mind that missile weapons have a
*minimum* range at which they are effective, too. Think of a bowman
versus a swordsmen--at 2 paces. The same thing happens to a dartsman
(dartsman???) too. Another house rule I have states that you cannot
use melee weapons when engaged in melee combat (an opponent is in the
hex adjacent to yours and is attacking you that round), although I
will allow characters to move half their movement and fire half their
attacks from that range--unless blocked by something, or someone.
Dr. Monty/Mr. Haul
>Thats 6 darts per round x6 minimum damage, 36 dmg MINIMUM, if they hit
>!
>IN ONE ROUND, And all this from range!
>He was shooting darts like a cannon shoots cannonballs.
>Is this correct? Or even plausible?
>
>What should I do about this character?
>I could take away his Guantlets of Ogre Strength, but its his only
>Magic Item, And he loves them.
Well you could make him have to buy 'special' darts to allow him to use
strength bonuses, and make them expensive and non-reusabel.....
Or, darts are small things, pretty much any armor should compleatly
block their effects..
p
Chester Boyd
this situation. It states that to maintain balance, the bonuses from
non-magical sources added to a missile weapon's damage cannot exceed the
weapon's maximum base damage, i.e. strength and specialization bonuses to
the darts could only give it a maximum of +3 to the damage of the darts.
Since the Gauntlets you mention boost the wearer's strength and not the
weapon's magic, this would be a valid solution to your problem.
Coincidentally, I have not had this problem for years. My players, even
the new ones I have recently acquired, design their characters so that
such a thing doesn't happen. They seem to prefer _not_ to kill everything
they encounter in the first round. As their drow psionicist is learning,
absolute power can be more of a pain in the tush than it's worth (this he
realized after threatening a group of villagers that *coincidentally*
included a powerful adventuring party in their ranks. After all, once
they acheive a certain level of power, I deem that high-level adventurers
are much like celebrities: They don't want to be recognized wherever they
go. And so, the psionicist was raised at great expense the next month, so
he did have a chance to learn from the incident. One of his attackers, a
high powered psionicist, is now his mentor. Imagine that; teaching drow
to be Neutral Good!).
Thanks for letting me babble on. Hope I gave a useful response!
Craelin Draksila
Chester Boyd
Chester Boyd
Chester Boyd
Paul J. Stormberg
gained when hurling weapons, unless, the weapons are heavier than a
normal missile of that sort. I always rule that in order to gain a
strength bonus for hurled weapons they must be at least 25% or 5 coins
heavier, whichever is greater. Thus the dart would go from 5 coins to 10
and be just as heavy as a dart. As a result the dart rate of fire should
be the same as the dagger, i.e., 2 per round.
Hope this works for you.
Paul
The Amorphous Mass
Yes! This again! :-)
> Anybody out there have a problem with Darts?
> I had a player that was a fighter throwing Darts.
> The Rate of Fire was 3 per Turn I think...at 1d2 or 1d3 dmg
> I forget the exact Specs.
> But anyway that gave him 3 attacks per round, and you just
> can't miss with 3 attacks.
> The problem was when he added the Strength Bonus for the darts.
> +5 Dmg on every hit.
Gauntlets of Ogre Power would give him a +6 damage adjustment...
> Which means at least 6 dmg every hit.
> Possibility of all three would hit, at 18 dmg Minimum per round.
> And this is a range attack?
> Now this may be nothing in your world, but think about when that
> same fighter starts getting 2 attacks per round or more.
> Thats 6 darts per round x6 minimum damage, 36 dmg MINIMUM, if they hit!
> IN ONE ROUND, And all this from range!
> He was shooting darts like a cannon shoots cannonballs.
> Is this correct? Or even plausible?
>
> What should I do about this character?
OK, here you go:
* The number of melee attacks a fighter gets in a round has *no
relation* to the number of missile attacks he gets. A warrior who is not
specialized in Dart will *always* only throw three per round. Specialist
rates are under Proficiencies, and even with specialization you don't
have to worry about 6 darts a round until the specialist is 13th level.
* Limit the damage bonus to the max damage the weapon can normally do:
+3 against S and M creatures, +2 against L creatures.
* Enforce encumberance: These aren't the darts you see in bars. These
are the size of those lawn darts they outlawed some years ago: Easily
a foot long and half a pound each, with pretty big "wings." It should be
difficult for a human to carry more than about a dozen of them,
and then there a chance for loss or breakage. This isn't in the core
rules, but it makes sense. Certainly any dart that landed a mortal or
near-mortal blow has a good chance of being stuck firmly in its target.
Other darts might break against armor, walls or trees, or get lost in
undergrowth.
* Protection from Normal Missiles.
----------------
The Amorphous Mass There are certain abilities, such as "getting into
james-r...@uiowa.edu character", that are considered "good." This
equates rather well with "light and flaky."
-- Cisco Lopez-Fresquet, on roleplaying.
Joshua Jasper
>Anybody out there have a problem with Darts?
>I had a player that was a fighter throwing Darts.
>The Rate of Fire was 3 per Turn I think...at 1d2 or 1d3 dmg
>I forget the exact Specs.
>But anyway that gave him 3 attacks per round, and you just
>can't miss with 3 attacks.
>The problem was when he added the Strength Bonus for the darts.
>Possibility of all three would hit, at 18 dmg Minimum per round.
>And this is a range attack?
>Now this may be nothing in your world, but think about when that
>same fighter starts getting 2 attacks per round or more.
>Thats 6 darts per round x6 minimum damage, 36 dmg MINIMUM, if they hit!
>IN ONE ROUND, And all this from range!
>He was shooting darts like a cannon shoots cannonballs.
>Is this correct? Or even plausible?
>
>What should I do about this character?
>Magic Item, And he loves them.
First question, what level is the PC to be having gauntlets of
ogre power? Those thins ought to be rare as all hell. Its possible he
deserves them, and fought hard to get them, but make sure you give PCs
the magic items they deserve. IMO, magic items should be given out in
direct proportion to the opponents deadlyness.. Ie. they should give the
players a fighting chance against whatever creatures they most commonly
encounter. If a PC has _only_ gauntlets of ogre power, what if he
encounters monsters hit only by magic weapons...
Second question, is it disrupting game ballance, that is to say,
is every, or nearly every fight a cake walk? This happened in my
campaign, and lo and behold, the other part-time GMs and players decided
to limit thier characters, ask him if he'd limit his character by a rules
change (a limit on the STR bonus for darts) If the objective of your game
is to have a challanging time, and to not simply slaughter everything, he
should be OK with it as long as he agrees, if not, perhaps you are gaming
with the wrong group.
Sinboy
Jeremy Watkins
>In article <31D05B...@sequent.com>, cda...@sequent.com says...
>>!
>>IN ONE ROUND, And all this from range!
>>He was shooting darts like a cannon shoots cannonballs.
>>Is this correct? Or even plausible?
>>
>>What should I do about this character?
>>I could take away his Guantlets of Ogre Strength, but its his only
>>Magic Item, And he loves them.
>
>strength bonuses, and make them expensive and non-reusabel.....
>Or, darts are small things, pretty much any armor should compleatly
>block their effects..
>p
>
Ex:
1d3+3
Gregory Bernath
In article <4r2qu4$9...@newshost.cyberramp.net>
>Or, darts are small things, pretty much any armor should compleatly
>block their effects..
Darts are _not_ small things. These aren't like dartboard darts;
these are more like small javelins with vanes. Or, for those old
enough, think of "Jarts".
"Jarts" was a brand name for lawn darts, which were basically
deadly missile weapons sold as a children's toy. They were about
a foot long, had large plastic vanes, and a heavy, sharp steel
point. After thousands of children were killed or maimed after
taking 1-3 hp of damage, these were banned in the USA.
Me, I remember those happy childhood days of flinging Jarts at
houses, cars, dogs, squirrels, my brothers, and basically anything
except the designated target that came with the game. Our favorite
game was to each grab one, fling 'em straight up on the count of 3,
and run like hell before they came down. It's a miracle I survived
childhood.
--
Greg Bernath gber...@oucsace.cs.ohiou.edu
gjh...@msu.oscs.montana.edu
>Anybody out there have a problem with Darts?
>I had a player that was a fighter throwing Darts.
>The problem was when he added the Strength Bonus for the darts.
>+5 Dmg on every hit. Which means at least 6 dmg every hit.
>He was shooting darts like a cannon shoots cannonballs.
>Is this correct? Or even plausible?
What should I do about this character?
what you should do about this character is stop allowing him to add his
strength bonus to dart attacks. have you ever played darts?..the idea
of throwing a dart at something has very little to do with how strong
you are and EVERYTHING to do with how good your aim is. someone who
can bench press 350 pounds can't generally sink a dart any further into
a target than someone who presses 35 pounds. this isn't just because of
the required finesse in the actual throwing of the dart, either -- it is
just plain and simple fact that the damaging tip of a dart is too small
to penetrate any further than it already does to do futher damage. i am not
sure if it shows up in the 2nd edition PHB or DMG as i haven't looked,
but first edition rules were very clear that you can't add strength bonuses
to damage when using thrown weapons such as darts.
besides, what self-respecting fighter can look himself in the mirror
every morning when he's carrying...DARTS?! this weapon, no matter your
class, is possibly the biggest waste of a weapon proficiency in existence
(at least you can poison a blow gun needle)!!!
can you say, "munchkin"?!
hope this helps!
jeneth
Jaroen Kuijper
>hope this helps!
>jeneth
Hmmmmmm,
I somehow get the idea that some readers of this thread don't seem to
realize what kind of weapons these darts really are. It's totally different
from the tine little game darts we know from the sport and also different
from the light shuriken used by ninja.
It's a dart about 20-25 cm long and about 3-5 thick with a long, sharp and
heavy iron point at one end. Thes weapons were used by some gladiator style
at the Roman Games and if thrown accurately and with force could deliver
quite some wounds.
A specialized fighter who's got strength and dexterity really is fearsome,
up to a level. Keep in mind that it's rather hard to hit monsters who need
to be hit with magical weapons. As an aside it is of course necessary to
replace darts which break after a missed throw and throwing while wearing
gauntlets is a tiny bit farsought! :) Those gladiators using darts were
very lightly armored in order to make optimum use of the required room they
needed to throw and for manipulating a dart you need to be able to handle
them dextrously.
Hope this helps!
Greetings, JAROEN
Renegade
On Tue, 25 Jun 1996 14:35:10 -0700, cdavis <cda...@sequent.com> wrote:
>Anybody out there have a problem with Darts?
>I had a player that was a fighter throwing Darts.
>The Rate of Fire was 3 per Turn I think...at 1d2 or 1d3 dmg
>I forget the exact Specs.
>But anyway that gave him 3 attacks per round, and you just
>can't miss with 3 attacks.
>The problem was when he added the Strength Bonus for the darts.
>+5 Dmg on every hit. Which means at least 6 dmg every hit.
>Possibility of all three would hit, at 18 dmg Minimum per round.
>And this is a range attack?
>Now this may be nothing in your world, but think about when that
>same fighter starts getting 2 attacks per round or more.
>Thats 6 darts per round x6 minimum damage, 36 dmg MINIMUM, if they hit!
>IN ONE ROUND, And all this from range!
>He was shooting darts like a cannon shoots cannonballs.
>Is this correct? Or even plausible?
>
>What should I do about this character?
>I could take away his Guantlets of Ogre Strength, but its his only
>Magic Item, And he loves them.
>
Okay, first of all, I'm not sure where you are getting the 6 attacks
per round. In the 2ed PHB, if the player specialized with the darts,
he wouldn't get 6 att/rnd until he was 13th level. Damage of 36-48
isn't really out of line for a 13th + level specialized fighter.
Secondly, if this is his weapon of choice, then you should probably
start paying closer attention to the rules for using range weapons.
With darts, his enemy must be within 10 yards for him to avoid a
penalty. Between 10-20 yards there is a -2 modifier, and between
21-40 yards, it is -5. Because of his great strength, you might
consider allowing him to throw up to 50 or 60 yards, but impose an
even larger penalty (such as -7 or -8). This should reduce the amount
of hits, and bring a little balance back to the game.
Hopefully, this situation might teach you to be a little more cautious
with magic items. As you can see, even one magic item can make it
tough to keep the game balance. It seems a little unfair to take the
gauntlets from him now, so your best bet is to make sure that you
apply every penalty that should be applied (for range, concealment,
etc) and present him with more powerful enemies. Anyway, good
luck.....
Dave
The opinions expressed in this post are purely my own.
You may e-mail replies to: rene...@dwx.com
Rameses Niblick the Third
In article <31D05B...@sequent.com> cdavis <cda...@sequent.com> writes:
>From: cdavis <cda...@sequent.com>
>Subject: Darts are Deadly
>Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 14:35:10 -0700
>Anybody out there have a problem with Darts?
>I had a player that was a fighter throwing Darts.
>The Rate of Fire was 3 per Turn I think...at 1d2 or 1d3 dmg
>I forget the exact Specs.
>But anyway that gave him 3 attacks per round, and you just
>can't miss with 3 attacks.
>The problem was when he added the Strength Bonus for the darts.
>+5 Dmg on every hit. Which means at least 6 dmg every hit.
>Possibility of all three would hit, at 18 dmg Minimum per round.
>And this is a range attack?
>Now this may be nothing in your world, but think about when that
>same fighter starts getting 2 attacks per round or more.
>Thats 6 darts per round x6 minimum damage, 36 dmg MINIMUM, if they hit!
>IN ONE ROUND, And all this from range!
>He was shooting darts like a cannon shoots cannonballs.
>Is this correct? Or even plausible?
>What should I do about this character?
>I could take away his Guantlets of Ogre Strength, but its his only
>Magic Item, And he loves them.
No, tell him that strength bonusses apply only to Melee weapons, which is the
case.
Rameses Niblick the Third Kerplunk Kerplunk Whoops Where's my thribble.
bija...@freenet.hut.fi http://skynet.ul.ie/~colm
"Better dead than smeg!"
David K. Lewis
In article <4r57n3$c...@netra.oscs.montana.edu>, gjh...@msu.oscs.montana.edu writes:
> In article <31D05B...@sequent.com>, cdavis <cda...@sequent.com> writes:
> >I had a player that was a fighter throwing Darts.
> >The problem was when he added the Strength Bonus for the darts.
> >+5 Dmg on every hit. Which means at least 6 dmg every hit.
> >He was shooting darts like a cannon shoots cannonballs.
> >Is this correct? Or even plausible?
> What should I do about this character?
>
> strength bonus to dart attacks. have you ever played darts?..the idea
> of throwing a dart at something has very little to do with how strong
> you are and EVERYTHING to do with how good your aim is.
You are confusing the projectiles used in the game Darts with the weapon
Darts, but they are two completely different things. The game projectile
is very small and would have little combat significance, but the weapon
is MUCH larger and weighted for impact. There are various styles and types
and the Romans used one variety with great effectiveness.
As always any opinions I may have written above are mine and mine alone.
Dave.
The Beast
Dave Harper wrote:
> 3) Speaking of swords--keep in mind that missile weapons have a
> *minimum* range at which they are effective, too. Think of a bowman
> versus a swordsmen--at 2 paces. The same thing happens to a dartsman
> (dartsman???) too. Another house rule I have states that you cannot
> use melee weapons when engaged in melee combat (an opponent is in the
> hex adjacent to yours and is attacking you that round), although I
> will allow characters to move half their movement and fire half their
> attacks from that range--unless blocked by something, or someone.
Don't you mean use missile weapons when engaged in melee combat?
--
Michael "The Beast" Bastian
Image Understanding Laboratory
Brigham Young University
Web: http://iul.cs.byu.edu/bastian/mike.html
Martin Schofield
gjh...@msu.oscs.montana.edu wrote:
: In article <31D05B...@sequent.com>, cdavis <cda...@sequent.com> writes:
: >Anybody out there have a problem with Darts?
: you are and EVERYTHING to do with how good your aim is. someone who
: can bench press 350 pounds can't generally sink a dart any further into
: a target than someone who presses 35 pounds. this isn't just because of
: the required finesse in the actual throwing of the dart, either -- it is
: just plain and simple fact that the damaging tip of a dart is too small
: to penetrate any further than it already does to do futher damage. i am not
A strong person can most definately throw a dart harder than a weaker one
and cause more damage doing it. I can throw darts a lot harder now than before
I started weightlifting (and I'm not even close to benching 350 pounds)
but my aim has not improved any. And if trying to throw a dart with full
strength I can sink it all the way into the board, or the wood behind the board
;) becuase if I'm throwing it really hard I'm concentrating on that and not
on aiming well.
Perhaps allow the +6 to damage but balance it with a -6 THAC0
Or go with the standard response to this and all other strength problems
make the max damage bonus equal to the max damage of the weapon.
Also when you throw darts really hard they tend to get stuck plus the wings
fly off and all sorts of bad stuff and thats when you're throwing them
at a cork board. Even though the AD&D darts are a lot different than
gaming darts they are also being thrown against armored opponents, try
making a d20 saving throw for them the score is equal to the damage they
did and you have to roll over it or the dart breaks, a fighter with a +6
to damage would have to roll over 7-9 for each dart (1-3 +6) a normal
thrower would need to roll over 1-3.
Dave Harper
The Beast <be...@byu.edu> wrote:
>Dave Harper wrote:
>> 3) Speaking of swords--keep in mind that missile weapons have a
>> *minimum* range at which they are effective, too. Think of a bowman
>> versus a swordsmen--at 2 paces. The same thing happens to a dartsman
>> (dartsman???) too. Another house rule I have states that you cannot
>> use melee weapons when engaged in melee combat (an opponent is in the
>> hex adjacent to yours and is attacking you that round), although I
>> will allow characters to move half their movement and fire half their
>> attacks from that range--unless blocked by something, or someone.
>Don't you mean use missile weapons when engaged in melee combat?
>--
Ooooops. I hope none of my players read that.
Dave Harper
The only people who don't read .SIG files are people who aren't on the
Internet and aliens. (think about it)
David K. Lewis
In article <bijaysis.2...@freenet.hut.fi>, bija...@freenet.hut.fi (Rameses Niblick the Third) writes:
> In article <31D05B...@sequent.com> cdavis <cda...@sequent.com> writes:
> >From: cdavis <cda...@sequent.com>
> >Subject: Darts are Deadly
> >Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 14:35:10 -0700
> >
> >Magic Item, And he loves them.
>
> No, tell him that strength bonusses apply only to Melee weapons, which is the
> case.
Well, he could certainly tell him that as he is the DM and his rulings stand,
but it is NOT the case. Strength bonuses do add to melee weapons, but also
add to thrown weapons and some missile weapons (strength bows).
Morgan Le Fey
In article <bijaysis.2...@freenet.hut.fi>,
bija...@freenet.hut.fi (Rameses Niblick the Third) wrote:
>
>In article <31D05B...@sequent.com> cdavis <cda...@sequent.com> writes:
>>I forget the exact Specs.
>>But anyway that gave him 3 attacks per round, and you just
>>can't miss with 3 attacks.
>>+5 Dmg on every hit. Which means at least 6 dmg every hit.
>>And this is a range attack?
>>Now this may be nothing in your world, but think about when that
>>same fighter starts getting 2 attacks per round or more.
>>Thats 6 darts per round x6 minimum damage, 36 dmg MINIMUM, if they hit!
>>IN ONE ROUND, And all this from range!
>>Is this correct? Or even plausible?
>
>>I could take away his Guantlets of Ogre Strength, but its his only
>>Magic Item, And he loves them.
>
>No, tell him that strength bonusses apply only to Melee weapons, which is the
>case.
Quite correct. Actually, there is one exception to that rule, and that
is compound bows, also known as strength bows. But other than that, none of
the missile weapons have a damage adjustment. The fault lies not in the weapon
but in the player mentioned above not knowing or heading the rules.
Morgan
mor...@indy.net
Timothy Manley
In rec.games.frp.dnd The Amorphous Mass <robi...@blue.weeg.uiowa.edu>
said:
>On Tue, 25 Jun 1996, cdavis wrote:
>
> Yes! This again! :-)
>
>> I had a player that was a fighter throwing Darts.
>> The Rate of Fire was 3 per Turn I think...at 1d2 or 1d3 dmg
>> I forget the exact Specs.
>> But anyway that gave him 3 attacks per round, and you just
>> can't miss with 3 attacks.
>> The problem was when he added the Strength Bonus for the darts.
>> +5 Dmg on every hit.
>
>
>> Possibility of all three would hit, at 18 dmg Minimum per round.
>> And this is a range attack?
>> Now this may be nothing in your world, but think about when that
>> same fighter starts getting 2 attacks per round or more.
>> Thats 6 darts per round x6 minimum damage, 36 dmg MINIMUM, if they hit!
>> IN ONE ROUND, And all this from range!
>> He was shooting darts like a cannon shoots cannonballs.
>> Is this correct? Or even plausible?
>>
>> What should I do about this character?
>
I agree with almost every one of your points, Jim, except the limiting the
bonus for extra Strength. In my campaigns darts were used to deliver
poison. A player with the animal handling/training could 'milk' poison
from a snake or a player with herbalism could concoct a poison. I use the
poison rule in the DMG, so it's not an autokill, and mostly a
paralysis/nothing effect. But, in a few rounds, you've taken someone
effectively out of a fight.
--
tim
Timothy Manley
In my campaigns the only magic items the players get are from the dead
bodies of their enemies. So, the item was used against them, and they
survived it. I've actually killed players by giving NPCs really potent
items. But, the players didn't mind, they just planned to focus their
attention on killing this guy.
--
tim
JB
The Beast <be...@byu.edu> wrote:
>Morgan Le Fey wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >No, tell him that strength bonusses apply only to Melee weapons, which is the
>> >case.
>>
>> Quite correct. Actually, there is one exception to that rule, and that
>> is compound bows, also known as strength bows. But other than that, none of
>> the missile weapons have a damage adjustment. The fault lies not in the weapon
>> but in the player mentioned above not knowing or heading the rules.
>>
>Quite incorrect, hurled weapons allow damage bonuses from strength. They always
>have. I don't know the page number from the PHB, but they do count. All of this
>talk is absolutely ridiculous! A player that specializes in Darts cannot cause
>a lot of damage because any player that can cause a lot of damage is a munchkin
>this is pure !@#$%^&*()! A master dartsperson with Gauntlets of Ogre Power would
>cause a lot of damage. Deal with it!
>--
>Michael "The Beast" Bastian
You know, this is all fine and dandy... until he goes up against
something immune to normal weapons and he runs out of magical darts.
Even supernatural strengh does not make a weapon magical! It simply
does not.
And yes the rules say Strengh bonuses apply. It's in the combat
section under "Missile Weapons" IIRC.
JB
The Beast
Morgan Le Fey wrote:
>
> >
> >No, tell him that strength bonusses apply only to Melee weapons, which is the
> >case.
>
> Quite correct. Actually, there is one exception to that rule, and that
> is compound bows, also known as strength bows. But other than that, none of
> the missile weapons have a damage adjustment. The fault lies not in the weapon
> but in the player mentioned above not knowing or heading the rules.
>
Quite incorrect, hurled weapons allow damage bonuses from strength. They always
have. I don't know the page number from the PHB, but they do count. All of this
talk is absolutely ridiculous! A player that specializes in Darts cannot cause
a lot of damage because any player that can cause a lot of damage is a munchkin
this is pure !@#$%^&*()! A master dartsperson with Gauntlets of Ogre Power would
cause a lot of damage. Deal with it!
--
Michael "The Beast" Bastian
Blue
The Beast <be...@byu.edu> wrote:
>Morgan Le Fey wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >No, tell him that strength bonusses apply only to Melee weapons, which is the
>> >case.
>>
>> Quite correct. Actually, there is one exception to that rule, and that
>> is compound bows, also known as strength bows. But other than that, none of
>> the missile weapons have a damage adjustment. The fault lies not in the weapon
>> but in the player mentioned above not knowing or heading the rules.
>>
>Quite incorrect, hurled weapons allow damage bonuses from strength. They always
>have. I don't know the page number from the PHB, but they do count. All of this
>talk is absolutely ridiculous! A player that specializes in Darts cannot cause
>a lot of damage because any player that can cause a lot of damage is a munchkin
>this is pure !@#$%^&*()! A master dartsperson with Gauntlets of Ogre Power would
>cause a lot of damage. Deal with it!
*sigh* A few points:
a) Compound bows are not automatically strength bows, nor are
strength bows always compound bows. Compound bows are just a type.
b) Normal bows *DO* give strength bonues up to 18 strength. Strength
bows give more, with a max of whatever strength they are crafted to.
(PHB, pg 73, under Bow) Bows are the only missile weapons needing a
"strength" version. Crossbows don't currently have an equivilent, and
all other missile weapons get strength bonuses for damage. (PHB, pg
13, under Damage Adjustment)
c) Hurled weapons always get strength bonuses.
d) In the new players options books they amend (c). Missile weapons
may not add more damage from strength then to maximum damage they
could roll. A dart does 1d3/1d2. So with an 18/00 strength and no
dex to talk of, a dart is +3 to hit and does 1d3+3/1d2+2 damage. This
can be increased via other, non-strength, bonuses.
-Blue
jamie nossal
> Quite incorrect, hurled weapons allow damage bonuses from strength. They always
> have.
True. This situation led the RPGA to create a house rule that limits
strength bonuses to the maximum damage inflicted by a weapon. Therefore,
darts could infict a maximum of 1d3+3 damage. I don't know if it applies
to melee weapons as well. Expect that ruling to become official when the
PH/DMG is revised.
Personally, I think a player with the brassies to specialize his 18/91
strength fighter in darts instead of the usual (yawn) longsword deserves
a slap on the back instead of a rule designed to frustrate him.
Lawrence R. Mead
cdavis (cda...@sequent.com) wrote:
: Anybody out there have a problem with Darts?
: I had a player that was a fighter throwing Darts.
: The Rate of Fire was 3 per Turn I think...at 1d2 or 1d3 dmg
: I forget the exact Specs.
: But anyway that gave him 3 attacks per round, and you just
: can't miss with 3 attacks.
Why can't you miss? The maximum range is something like 30' , so at that
range he is -4 to hit; even at medium range (look it up, 20'?) he is -2.
: The problem was when he added the Strength Bonus for the darts.
: +5 Dmg on every hit. Which means at least 6 dmg every hit.
: Possibility of all three would hit, at 18 dmg Minimum per round.
: And this is a range attack?
: Now this may be nothing in your world, but think about when that
: same fighter starts getting 2 attacks per round or more.
Multiple attacks by level does not change missle rate of fire, only with
a hand-held weapon. So just 3 attacks no matter what his level (unless
hasted).
: Thats 6 darts per round x6 minimum damage, 36 dmg MINIMUM, if they hit!
: IN ONE ROUND, And all this from range!
: He was shooting darts like a cannon shoots cannonballs.
: Is this correct? Or even plausible?
As DM you may rule that strenght bonus does not apply to *small* thrown
objects like a dart: their damage comes from the needle in front which
can only penetrate so far. Thus, I would give the +3 to hit of the
gauntlets (strength will allow easier penetration), but *none* of the damage
bonus for strength.
: What should I do about this character?
: I could take away his Guantlets of Ogre Strength, but its his only
: Magic Item, And he loves them.
Think through the consequences of giving out a powerful item before you
do so.
To summarize, there are deficits to range for any type of missle weapon; look
them up and use them. Level only effects numbers of attacks with a hand-held
weapon and not with missles, and lastly, one may reasonably rule that the
damage bonus does not apply to darts, anyway, by the above reasoning. Do
darts look so frightening now?
DMGorgon
--
Lawrence R. Mead (lrm...@whale.st.usm.edu)
ESCHEW OBFUSCATION ! ESPOUSE ELUCIDATION !
http://www-dept.usm.edu/~scitech/phy/mead.html
Max J Spaulding
The Beast wrote:
>
> Morgan Le Fey wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >No, tell him that strength bonusses apply only to Melee weapons, which is the
> > >case.
> >
> > Quite correct. Actually, there is one exception to that rule, and that
> > is compound bows, also known as strength bows. But other than that, none of
> > the missile weapons have a damage adjustment. The fault lies not in the weapon
> > but in the player mentioned above not knowing or heading the rules.
> >
>
> talk is absolutely ridiculous! A player that specializes in Darts cannot cause
> a lot of damage because any player that can cause a lot of damage is a munchkin
> this is pure !@#$%^&*()! A master dartsperson with Gauntlets of Ogre Power would
> cause a lot of damage. Deal with it!
> Michael "The Beast" Bastian
> Image Understanding Laboratory
> Brigham Young University
> Web: http://iul.cs.byu.edu/bastian/mike.html
Actually you are both right. 1st Ed PHB on pg. 9 clearly states that the damage adjustment is only to
melee weapons. 2nd edition PHB pg. 13 states that it can be applied to thrown weapons and bows built for
strength. One note to Michael, AD&D was around for a long time before 2nd edition, because it is in the 2nd
books doesn't mean it was always that way.
Max.
Jamie Nossal
Lawrence R. Mead wrote:
>
> cdavis (cda...@sequent.com) wrote:
> : Anybody out there have a problem with Darts?
> : I had a player that was a fighter throwing Darts.
> : The Rate of Fire was 3 per Turn I think...at 1d2 or 1d3 dmg
> : I forget the exact Specs.
> : But anyway that gave him 3 attacks per round, and you just
> : can't miss with 3 attacks.
Range for a dart is 10-20-40. At greater than 10 yard range
(I'd use the old 10' indoors), the player is -2 to hit, at more
than 20yards (20' indoors), he is -5 to hit.
Remember that in the case of multiple attacks, the fighter gets
a single shot on his initiative, the remainder come at the END of
the round, AFTER his opponents have had a chance to return an attack.
All they have to do is survive a single dart, then
engage the fighter in melee where he can no longer use a missile weapon.
With those limits, even a double specialized, gauntlet of ogre powered
dart-tosser allowed to combine level and specialization ROF, to hit and
damage bonuses is not so bad.
Hank Sprague
In article <4r29c2$5...@news.inforamp.net> Dave Harper,
dha...@inforamp.net writes:
>Another house rule I have states that you cannot
>use melee weapons when engaged in melee combat (an opponent is in the
>hex adjacent to yours and is attacking you that round)
This rule just _might_ be a little harsh :-) Yes, of course I know that
you meant to say "ranged weapons," but I couldn't resist.
--
Tempest
"Retreat, hell! We're just attacking in the opposite direction!"
-US Marine Corps commander,
Changjin Reservoir, Korea.
Hank Sprague
While on the subject of small throwing weapons, I've always wondered
something: how in the hell do you throw a dagger correctly? I fondly
remember chucking knives at trees when I was younger, and about 1 in 20
actually stuck in the tree. Yes, they were sharp. The rest mostly hit
with the handle, or at some weird angle so as to make the blade bounce
off harmlessly. Any advice is appreciated, because, in my mind, there's
nothing cooler than a thief jumping into battle, hurling daggers with
deadly skill and accuracy.
Didja see the way I twisted the subject of this thread towards my own
ends? Neat, wasn't it? :-)
Dave Harper
Hank Sprague <espr...@interaccess.com> wrote:
>In article <4r29c2$5...@news.inforamp.net> Dave Harper,
>dha...@inforamp.net writes:
>>Another house rule I have states that you cannot
>>use melee weapons when engaged in melee combat (an opponent is in the
>>hex adjacent to yours and is attacking you that round)
> This rule just _might_ be a little harsh :-) Yes, of course I know that
>you meant to say "ranged weapons," but I couldn't resist.
Well you know, it's one way to rid myself of those pesky players with
their +5 swords. :-P
Dave
Chester Boyd
bija...@freenet.hut.fi (Rameses Niblick the Third) wrote:
>In article <31D05B...@sequent.com> cdavis <cda...@sequent.com> writes:
>>Subject: Darts are Deadly
>>Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 14:35:10 -0700
>
>>I had a player that was a fighter throwing Darts.
>>The Rate of Fire was 3 per Turn I think...at 1d2 or 1d3 dmg
>>I forget the exact Specs.
>>But anyway that gave him 3 attacks per round, and you just
>>can't miss with 3 attacks.
>>+5 Dmg on every hit. Which means at least 6 dmg every hit.
>>Possibility of all three would hit, at 18 dmg Minimum per round.
>>And this is a range attack?
>>Now this may be nothing in your world, but think about when that
>>same fighter starts getting 2 attacks per round or more.
>>IN ONE ROUND, And all this from range!
>>He was shooting darts like a cannon shoots cannonballs.
>>Is this correct? Or even plausible?
>
>>I could take away his Guantlets of Ogre Strength, but its his only
>>Magic Item, And he loves them.
>
>case.
>
>
Actually, I thought that too until I looked it up yesterday but in the
Player's Handbook it says that hurled weapons (such as darts) receive
strength bonuses.
pcs$...@altair.selu.edu
In article <31DB73...@ruf.rice.edu>, jamie nossal <jno...@ruf.rice.edu> writes:
>> Quite incorrect, hurled weapons allow damage bonuses from strength. They always
>> have.
>
> strength bonuses to the maximum damage inflicted by a weapon. Therefore,
> darts could infict a maximum of 1d3+3 damage. I don't know if it applies
> to melee weapons as well. Expect that ruling to become official when the
> PH/DMG is revised.
>
> Personally, I think a player with the brassies to specialize his 18/91
> strength fighter in darts instead of the usual (yawn) longsword deserves
> a slap on the back instead of a rule designed to frustrate him.
or take proficiency with one of the more common, boring weapons like
the ever-popular longsword tend to not find much in the way of magical
weapons they can use, and later, in combat with enemies only hit by magic,
they tend to not last all that long.
How many magical halberds have You seen?
When was the last time you found a magical whip?
My quarterstaff using fighter (inspired by a Robin Hood movie) never found
any magic weapons that weren't daggers or swords.
The most unusual magic weapon i've seen in any of the games I've played in
was a +1 cutlass, which we found after we threw the corpse of the pirate
captain overboard. And when a DM does do some minor editing to make that
+1 longsword a +1 rapier or a +1 scythe or a holy avenger scimitar,
it tends to sound a little contrived and doesn't always seem to fit.
The big burly ogre henchman was wielding a +1 rapier? Go figure.
Heaven help the paladin who doesn't take a sword proficiency.
In a non-munchkin campaign where you can't just waltz into any magic shop
and find a large selection of affordable magical weapons of every variety,
it pretty much takes a DM who actually pays attention to what kind of character
you're playing, and sees that before you go up against the
horrible-only-hittable-with-magic enemies, your swashbuckler has the
opportunity to best another fencer in a duel, and thus obtain the poor sap's
magical saber, or your savage goes on a small side quest for the chieftain,
and is rewarded with a +1 spear that belonged to an ancestor or something.
Not only does this make it more realistic for them to obtain such things,
but it gives the fighter who doesn't take the generic guy with a longsword
path, a chance to show off and roleplay his interesting character concept,
instead of being put at a disadvantage as usual.
Bridget Farace
bfa...@selu.edu
What good is opening your mind, if in doing so, you close your heart
to your greatest ally in the universe? Is it worth so much to you to
realize that you are naked?
Jamie Nossal
pcs$25...@altair.selu.edu wrote:
> I find from experience that the fighters I play who Don't specialize
> or take proficiency with one of the more common, boring weapons like
> the ever-popular longsword tend to not find much in the way of magical
> weapons they can use, and later, in combat with enemies only hit by magic,
> they tend to not last all that long.
> How many magical halberds have You seen?
> When was the last time you found a magical whip?
That is precisely the point. Instead of worrying about whether his
PC will ever find a +2 lucern hammer, the player ought to be thinking
about how to make the PC interesting and/or different.
And, yes, in my campaign there have been both magical halberds and whips.
Nothing better than for three longsword-specialized fighters to find
their opponents armed (and specialized) with magical axes, polearms,
staves, tridents, etc. What are they gonna do when they win those arms
in fair battle?
Use them (with non-proficiency penalties, of course) when ambushed by a
band of nasty level-draining undead. Such fun.
mark templeton
(pcs$25...@altair.selu.edu) writes:
> In article <31DB73...@ruf.rice.edu>, jamie nossal <jno...@ruf.rice.edu> writes:
>>> Quite incorrect, hurled weapons allow damage bonuses from strength. They always
>>> have.
>>
>> True. This situation led the RPGA to create a house rule that limits
>> strength bonuses to the maximum damage inflicted by a weapon. Therefore,
>> darts could infict a maximum of 1d3+3 damage. I don't know if it applies
>> to melee weapons as well. Expect that ruling to become official when the
>> PH/DMG is revised.
>>
>> Personally, I think a player with the brassies to specialize his 18/91
>> strength fighter in darts instead of the usual (yawn) longsword deserves
>> a slap on the back instead of a rule designed to frustrate him.
you mean a pat on the back right? 8) make a halfling fighter, specialized
in darts. He's 18 str(no exceptional), 19 Dex(ok we're munchkins
remember?) and has ambidexterity. So he gets 3/1 for both hands, plus an
additional attack for ambidexterity, so 7/1 darts at (+1race+1sp, +1str,
+4/5 dex) plus 6 or seven to hit and (+2sp, +2str, +1 race) plus 5 damage.
Seven time a round, six if you count differently. gee:
I throw my darts at the, oh, nasty thing. I do MINIMUM 36 max of 42 points
of damage. I like halfling fighters with darts.
> I find from experience that the fighters I play who Don't specialize
> or take proficiency with one of the more common, boring weapons like
> the ever-popular longsword tend to not find much in the way of magical
> weapons they can use, and later, in combat with enemies only hit by magic,
> they tend to not last all that long.
> How many magical halberds have You seen?
> When was the last time you found a magical whip?
--
http://www.ncf.carleton.ca/~aj217/
<new sig under construction>
Dave Brohman
Jamie Nossal (jno...@ruf.rice.edu) wrote:
> And, yes, in my campaign there have been both magical halberds and whips.
> Nothing better than for three longsword-specialized fighters to find
> their opponents armed (and specialized) with magical axes, polearms,
> staves, tridents, etc. What are they gonna do when they win those arms
> in fair battle?
How about a wealthy madman with a +3 chairleg and a Vorpal Broken Bottle!
I once had a PC (a Wolfen in Palladium) who saved up his loot for ages and
had all his teeth removed and replaced with ever-sharpened steel. If I
remember correctly, it didn't give a hit bonus but it did give a damage
bonus. Of course, this guy was a bit mad. He paid a mage to curse him so
that his eyes glowed blood red and he always slept in the barn, no matter
where they were or how much loot he had.
Later.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Dave Brohman
Carleton University
Ottawa, Ontario, Canada E-Mail : dbro...@chat.carleton.ca
Featuring Alexi Sayle as the Balowski Family.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Dave Brohman
mark templeton (aj...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA) wrote:
> you mean a pat on the back right? 8) make a halfling fighter, specialized
> in darts. He's 18 str(no exceptional), 19 Dex(ok we're munchkins
> remember?) and has ambidexterity. So he gets 3/1 for both hands, plus an
> additional attack for ambidexterity, so 7/1 darts at (+1race+1sp, +1str,
> +4/5 dex) plus 6 or seven to hit and (+2sp, +2str, +1 race) plus 5 damage.
> Seven time a round, six if you count differently. gee:
WHAT?!? You give full attacks for each ahnd AND an extra attack for having
ambidexterity. Sorry, I must have missed the release of "PLAYERS OPTIONS:
MUNCHKINS". So, if I took a Elven Ranger in this game with Ambidexterity,
Two-Weapon Style and Double Specialized in Longsword (assuming the rule
that X2 specialization gives you 2/1 attacks). This character, with 18/92
STR, would have a THACO of 14 at first level adn would be attacking five
times, doing at least 45 points of damage and up to 85 (105 vs large
creatures). That is freakin' insanity!
But, if that is the style of game you play, and you all enjoy it, more
power to you.
Jeffory Orrok
I don't know if this was already mentioned in an expired response, but
there is the consideration of the dart population.
1) these things are NOT the little needles you flick in the pub. Think
more of the Jart (lawn dart) to get an idea of size. These puppies dont
necessarily weigh much, but they're bulky as hell. How many can Sir
Snapwrist carry? maybe two dozen in bandoliers. Anything more, and
you've got to hire a porter to lug a trunk full of them.
2) apply the arrow breakage rule. (s)he misses, it must save vs ??? or
it breaks. If you're feeling merciful, you might just blunt it, unless
the save is, say 4 or 6 below what's needed. Depending on your love for
bookkeeping, 2 or three bluntings = breakage.
3) apply a friendly fire rule. (s)he misses, then must check to see if
party/henchmen in proximity gets hit (remember to apply lack of shield
and rear-AC if appropriate).
--
jeff
jeff...@earthlink.net
George Hom
>I find from experience that the fighters I play who Don't specialize
>or take proficiency with one of the more common, boring weapons like
>the ever-popular longsword tend to not find much in the way of magical
>weapons they can use, and later, in combat with enemies only hit by
magic,
>they tend to not last all that long.
>How many magical halberds have You seen?
>When was the last time you found a magical whip?
>My quarterstaff using fighter (inspired by a Robin Hood movie) never
found
>any magic weapons that weren't daggers or swords.
>The most unusual magic weapon i've seen in any of the games I've played
in
>was a +1 cutlass, which we found after we threw the corpse of the pirate
>captain overboard. And when a DM does do some minor editing to make that
>+1 longsword a +1 rapier or a +1 scythe or a holy avenger scimitar,
>it tends to sound a little contrived and doesn't always seem to fit.
>The big burly ogre henchman was wielding a +1 rapier? Go figure.
That's interesting -- I've been gaming for about 10-12 years, and although
swords and daggers are definitely the most common weapons in our games (I
split DMing with another person), they only account for about 60-70%. One
of the party leader's big early frustrations was that for almost a full
year of real time his cleric was forced to use as his primary weapon a
magical crystal trident the group found on their first big adventure. (It
had originally belonged to the leader of a tribe of Sahuagin). I have been
playing a ranger character for the past few years, and designed him to be
a real survive-anywhere guy. He does know how to use the longsword, but he
has also taken the broad proficiencies suggested in the Fighters Handbook
so that he can use all clubbing and cleaving type weapons. For awhile the
party was stranded on a desert island with limited supplies, so he was
using his hand axe to make clubs for everyone!
Not one but two of our players have taken polearms as their fighters melee
weapon (one even specialized in it!) The first took halberd, the second
took glaive. The first was annoyed a year ago when he heard of a magical
polearm in the abandoned monastery the group was searching and it turned
out to be a glaive. The second is annoyed because magical glaives are
still rare in our world, and the first guy has one of the only ones he's
ever heard of (Glaive of Lucky Speed -- can be wielded faster than its
normal speed rating and allows bonusses to certain saving throws, and is
+1 overall, used originally by a martial-arts style monk)
I'm certainly surprised that your Robin Hood style character was shorted
on the quarterstaff. Other than the longsword the DMG gives probably the
most air time to magical staves, many of which should be useable by such a
character!
The other DM and I made a choice years ago to encourage people to
diversify and not just specialize in the longsword. Of the 6 fighter types
who have played in the current campaign, I think not one has spec'd the
LS. (Ranger and Paladin couldn't; 1 spec'd the Glaive, 1 the Longbow, 1
took the All blades broad group, 1 is taking a standard but non spec'd
rack). The group has consisted of about 15 characters over two to three
years of regular play. In that time they have had about 5 magical
longswords, 1 trident, 2 clubs, 2 broadswords, 3 shortswords, 1
quarterstaff, numerous daggers, 1 glaive, 1 longbow, 1 hand axe, 2 sickles
(a pair), 1 morning star, a set of 3 javelins, a gladiator's net, etc etc.
Not all are still in the group, of course! But all were pretty well
introduced, and "unique" enough to be memorable.
Just my lengthy 2 cents.
George
Jamie Nossal
mark templeton wrote:
>
> (pcs$25...@altair.selu.edu) writes:>
> you mean a pat on the back right? 8) make a halfling fighter, specialized
> in darts. He's 18 str(no exceptional), 19 Dex(ok we're munchkins
> remember?) and has ambidexterity. So he gets 3/1 for both hands, plus an
> additional attack for ambidexterity, so 7/1 darts at (+1race+1sp, +1str,
> +4/5 dex) plus 6 or seven to hit and (+2sp, +2str, +1 race) plus 5 damage.
>
> Seven time a round, six if you count differently. gee:
>
> of damage. I like halfling fighters with darts.
>
No, a slap on back, 18/91 strength = no wimps.
As for your halfling, that's why I don't use the optional handbooks and
I DO use the not-optional IMO DMG and PH. Ambidexterity my ass, to get
those kind of bonuses granted by a feeble NWP, anybody else has to have a
21 dexterity (look it up).
Anyway, you don't get full attacks with the off-hand (see Attacking with
Two Weapons, DMG), you only get one per round. 19 DEX gives you a +3 to
hit with missiles not +4. Second, your halfing gets exactly ONE dart
attack during the round, the remainder occur after the 'big nasty' has
gotten its attack (see Multiple Attacks in a Round, DMG).
Your attacks are now 4/1 plus an off-hand attack (if missiles are even
allowed in the off-hand, which they are not in the core rules). Bonuses
are +6 to hit with the right hand, +5 with the left hand (unless you
believe ambidexterity grants the same bonuses as 21 DEX) and 1d3+4 damage
or 1d2+4 if the nasty is indeed big.
If you hit with all 5 darts, you do a minimum of 25 points of damage. But
wait...
My big nasty uses its attack to move in melee combat with your halfling
after your first throw, thereby nullifying your remaining missile
attacks. If it can't reach the halfling, it attacks any convenient party
member, thereby forcing at least the "missile fire in combat' rule where
you are about as likely to hit your allies as the monster (unless your DM
allows you to use a called shot at -4 to hit). Of course, if you are
shooting monsters in a barrel, that's different...
You either never get to use the rest of the darts, occasionally plug a
friend roughly half the time, or move down to a +2 or +1 to hit. The same
character specialized in the longsword will be +2 to hit and inflict
1d8+4 or 1d12+4(!) damage with a free attack every other round. Not much
difference really, except the longsword has broader application.
Jamie Nossal
> How about a wealthy madman with a +3 chairleg and a Vorpal Broken Bottle!
Of course, this guy was a bit mad. He paid a mage to curse him so
> that his eyes glowed blood red and he always slept in the barn, no matter
> where they were or how much loot he had.
Now, THAT'S what I call a fun guy.
Jamie Nossal
Not to mention that you have to be within 10', any further and you are at
least -2 to hit, -5 if the baddie is 20+' away. At 40+' distance, he just
sticks his big, stinky tongue out at your dartboy.
Ed Branco
Jamie Nossal <jno...@ruf.rice.edu> wrote:
>pcs$25...@altair.selu.edu wrote:
>
>> I find from experience that the fighters I play who Don't specialize
>> or take proficiency with one of the more common, boring weapons like
>> the ever-popular longsword tend to not find much in the way of magical
>> weapons they can use, and later, in combat with enemies only hit by magic,
>> they tend to not last all that long.
>> How many magical halberds have You seen?
>> When was the last time you found a magical whip?
>
>PC will ever find a +2 lucern hammer, the player ought to be thinking
>about how to make the PC interesting and/or different.
>
>Nothing better than for three longsword-specialized fighters to find
>their opponents armed (and specialized) with magical axes, polearms,
>staves, tridents, etc. What are they gonna do when they win those arms
>in fair battle?
>
>band of nasty level-draining undead. Such fun.
So what you're saying is that you penalize a player for trying to make
his character a little different (by specializing in a scimitar, khopesh,
or any other non-common blade) by not giving him a magical weapon. I
would think that most DM's would want to encourage colourful and
remarkable characters. By only alllowing them to find the traditional
boring magic weapons, although they may be the most common, almost limits
the player to his choice of weapons.
I would hate to play a character who only found weapons he wasn't suited
to use. IMHO it is the responsibility of all DM's to ensure that players
encounter items they should use. I am not suggesting that the party only
finds magical scimitars or whips, but to confine the player to penalties
because he could only find 20 magical long swords throughout his career
is absurd.
Ed
George Hirst
Dave Brohman wrote:
>
> mark templeton (aj...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA) wrote:
>
> > you mean a pat on the back right? 8) make a halfling fighter, specialized
> > in darts. He's 18 str(no exceptional), 19 Dex(ok we're munchkins
> > remember?) and has ambidexterity. So he gets 3/1 for both hands, plus an
> > additional attack for ambidexterity, so 7/1 darts at (+1race+1sp, +1str,
> > +4/5 dex) plus 6 or seven to hit and (+2sp, +2str, +1 race) plus 5 damage.
>
> > Seven time a round, six if you count differently. gee:
>
> ambidexterity. Sorry, I must have missed the release of "PLAYERS OPTIONS:
> MUNCHKINS". So, if I took a Elven Ranger in this game with Ambidexterity,
> Two-Weapon Style and Double Specialized in Longsword (assuming the rule
> that X2 specialization gives you 2/1 attacks). This character, with 18/92
> STR, would have a THACO of 14 at first level adn would be attacking five
> times, doing at least 45 points of damage and up to 85 (105 vs large
> creatures). That is freakin' insanity!
>
> But, if that is the style of game you play, and you all enjoy it, more
> power to you.
>
> Later.
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Dave Brohman
> Carleton University
> Ottawa, Ontario, Canada E-Mail : dbro...@chat.carleton.ca
>
> Featuring Alexi Sayle as the Balowski Family.
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
Shall we munchkin a little further? Sure, why not. Double
specialize in long sword, through three slots into bladesinging, another
one into paired weapon (plus one from being a ranger), and one in
ambidexterity, and another two into single weapon, making each blade give
you -2 to your AC (yes, I know this aint exactly kosher, but hey, we're
munchkining). This is all possible because of the optional
proficiencies, and because fighters can use those granted by intelligence
for weapons. Now, assuming that same elf who had an 18/92 strength also
had an 18 dex, your first level elven ranger would attack four or five
times per round, and, wearing banded armor, would have an AC of - 8 (ac
four from the armor, -4 from dex, -4 from the single weapon sp. and
another -4 from bladesinging). Hell, he picks up his swords and he has
an AC of -2 while completely naked.
The above character is why I posted the question about
ambidexterity. When a friend of mine showed me this character is
possible at first level, I could not believe that TSR actually had this
in mind, or overlooked it. Now, alot of this falls through the cracks if
your GM cracks the whip of common sense even a little, but not every GM
happens to own this particullar kind of whip. Now, granted, the
character only has 10 hit points (maximum for a ranger, remember we're
munchkining), but hey, what are you ever gonna run into at first level
that can hit an AC of - 8 with any regularity? God forbid this character
finds any items of protection or - even worse - a pair of defender
swords.
--- George
Joe Feyas
pcs$25...@altair.selu.edu wrote:
>
> I find from experience that the fighters I play who Don't specialize
> or take proficiency with one of the more common, boring weapons like
> the ever-popular longsword tend to not find much in the way of magical
> weapons they can use, and later, in combat with enemies only hit by magic,
> they tend to not last all that long.
> How many magical halberds have You seen?
This whole thread brings up a question that I had some years ago. What about
polymorphing a magic weapon into a different shape. I had a mage in a campaign that
took a Longsword +4, defender and shrunk it down to a Dagger + 4, defender. The DM
allowed it, and I agreed that it was an exceptional idea.
Makes me think. I just began playing in a new campaign - my character? A dwarf
fighter that uses a cludgel. (Whats the odds I'll ever encounter a magical cludgel?)
The Amorphous Mass
On Mon, 8 Jul 1996, Joe Feyas wrote:
> This whole thread brings up a question that I had some years ago. What about
> polymorphing a magic weapon into a different shape. I had a mage in a
> campaign that took a Longsword +4, defender and shrunk it down to a
> Dagger + 4, defender. The DM allowed it, and I agreed that it was an
> exceptional idea.
Polymorph, as written, only works on creatures. It is a cool idea,
though. I wouldn't allow Poly to work, but I might allow another
(perhaps original) spell to work. There's also Steal Enchantment
from the Tome of Magic, which attempts to transfer the magical
properties of one item to another.
Mischievous question: Is an intelligent weapon a "creature?"
> Makes me think. I just began playing in a new campaign - my
> character? A dwarf fighter that uses a cludgel. (Whats the odds I'll
> ever encounter a magical cludgel?)
They're worse than the odds that you'll encounter a non-magical
"cludgel." I believe you're thinking of _cudgel_, aka club. The
advantage of proficiency in cudgel is of course the fact that you will
almost never be far from a weapon! I note that following the DMG2 there
is an 0% chance of finding a magical cudgel, but your DM might
nevertheless throw one in somewhere...
----------------
The Amorphous Mass There are certain abilities, such as "getting into
james-r...@uiowa.edu character", that are considered "good." This
equates rather well with "light and flaky."
-- Cisco Lopez-Fresquet, on roleplaying.
Vermilion
Well, this is pretty absurd... Even Skills & Powers doesn't let you jump
all over the rules like that...
Assuming PHB and handbooks, leeme dissect some of this. Elf with Str 18+,
Dex 18, and Int 17, to give you the exra 6 prof. slots. Big stats. Double
specialization? I must have missed that handbook. As for combining single
and double weapon spec's, well that's beyond munchkining. Bending the rules
is one thing, but out and out doing exactly the opposite of the skill
description is pretty lame. Forget kosher, that's inedible. Why not just make
up your own rules? How 'bout that bladesinging rule... You know, that part
where the book says "as with the AC bonus, +2 is the best they can hope
for." I guess this guy can hope for +4, huh? As far as level 1 naked
players, the best you can do, by the rules, is AC 2, with dex -4, single
weapon -2, and bladesinging or Kensai bonus -2 AC. Oh, yeah - single and two
weapon style at first level? Fighter's HB says only one style specialization
at 1st level. Ranger with Banded armor? PHB says he only is exempt from the
penalties with studded leather or lighter. Of course, two-handed and
ambidexterity combined eliminate that, I suppose.
TSR is doing just fine. It's a few rules modifications, and out right
violations, that make this a problem. But, then again, any campaign where
coming upon a pair of Defender blades is possible has its own special
difficulties. Why anyone would want to play a character like this, I don't
know. Is it fun knowing the outcome of every battle before it happens?
- Vermilion, former possesor of a Kensai character that cut down foes like
mown grass. He was mind-numbingly boring...
Joshua Samuel Jasper
In <4rnhfs$r...@freenet-news.carleton.ca> aj...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (mark
templeton) writes:
>
>
> (pcs$25...@altair.selu.edu) writes:
>> In article <31DB73...@ruf.rice.edu>, jamie nossal <jno...@ruf.rice.edu>
writes:
>>>> Quite incorrect, hurled weapons allow damage bonuses from strength. They
always
have.
>>>
>>> True. This situation led the RPGA to create a house rule that limits
>>> strength bonuses to the maximum damage inflicted by a weapon. Therefore,
>>> darts could infict a maximum of 1d3+3 damage. I don't know if it applies
>>> to melee weapons as well. Expect that ruling to become official when the
>>> PH/DMG is revised.
>>>
>>> Personally, I think a player with the brassies to specialize his 18/91
>>> strength fighter in darts instead of the usual (yawn) longsword deserves
>>> a slap on the back instead of a rule designed to frustrate him.
>
>
>> or take proficiency with one of the more common, boring weapons like
>> the ever-popular longsword tend to not find much in the way of magical
>> weapons they can use, and later, in combat with enemies only hit by magic,
>> they tend to not last all that long.
>> How many magical halberds have You seen?
>> My quarterstaff using fighter (inspired by a Robin Hood movie) never found
>> any magic weapons that weren't daggers or swords.
>> The most unusual magic weapon i've seen in any of the games I've played in
>> was a +1 cutlass, which we found after we threw the corpse of the pirate
>> captain overboard. And when a DM does do some minor editing to make that
>> +1 longsword a +1 rapier or a +1 scythe or a holy avenger scimitar,
>> it tends to sound a little contrived and doesn't always seem to fit.
>> The big burly ogre henchman was wielding a +1 rapier? Go figure.
>> In a non-munchkin campaign where you can't just waltz into any magic shop
>> and find a large selection of affordable magical weapons of every variety,
>> it pretty much takes a DM who actually pays attention to what kind of
character
>> you're playing, and sees that before you go up against the
>> horrible-only-hittable-with-magic enemies, your swashbuckler has the
>> opportunity to best another fencer in a duel, and thus obtain the poor sap's
>> magical saber, or your savage goes on a small side quest for the chieftain,
>> and is rewarded with a +1 spear that belonged to an ancestor or
something.
>> Not only does this make it more realistic for them to obtain
such things,
>> but it gives the fighter who doesn't take the generic guy with a
longsword
>> path, a chance to show off and roleplay his interesting
character concept,
>> instead of being put at a disadvantage as usual.
>>
>>
>> Bridget Farace
Actualy, the main fighters in my campaign, a human and a Rakhasta
(translated from basic DND, perhaps you've read the Dragon mag 'Voyage
of the Princess Arc' chronicles, Myojo the cat man was a Rakhasta) have
no proficiency in longsword at all. The human is a bastard sword double
specialist, and the Rakhasta is specialized in war claws (dmg 1-6/1-6)
and has 3 attacks/round, with an 18/81 str, he's pretty deadly...
The third level fighter I started for a new campaighn I'm in is
proficient in stick fighting, and caries around a lead weighted
truncheon.
In fact, no one in my campaign caries a long sword except the
thief...
Sinboy
mark templeton
Jamie Nossal (jno...@ruf.rice.edu) writes:
> mark templeton wrote:
>>
>> (pcs$25...@altair.selu.edu) writes:>
>> you mean a pat on the back right? 8) make a halfling fighter, specialized
>> in darts. He's 18 str(no exceptional), 19 Dex(ok we're munchkins
>> remember?) and has ambidexterity. So he gets 3/1 for both hands, plus an
>> additional attack for ambidexterity, so 7/1 darts at (+1race+1sp, +1str,
>> +4/5 dex) plus 6 or seven to hit and (+2sp, +2str, +1 race) plus 5 damage.
>>
>> Seven time a round, six if you count differently. gee:
>>
>> I throw my darts at the, oh, nasty thing. I do MINIMUM 36 max of 42 points
>> of damage. I like halfling fighters with darts.
>>
>
> No, a slap on back, 18/91 strength = no wimps.
>
> As for your halfling, that's why I don't use the optional handbooks and
> I DO use the not-optional IMO DMG and PH. Ambidexterity my ass, to get
> those kind of bonuses granted by a feeble NWP, anybody else has to have a
> 21 dexterity (look it up).
>
this was my point. and this is why the RPGA has disallowed weapon styles
and amibexterity. they just make ginzus and machine guns.
> Anyway, you don't get full attacks with the off-hand (see Attacking with
> Two Weapons, DMG), you only get one per round. 19 DEX gives you a +3 to
> hit with missiles not +4. Second, your halfing gets exactly ONE dart
> attack during the round, the remainder occur after the 'big nasty' has
> gotten its attack (see Multiple Attacks in a Round, DMG).
>
i know. 1 then the rest. and it was late, the +4 already had the dex plus
race included.
> Your attacks are now 4/1 plus an off-hand attack (if missiles are even
> allowed in the off-hand, which they are not in the core rules). Bonuses
> are +6 to hit with the right hand, +5 with the left hand (unless you
> believe ambidexterity grants the same bonuses as 21 DEX) and 1d3+4 damage
> or 1d2+4 if the nasty is indeed big.
>
uhm, the bonus should be the same. the number of attacks is just
different. if you didn't have ambidexterity then youd be +6 for on-hand,
and +6minus the penalty for the offhand. but not important.
> If you hit with all 5 darts, you do a minimum of 25 points of damage. But
> wait...
>
> My big nasty uses its attack to move in melee combat with your halfling
> after your first throw, thereby nullifying your remaining missile
> attacks.
this is why the halfing stays at medium range, given that you can only
move half of your movement and stil attack that round(movement rules), and
even if you are up close I just get a penalty given that hand weapons have
no minimum range like arrows do, i think.
If it can't reach the halfling, it attacks any convenient party
> member, thereby forcing at least the "missile fire in combat' rule where
> you are about as likely to hit your allies as the monster (unless your DM
> allows you to use a called shot at -4 to hit). Of course, if you are
> shooting monsters in a barrel, that's different...
the percentage chance is only if you miss, isn't it? and at plus 6 unless
your a AC zero nasty I'm likely going to hit.
>
> You either never get to use the rest of the darts, occasionally plug a
> friend roughly half the time, or move down to a +2 or +1 to hit. The same
> character specialized in the longsword will be +2 to hit and inflict
> 1d8+4 or 1d12+4(!) damage with a free attack every other round. Not much
> difference really, except the longsword has broader application.
he's a halfling. and I like the double longsword rules except I gave him
scimitars(he was too short for the longsword by and inch or two) and I
like making the other players say 'huh?' what do you mean you have 26
darts and a knife and TWO five foot poles? (i broke the 10 foot one in
half)
mark templeton
and if your that far away i won't bother throwing any darts. I'll use the
short bow or sick the mage on you ;)
Cisco Lopez-Fresquet
>>>>> "mt" == mark templeton <aj...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA> writes:
mt> he's a halfling. and I like the double longsword rules except I gave him
mt> scimitars(he was too short for the longsword by and inch or two) and I
mt> like making the other players say 'huh?' what do you mean you have 26
mt> darts and a knife and TWO five foot poles? (i broke the 10 foot one in
mt> half)
As a halfling is a small creature, the only weapons he can use one-handed
are size small weapons (as per the PH). Two scimitars doesn't cut it.
Depending on the verison of the PH you use, the best you can get is two
short swords.
- cisco
--
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
ci...@src.honeywell.com lope...@maroon.tc.umn.edu
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
You are visited by aliens from another world who give you an advanced device
that can wipe out hunger, end war and cure cancer. Your reaction is:
a. Give the device to the United Nations.
b. Give the device to the President of the USA.
c. Take it apart to see how it works.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
George Hirst
> Lots o' stuff said.
I'm not arguing, this is not what I would consider legal, but
it's not ILLEGAL either. (As to x2 specialization, it was from 1st
edition, and I could swear they transfered it to 2nd ed, up until they
reprinted the new PHB). As to everything else, it's all 99% keeping a
straight face, but nothing says (except the 1st level restriction, so you
just hang onto a prof slot or two, reach 2nd, and spend them), that this
can't be done. (Bladesingings bonus assumes one blade, through in a
second blade, with the same bonus, and a DM with little common sense...).
As to the rest, it is not illegal, just kinda boring. I would never
have even bothered posting this, if I hadn't seen so many characters like
it. All of the rules are hidden somewhere in the books, and just get put
together in wierd orders.
For the record, the last character like this I tried to play was
many years ago (My gaming started to look like a bad kung fu movie), but
I've seen way to many munchkin characters, and it gets annoying when
someone whines that I can't say no because on page 42...
Anyway, the rules are there, and most include just enough grey to
make this sort of catastrophe possible without a DM decleration of 'no'.
Remember that little saying about a lie between two truths? From what
I've seen, the same happens to the rules, sort of like following the
letter rather than the spirit.
---George
Wayne J. Rasmussen
Ed Branco (l...@enterprise.ca) wrote:: >
: >> I find from experience that the fighters I play who Don't specialize
: >> or take proficiency with one of the more common, boring weapons like
: >> the ever-popular longsword tend to not find much in the way of magical
: > weapons they can use, and later, in combat with enemies only hit by magic
: >> How many magical halberds have You seen?
: >> When was the last time you found a magical whip?
: >That is precisely the point. Instead of worrying about whether his
: >PC will ever find a +2 lucern hammer, the player ought to be thinking
: >about how to make the PC interesting and/or different.
: >
: >And, yes, in my campaign there have been both magical halberds and whips.
: >Nothing better than for three longsword-specialized fighters to find
: >their opponents armed (and specialized) with magical axes, polearms,
: >staves, tridents, etc. What are they gonna do when they win those arms
: >in fair battle?
: >
: >Use them (with non-proficiency penalties, of course) when ambushed by a
: >band of nasty level-draining undead. Such fun.
: So what you're saying is that you penalize a player for trying to make
: his character a little different (by specializing in a scimitar, khopesh,
: or any other non-common blade) by not giving him a magical weapon. I
: would think that most DM's would want to encourage colourful and
: remarkable characters. By only alllowing them to find the traditional
: boring magic weapons, although they may be the most common, almost limits
: the player to his choice of weapons.
So what you are saying is the manufacture of magical items in a GMs world
should be based on what weapons the PCs choose rather than the dynamics
of the world?
: I would hate to play a character who only found weapons he wasn't suited
: to use. IMHO it is the responsibility of all DM's to ensure that players
: encounter items they should use. I am not suggesting that the party only
: finds magical scimitars or whips, but to confine the player to penalties
: because he could only find 20 magical long swords throughout his career
: is absurd.
I find your last paragraph absurd.
This reminds me of the person who became a grade school teacher then felt
that her job should pay six figures a year. If she wanted to make six
figures a year she should have got into a career that pays six figures a
year.
A game master naver HAS to give magic items to players or groups! If a
character chooses a weapon which is rarely used or is new to the world,
you will find it hard to find magical versions of it. It would be more
likely that some person, who likes this weapon, would commission a magicial
version of the odd weapon. This includes the PC. If the weapon is one
which has fallen out of use in the last few centuries, there could still
be persons using them or the PC may have a reason to adventure for them.
Seriously, what if 100 long swords were manufactured for every magical
whip? That 20 magical long swords without finding a magical whip seems
more reasonable. Even more so if it was 1000 long swords to 1 whip.
Now if it was 2 magical long swords for every 1 magical whip, I wouldn't
be too happy. It is the GMs call to make, not the players.
AndyMan 8P
In article <4rrbfm$k...@news.canscape.com>, Ed Branco <l...@enterprise.ca>
writes:
>>And, yes, in my campaign there have been both magical halberds and
whips.
>>Nothing better than for three longsword-specialized fighters to find
>>their opponents armed (and specialized) with magical axes, polearms,
>>staves, tridents, etc. What are they gonna do when they win those arms
>>in fair battle?
>
>So what you're saying is that you penalize a player for trying to make
>his character a little different (by specializing in a scimitar, khopesh,
>or any other non-common blade) by not giving him a magical weapon. I
>would think that most DM's would want to encourage colourful and
>remarkable characters. By only alllowing them to find the traditional
>boring magic weapons, although they may be the most common, almost limits
>the player to his choice of weapons.
He wasn't penalizing them for using nonstandard weapons he was
punishing them fro using STANDARD weapons. (Three LSWORD
Specialized fighters finding magical AXES, HALBERDS, etc.)
Just clarifying for you.
AndyMan
A.P. Macgregor
> As a halfling is a small creature, the only weapons he can use one-handed
>are size small weapons (as per the PH). Two scimitars doesn't cut it.
>
> Depending on the verison of the PH you use, the best you can get is two
>short swords.
Although true, what doesn't make sense to me is how a dwarf, also a small
creature, can't wield a battle axe in one hand. Perhaps I've missed
something in the players that lets a dwarf (S) wield an axe (M) in one
hand. Most pictures show dwarves wielding the axe in one hand, often
with a shield in the other.
AM
Gregory Croff
I believe, even in the various monster Manuals, Apendicies, etc.; that
standard dwarves (hill and montain) are listed as medium sized creatures.
Only the sub-races have some members that can be considered small sized
creatures.
I, too, was upset when my gnome fighter couldn't wield a battle axe in one
hand and a hand axe in the other. But then gnomes are smaller that dwarves.
I settled for short sword and hand axe.
Gregory A Croff
"Trendish rolls over in his grave."
Ryan Secan
I'm not sure exactly where I read it, but I believe the current ruling
is that thrown missile weapons cannot add more damage for strength
than their base damage (ie a dart that does 1-3 cannot have more than
+3 damage for strength) This makes things a little more reasonable,
allowing dart users some of their strenght, but also gives a reason
for some of the larger thrown weapons (like spears!!!)
Ryan
George Hom
w...@netcom.com (Wayne J. Rasmussen) writes:
>So what you are saying is the manufacture of magical items in a GMs world
>should be based on what weapons the PCs choose rather than the dynamics
>of the world?
Not at all. However, as a GM, I find it much more interesting and
play-balanced to assume that there must be some reason that such a variety
of weapons have been invented. Certainly, the combat rules are simplified
and have been much debated, but the reason most people take longswords are
(a) fantasy tradition and (b) they do great damage with a quick speed
factor. So I assume that there are other compelling factors that motivate
weapons choices (like lots of skeletal undead in some areas, leading to
clubs, maces, etc. over blades). The dynamics of my world, then, make it
reasonable that longsword is popular, but not overwhelmingly so.
>>: I would hate to play a character who only found weapons he wasn't
suited
>> to use. IMHO it is the responsibility of all DM's to ensure that
players
>>: encounter items they should use. I am not suggesting that the party
only
>> finds magical scimitars or whips, but to confine the player to
penalties
>> because he could only find 20 magical long swords throughout his career
>>is absurd.
>I find your last paragraph absurd.
>This reminds me of the person who became a grade school teacher then felt
>that her job should pay six figures a year. If she wanted to make six
>figures a year she should have got into a career that pays six figures a
>year.
Well, that is reasonable. Nothing says that you have to give your players
anything just because they chose to double specialize in it (that attitude
has led to some of my players using broad-group proficiencies so that they
can be "weapons-masters" who can use whatever weapons they do find). On
the other hand, if the player is willing to take a weapon that is less
than optimal for the sake of roleplaying, the GM should reward that in
SOME way (maybe NPCs start admiring the exotic weapon choice and the PC
gets a bunch of eager students while in town, for example).
>Seriously, what if 100 long swords were manufactured for every magical
>whip? That 20 magical long swords without finding a magical whip seems
>more reasonable. Even more so if it was 1000 long swords to 1 whip.
Doesn't matter as much how many were EVER made, as whether the PC's might
hear about it. Magical whips being so rare, they would be quite memorable!
A magical whip, why sure, the bard says, old Everun the mad commissioned
one four hundred years ago. Legend says it is still in his old keep,
guarded by hideous monsters.
Why not use the opportunity to actually find the hoped-for weapon as an
adventure hook?
Just my 2 c.p.
George
Jamie Nossal
This thread is a total mess, there are a bunch of quotes from different
people all jammed together as one.
Since I use random tables to determine magical weapons and even the
non-magical weapons used by NPCs, it does the PCs no good at all to try
to guess what they are going to find. Of course, the traditional weapons
are much more common than oddities like a trident of defending +3, but
the point is that virtually anything imaginable can and eventually will
come into play.
Tim Breen
Sorry for jumping in to the middle of this conversation; I'm new in this news
group (but not to [A]D&D or RPGA).
> I find from experience that the fighters I play who Don't specialize
> or take proficiency with one of the more common, boring weapons like
> the ever-popular longsword tend to not find much in the way of magical
> weapons they can use, and later, in combat with enemies only hit by magic,
> they tend to not last all that long.
> How many magical halberds have You seen?
Not too many halberds, but I've seen a LOT of Tridents +1 in the Living City
lately... Far too many. <grin>
Barbara Haddad
g910...@mcmail.cis.McMaster.CA (A.P. Macgregor) writes:
> > As a halfling is a small creature, the only weapons he can use one-handed
> >are size small weapons (as per the PH). Two scimitars doesn't cut it.
> >
> > Depending on the verison of the PH you use, the best you can get is two
> >short swords.
>
> Although true, what doesn't make sense to me is how a dwarf, also a small
> creature, can't wield a battle axe in one hand. Perhaps I've missed
> something in the players that lets a dwarf (S) wield an axe (M) in one
> hand. Most pictures show dwarves wielding the axe in one hand, often
> with a shield in the other.
IMHO dwarves should be classed as size 'M' creatures. They may be a
bit shorter than humans, but they mass as much as humans - and much more
than elves. (Thus in my world, halflings & gnomes are size 's', but
dwarves are size 'm' - which also solves the battleaxe problem).
------------------------------------------------------------------
Barbara Haddad - mel...@shakala.com
Shakala Communications, Inc. CA +1-408-734-2289
Tedley0
One time I created a character who hated swords of all types (parents were
killed by a swordsman). He absolutely refused to use a sword for more
than cutting bread. He was proficient in the staff, darts, hammer, and
sling. He was a fun character and the DM enjoyed trying to find ways to
force the character to use a sword.
Just my 2 cents worth.
Gregory Bernath
In article <4s0oo2$f...@crdnns.crd.ge.com>
Gregory Croff <cr...@orion.crd.ge.com> writes:
>I, too, was upset when my gnome fighter couldn't wield a battle axe in one
>hand and a hand axe in the other. But then gnomes are smaller that dwarves.
>I settled for short sword and hand axe.
Technically, you should still be upset. According to the Players' Handbook,
a hand axe is a size M weapon. The Arms and Equipment Guide says the same,
though it's possible C&T might be different (I don't have that book).
Luckily, everyone I've ever played with has ignored that and called it a
size S weapon. Which is cool, because I'm playing a gnome thief/priest
of Garl Glittergold, who's required to wield an axe. Needing both hands
for a hand axe would really bite.
--
Greg Bernath gber...@oucsace.cs.ohiou.edu
Christian Seitz
In article <4rckim$j...@sole.hooked.net>, t...@sole.hooked.net (Timothy
Manley) wrote:
> In rec.games.frp.dnd The Amorphous Mass <robi...@blue.weeg.uiowa.edu>
> said:
>
>
> >On Tue, 25 Jun 1996, cdavis wrote:
> >
> > Yes! This again! :-)
> >
> >> Anybody out there have a problem with Darts?
> >> I had a player that was a fighter throwing Darts.
> >> The Rate of Fire was 3 per Turn I think...at 1d2 or 1d3 dmg
> >> I forget the exact Specs.
> >> But anyway that gave him 3 attacks per round, and you just
> >> can't miss with 3 attacks.
> >> The problem was when he added the Strength Bonus for the darts.
> >> +5 Dmg on every hit.
> >
> > Gauntlets of Ogre Power would give him a +6 damage adjustment...
> >
> >> Which means at least 6 dmg every hit.
> >> Possibility of all three would hit, at 18 dmg Minimum per round.
> >> And this is a range attack?
> >> Now this may be nothing in your world, but think about when that
> >> same fighter starts getting 2 attacks per round or more.
> >> Thats 6 darts per round x6 minimum damage, 36 dmg MINIMUM, if they hit!
> >> IN ONE ROUND, And all this from range!
> >> He was shooting darts like a cannon shoots cannonballs.
> >> Is this correct? Or even plausible?
> >>
> >> What should I do about this character?
Your dart thrower has a big problem called RANGE.Darts have a poor range
almost all other range weapons outrange darts. Most opponents can close
with your dart thrower in less thean 1 round. There is also a nice spell
called protection from normal missiles. And don't forget the cover/shoot
into meele into meele rules long range and a good cover can modify the
enemies AC to -5 or more and when he fires on opponents engaged in meele
with friedly PCs he might hit a PC.
IMHO darts are only usefull for wizards, thieves and assassin type
fighter/wizards. I prefer to poison darts to make them more efficient. A
dual classed 9th level wizard / 15 level fighter using inproved
invisibility , fly and darts with a type E poison is a realy nasty foe in
combat(he has a min damage of 126 if all attacks hit and a good chance to
kill his enemy with a single dart!). I think it is not a good idea to
specialize in darts if you are a single classed fighter. Darts are only
good to ruin enemy spellcasting because they have a better speed factor
than most other weapons.
Christian Seitz
George Hirst
A.P. Macgregor wrote:
>
> > As a halfling is a small creature, the only weapons he can use one-handed
> >are size small weapons (as per the PH). Two scimitars doesn't cut it.
> >
> > Depending on the verison of the PH you use, the best you can get is two
> >short swords.
>
> Although true, what doesn't make sense to me is how a dwarf, also a small
> creature, can't wield a battle axe in one hand. Perhaps I've missed
> something in the players that lets a dwarf (S) wield an axe (M) in one
> hand. Most pictures show dwarves wielding the axe in one hand, often
> with a shield in the other.
>
<grin> My guess would be becuase dwarvern fighters are sickos,
who would swing a tree at you if they were mad enough. And if you get
him angry, he forgets that he's too small to use the axe.
---George
J.D Auberon
Call me old fashioned, but I like the idea of swords in abundance.
Why can't it be the weapon of choice for a fighter? It's fine that
you like your players to role-play original characters, but i'm sick
to death of my players going through the weapon lists at the generation
stage and picking the most unnusual, awkward fucking devices they can
imagine just for the sake of originality. Hell, we're not playing the
game to compete in finest, most extraordinary weapon competitions.
Players should learn that Role-playing is all about interaction with
the game world, too many players want characters that make a tavern
crowd go silent as they enter.
Fuck them, I say..
One of my players always insists on a sword-shield and trident for his
character. Now the rules for most of weapon-style shields is pretty
strict. They can break as easy as chalk, most of them, and their cost
and rarity makes such a loss painful for most players. Now I explained
this to him while he was outfitting his character, but he insisted. Well,
first battle and his shield-sword broke. Great, he looked at me in
disbelief. What was I to do? I finally allowed him to get a hold of
a super duper special edition, blah blah sword-shield from a dwarven
smith, and the chances of it breaking were reduced to a critical miss.
All well and good. But do you think I'm gonna allow this guy to come
across a sword-shield +3? Fuck No! I mean, really, you can only treat
the players to candy as far as realism. His weapon of choice is a
collecters item for christs sake! The funny thing is, he still uses
it. I've granted him a magical trident, and now his character is a
comic relief to the party. His only goal in life is to find that one
magic sword-shield. He's even drawn a picture of it on his character
sheet.
One of these days i'll let him have it, but not for a while yet.
Basically; the sword is the most effective weapon in D&D; so why would
a character have been trained in any other. Would you use a longbow
now that we have the machine gun?
J.D Auberon (Moon...@harpo.nepean.uws.edu.au)
A.P. Macgregor
>> Although true, what doesn't make sense to me is how a dwarf, also a small
>> creature, can't wield a battle axe in one hand. Perhaps I've missed
>> something in the players that lets a dwarf (S) wield an axe (M) in one
>> hand. Most pictures show dwarves wielding the axe in one hand, often
>> with a shield in the other.
>
>bit shorter than humans, but they mass as much as humans - and much more
>than elves. (Thus in my world, halflings & gnomes are size 's', but
>dwarves are size 'm' - which also solves the battleaxe problem).
I believe the difficulty arises because the battle axe falls somewhere
between a size S and size M weapon. A dwarf is also in this position.
It just happens that the axe is M and the dwarf is S. Making the dwarf a
size M creature doesn't sit right with me. I believe the dwarf should be
considered size S but allowed to wield the battle axe in one hand as if
it were a size S weapon. The dwarf as size M allows long sword wielding
in one hand which I don't believe is correct.
AM
Jamie Nossal
mark templeton wrote:
> this is why the halfing stays at medium range, given that you can only
> move half of your movement and stil attack that round(movement rules), and
> even if you are up close I just get a penalty given that hand weapons have
> no minimum range like arrows do, i think.
Moving at half-speed decreases your # of attacks by half (see split-fire
rules). Plus the halfing has a max move of 6, so his move of 3 won't keep
too many monsters from catching him anyway.
The halfling can't use missile weapons when being meleed, penalties are
irrelevant.
> If it can't reach the halfling, it attacks any convenient party
> > member, thereby forcing at least the "missile fire in combat' rule where
> > you are about as likely to hit your allies as the monster (unless your DM allows you to use a called shot at -4 to hit).
>
> the percentage chance is only if you miss, isn't it? and at plus 6 unless
> your a AC zero nasty I'm likely going to hit.
>
Nope. You determine your target by random chance FIRST, then roll a
to-hit. Happy darting.
Christopher Joyner
Because the long bow is quiet... :)
Gregory Bernath
>Not too many halberds, but I've seen a LOT of Tridents +1 in the Living City
>lately... Far too many. <grin>
Hey, I started my LC fighter out with broadsword proficiency, and
specialized in it at 3rd level.
Longsword? In a pig's eye! That's a weapon for those damned knights.
You know the bastards. Walkin' around with their snooty noses in the air,
wearin' ostrich feathers on their helms, always sayin' stuff like "prithy
thee, milady". Oooh no. The honest fightin' man just needs somethin'
to hack away and get the job done.
(For better effect, imagine that tirade done with a bad scottish accent).
I had resigned myself to never seeing a magical broadsword in an LC event,
other than my starting weapon. And then a +3 broadsword more or less landed
in my lap last weekend. Life is good.
--
Greg Bernath gber...@oucsace.cs.ohiou.edu
00mast...@bsuvc.bsu.edu
In article <seitz-11079...@krick133.krick.com>, se...@krick.com (Christian Seitz) writes:
> In article <4rckim$j...@sole.hooked.net>, t...@sole.hooked.net (Timothy
>> >> Now this may be nothing in your world, but think about when that
>> >> same fighter starts getting 2 attacks per round or more.
>> >> Thats 6 darts per round x6 minimum damage, 36 dmg MINIMUM, if they hit!
>> >> IN ONE ROUND, And all this from range!
>> >> He was shooting darts like a cannon shoots cannonballs.
>> >> Is this correct? Or even plausible?
Actually, I thought the multiple attack rule applied ONLY to *melee*
weapons, not missile weapons. I'll have to double check, but I'm certain
that even if of sufficent level to gain multiple attacks, they apply only
to melee weapons.
Mark
Lawrence R. Mead
Ed Branco (l...@enterprise.ca) wrote:
: Jamie Nossal <jno...@ruf.rice.edu> wrote:
: >pcs$25...@altair.selu.edu wrote:
: >
: >> or take proficiency with one of the more common, boring weapons like
: >> the ever-popular longsword tend to not find much in the way of magical
: >> weapons they can use, and later, in combat with enemies only hit by magic,
: >> they tend to not last all that long.
: >> How many magical halberds have You seen?
: >
: >That is precisely the point. Instead of worrying about whether his
: >PC will ever find a +2 lucern hammer, the player ought to be thinking
: >about how to make the PC interesting and/or different.
: >
: >their opponents armed (and specialized) with magical axes, polearms,
: >staves, tridents, etc. What are they gonna do when they win those arms
: >in fair battle?
: >Use them (with non-proficiency penalties, of course) when ambushed by a
: >band of nasty level-draining undead. Such fun.
:
: or any other non-common blade) by not giving him a magical weapon. I
: would think that most DM's would want to encourage colourful and
: remarkable characters. By only alllowing them to find the traditional
: boring magic weapons, although they may be the most common, almost limits
: the player to his choice of weapons.
: to use. IMHO it is the responsibility of all DM's to ensure that players
: encounter items they should use. I am not suggesting that the party only
: finds magical scimitars or whips, but to confine the player to penalties
: because he could only find 20 magical long swords throughout his career
: is absurd.
: Ed
:
Agreed; however, it is the players *choice*. If he knows that other-than-
longsword magic weapons are rare and chooses on his own not to be
proficient in one, well ...
DMGorgon
--
Lawrence R. Mead (lrm...@whale.st.usm.edu)
ESCHEW OBFUSCATION ! ESPOUSE ELUCIDATION !
http://www-dept.usm.edu/~scitech/phy/mead.html
Lawrence R. Mead
Joe Feyas (joef...@ix.netcom.com) wrote:
: pcs$25...@altair.selu.edu wrote:
: >
: > I find from experience that the fighters I play who Don't specialize
: > or take proficiency with one of the more common, boring weapons like
: > the ever-popular longsword tend to not find much in the way of magical
: > weapons they can use, and later, in combat with enemies only hit by magic,
: > they tend to not last all that long.
: > How many magical halberds have You seen?
:
: This whole thread brings up a question that I had some years ago. What about
: polymorphing a magic weapon into a different shape. I had a mage in a campaign that
: took a Longsword +4, defender and shrunk it down to a Dagger + 4, defender. The DM
: allowed it, and I agreed that it was an exceptional idea.
:
: Makes me think. I just began playing in a new campaign - my character? A dwarf
: fighter that uses a cludgel. (Whats the odds I'll ever encounter a magical cludgel?)
Please read the spell description - magic, swords included are not
polymorphable.
R. John Morrow
Lawrence R. Mead (lrm...@ocean.st.usm.edu) writes:
> Agreed; however, it is the players *choice*. If he knows that other-than-
> longsword magic weapons are rare and chooses on his own not to be
> proficient in one, well ...
>
Well, one thing that people seem to be forgetting in this
discussion is that it is up to the DM to determine was magic weapons
players have. People keep saying, "we only ever find magic longswords".
Well, that would be the DM's fault, no? I mean, God doesn't sprinkle
magic items through the campaign... When I DM, I tend to give out magic
items that can be used by the party (on those rare occasions when I give
out magic at all!).
--
"I know I'm going to Heaven, because I've served my tour in Hell."
Canadian Embassy - Algiers, Algeria 1992-1994
Jamie Nossal
J.D Auberon wrote:
>
> Call me old fashioned, but I like the idea of swords in abundance.
> Why can't it be the weapon of choice for a fighter? It's fine that
> you like your players to role-play original characters, but i'm sick
> to death of my players going through the weapon lists at the generation
> stage and picking the most unnusual, awkward fucking devices they can
> imagine just for the sake of originality.
That's fine, I estimate 2/3s of all PC and NPC fighter in my campaign use
them. The comment got made about swords when someone complained about
the advantages to be had specializing in the dart and the subject
digressed from there. I don't look down on a player who has his PC
specialize in the sword, likewise I don't see anything wrong with a
fighter specialized in darts or whatever else they'd like.
Martin Schofield
: A.P. Macgregor wrote:
: > creature, can't wield a battle axe in one hand. Perhaps I've missed
: > something in the players that lets a dwarf (S) wield an axe (M) in one
: > hand. Most pictures show dwarves wielding the axe in one hand, often
: > with a shield in the other.
I believe dwarves are size M due to their large mass. Also the shoulder and arm strength of a dwarf make axe use preferable.
Chris Rachiele
On 10 Jul 1996, A.P. Macgregor wrote:
> Date: 10 JUL 1996 10:47:06 -0400
> From: A.P. Macgregor <g910...@mcmail.cis.McMaster.CA>
> Newgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
> Subject: Re: a fighter without longsword proficiency? My word! (was Re: Darts are De
>
> > As a halfling is a small creature, the only weapons he can use one-handed
> >are size small weapons (as per the PH). Two scimitars doesn't cut it.
> >
> > Depending on the verison of the PH you use, the best you can get is two
> >short swords.
>
> Although true, what doesn't make sense to me is how a dwarf, also a small
> creature, can't wield a battle axe in one hand. Perhaps I've missed
> something in the players that lets a dwarf (S) wield an axe (M) in one
> hand. Most pictures show dwarves wielding the axe in one hand, often
> with a shield in the other.
>
> AM
Well, the monster manual lists the dwarf as size "small to medium", so I
usually allow it. I guess I could chosse their size randomly, but that
seems like too much of a disadvantage for those who get unlucky. I even
allow one dwarf to use a 2-h sword. However, as his str. is 18/12, I
decided that he could do it.
Mary Cochran
J.D Auberon wrote:
>
> Call me old fashioned, but I like the idea of swords in abundance.
> Why can't it be the weapon of choice for a fighter? It's fine that
> you like your players to role-play original characters, but i'm sick
> to death of my players going through the weapon lists at the generation
> stage and picking the most unnusual, awkward fucking devices they can
you are their gm tell them whute things you like and the things
you don't befor you start the game. i personaley like strange wepones
at times i haven't played much d&d but from the couple advenchers
i've played i like to picher every thing as anime (it helps
termendisly when your playing with a bunch of idotes who cant get
into caractor and a gm who exsplanes the bare minamum if you are
luckey (my first d&d game it was hell, my second was with a difrent
dm who is great he exsplaned every thing in butiful detail, and the
other caractor still couldn't get in to carector)but seeing every
thing as anime helped me get in to caractor maybe that is whut they
are doing in a somewhut different way they are seeing them selves as
that carector and trying to speperate them selves from all the other
fighters by apearence.
nick mcoc...@nwlink.com
and one question sence i'm writeing you any way and
you seam very exspeareyinced whut good are halflings
exseped
as theaves
Xvim
Mary Cochran
George Hirst wrote:
>
> A.P. Macgregor wrote:
> >
> > > As a halfling is a small creature, the only weapons he can use one-handed
> > >are size small weapons (as per the PH). Two scimitars doesn't cut it.
> > >
> > > Depending on the verison of the PH you use, the best you can get is two
> > >short swords.
> >
> > Although true, what doesn't make sense to me is how a dwarf, also a small
> > creature, can't wield a battle axe in one hand. Perhaps I've missed
> > something in the players that lets a dwarf (S) wield an axe (M) in one
> > hand. Most pictures show dwarves wielding the axe in one hand, often
> > with a shield in the other.
> >
> > AM
>
> who would swing a tree at you if they were mad enough. And if you get
> him angry, he forgets that he's too small to use the axe.
>
> ---George
nick
Life is anything that dies when you stomp on it.
-Dave Barry
Joshua Jasper
In article <31E73A...@nwlink.com>,
Mary Cochran <mcoc...@nwlink.com> wrote:
>
> you are their gm tell them whute things you like and the things
>you don't befor you start the game. i personaley like strange wepones
>at times i haven't played much d&d but from the couple advenchers
>i've played i like to picher every thing as anime (it helps
>termendisly when your playing with a bunch of idotes who cant get
>into caractor and a gm who exsplanes the bare minamum if you are
>luckey (my first d&d game it was hell, my second was with a difrent
>dm who is great he exsplaned every thing in butiful detail, and the
>other caractor still couldn't get in to carector)but seeing every
>thing as anime helped me get in to caractor maybe that is whut they
>are doing in a somewhut different way they are seeing them selves as
>that carector and trying to speperate them selves from all the other
>fighters by apearence.
>
> nick mcoc...@nwlink.com
> and one question sence i'm writeing you any way and
>you seam very exspeareyinced whut good are halflings
>exseped
> as theaves
Not to be rude, but is English your first language, or do you
mangle it for fun?
Sinboy
Rachel Cloud
> J.D Auberon wrote:
> >
> > Call me old fashioned, but I like the idea of swords in abundance.
> > Why can't it be the weapon of choice for a fighter? It's fine that
> > you like your players to role-play original characters, but i'm sick
> > to death of my players going through the weapon lists at the generation stage and picking the most unnusual, awkward fucking devices
they can imagine just for the sake of originality. Hell, we're not
playing the game to compete in finest, most extraordinary weapon
competitions.
Players should learn that Role-playing is all about interaction with
the game world, too many players want characters that make a tavern
crowd go silent as they enter.
> > One of my players always insists on a sword-shield and trident for his character. Now the rules for most of weapon-style shields is pretty
> > Basically; the sword is the most effective weapon in D&D; so why would a character have been trained in any other. Would you use a longbow
> > now that we have the machine gun?
This is why most fighters learn the longsword. First of all, in most
campaign worlds the long sword is the standard weapon because it is
fairly fast and does respectable damage to large and small creatures.
Since it is the standard weapon, it is the weapon most likely to be
enchanted. (Followed by Dagger, Quarterstaff, Mace and Short Sword)
When I create first level fighters most of them have are proficient
in the weapons they are most likely to have access to. A sword (usually
long, sometimes short), a bow, dagger and club (Also spear, axe, and
hammer) Clerics usually train with their bretheren who teach them
weapons suited to the order. Thieves either learn from the guild or pick
uup what they can on the street, while mages learn from their teacher as
well (who can probably only use a dagger, staff, and darts if all three)
Weapon choice should aslo depend on the society. A character from a
coastal fishing villiage might be proficient with net or trident. If the
character is part of the nobility (or a squire of some sort) then they
might have learned to use the lance or horseman's mace.
Characters should be taking weapons that make sense for them to take.
Weapons that are inexpensive (for poor characters) weapons that are
common to the region, and weapons that are most useful. Enchanted weapons
usually fit this category. Long swords are commonly enchanted becauuse
they are very common anyway, and very useful. Daggers, because amost
anyone can use them, and maces because priests can use them. Why wouuld
anyone commission a magical pike? (Certainly not a king. For the
cost involved what's one magical pike amidst a thicket of 60 or
so?) Players should select weapons their character would logically take.
A fighter with 18/91 strength would not specialize in darts to take
advantage of his strength. This would be like Shaquille O'Neal planting
himself out on the arc and trying to shoot three pointers. Shaq is tall
and strong, might be able to do it, and would get more points, but he
wold hurt his team over all if he did so.
The dart throwing big guy won't get much respect. He shouuld strap his
armor on grab a shield and play human tank. If he winds up on a
scouuting mission and uses darts to quietly dispatch a sentry, fine, but
they should not be a major part of his repertoire. (Like the cleric who
carries a knife just in case he might have to make a called shot to cut
the rope holding up a chandelier, thuus dropping it on the party's foes)
Finally, the DM does not have to give the player magic weapons of their
choice. If Phred the Phantastic insists on using a Bardiche-Guisarme-
Voulge-Fork even though no one else in the Kingdom has one, he should not
be surprised that none have been enchated before. that is simply the
price Phred pays for using a bizarre weapon (or imported hair gel).
Think how difficult it can be to get replacement parts for a Swiss Cuckoo
Clock or a rare imported car. Finding a magical version of the rare
weapon is difficult. How many smiths have ever tried to make one, how
many are still alive who could make one that is suitable for enchantment,
and what would they charge?
The rare weapon also commands extra attention and notoriety. (scorn,
ridicule, adoring 14 year-olds who want to be like Phred...) Try hiding?
"Officer he was normal height, average build and he had dark hair, but
oh yeah, he was carrying a bardcihe-fork-guisarme-voulge.
Dave...
Rachel Cloud
Rachel Cloud
Aaron Ranta
In article <4sdi1t$7...@t3.mscf.uky.edu>, pj...@t1.ms.uky.edu says...
>
>I have to agree here. The group I play with always choose bastard swords as
>their favorite weapons, and often specialize in them. And the DM just chose
>to perpetuate this sort of thing by making sure that the only magical weapons
>we found were bastard swords. This was really annoying for me because I
>was playing a Paladin who refused to learn bastard sword as a profociency. In
>fact, at level 4 I took Halberd (which is one of my favorite weapons of all
>time) and our DM actually laughed at me!
>
>What comes around goes around though. This year, I'll be DMing and I refuse
>to cater to my players weapon proficiencies! I've got a whole slew of magic
>weapons, starting with a short sword, that are most specifically NOT bastard
>swords. It some unrealistic to me that the sword you just happen to be good
>with is also the sword you just happen to find!
>
>(*Evil grin*) I can just imagine the look on the poor fighter's face when he
>has to put down his bastard sword to fight undead because his only maigc weapon
>is a short sword +2.
>
>Seriously though, most characters choose their favorite weapon type at first
>level and then just fill out their weapon prroficiencies with junk they'll
>never need. The situation I'm trying to create here is that the players'
>find a weapon (an axe say) that none of them can use, but is so powerful they
>have to/want to learn how to use it! This seems realistic to me. You like
>your sword so you use your sword. When you find a quarterstaff that's better
>than your sword, you learn to use the quarterstaff.
I must agree with you on most of this. The DM should _not_ cater to the
pc's choice of weapons in regards to magical items. Neither, for that matter
should they all be swords. The chances of finding magical weapons should
be biased according to certain weapon types
(It should be far more common to see a magic broad sword then a magic
bastard sword, for instance, and both should be more common then a military
pick or voulge)
, and also for cultures
(For instance, elves would create alot of magic short/long swords/bows,
while dwarves might create magical battle axes and war hammer)
One of the solutions I came up with, is not permitting the players to
specialize until they gain a new weapon proficiency at level 3.
This way, if they do find an unusual magical weapon, (Or even an
interesting non-magical weapon with heavy role playing significance) they
can choose to become expert at it once they hit level 3.
As well, I tend to avoid the 'usual' magical type weapon, just to see
how the players will adapt. (Not so far as to force them to use magic
whips, or other such nonsense, but magic battle axes and spears and
flails and the like... (mostly anything but long swords, to tell you
the truth)
*shrug*
A
Paul James Zoski
pcs$25...@altair.selu.edu wrote:
: >
Somebody else wrote:
: > Personally, I think a player with the brassies to specialize his 18/91
: > strength fighter in darts instead of the usual (yawn) longsword deserves
: > a slap on the back instead of a rule designed to frustrate him.
: I find from experience that the fighters I play who Don't specialize
: or take proficiency with one of the more common, boring weapons like
: the ever-popular longsword tend to not find much in the way of magical
: weapons they can use, and later, in combat with enemies only hit by magic,
: they tend to not last all that long.
: How many magical halberds have You seen?
: When was the last time you found a magical whip?
: My quarterstaff using fighter (inspired by a Robin Hood movie) never found
: any magic weapons that weren't daggers or swords.
: The most unusual magic weapon i've seen in any of the games I've played in
: was a +1 cutlass, which we found after we threw the corpse of the pirate
: captain overboard. And when a DM does do some minor editing to make that
: +1 longsword a +1 rapier or a +1 scythe or a holy avenger scimitar,
: it tends to sound a little contrived and doesn't always seem to fit.
: The big burly ogre henchman was wielding a +1 rapier? Go figure.
: Bridget Farace
: bfa...@selu.edu
I have to agree here. The group I play with always choose bastard swords as
their favorite weapons, and often specialize in them. And the DM just chose
to perpetuate this sort of thing by making sure that the only magical weapons
we found were bastard swords. This was really annoying for me because I
was playing a Paladin who refused to learn bastard sword as a profociency. In
fact, at level 4 I took Halberd (which is one of my favorite weapons of all
time) and our DM actually laughed at me!
What comes around goes around though. This year, I'll be DMing and I refuse
to cater to my players weapon proficiencies! I've got a whole slew of magic
weapons, starting with a short sword, that are most specifically NOT bastard
swords. It some unrealistic to me that the sword you just happen to be good
with is also the sword you just happen to find!
(*Evil grin*) I can just imagine the look on the poor fighter's face when he
has to put down his bastard sword to fight undead because his only maigc weapon
is a short sword +2.
Seriously though, most characters choose their favorite weapon type at first
level and then just fill out their weapon prroficiencies with junk they'll
never need. The situation I'm trying to create here is that the players'
find a weapon (an axe say) that none of them can use, but is so powerful they
have to/want to learn how to use it! This seems realistic to me. You like
your sword so you use your sword. When you find a quarterstaff that's better
than your sword, you learn to use the quarterstaff.
--
Paul J. Zoski e-mail: pj...@ms.uky.edu
718 Patterson Office Tower WWW: http://www.ms.uky.edu/~pjz1
Office Phone: (606)-257-6806 Fax: (606)-257-4078
Helf! Somebbodfy stole my spel cheecker.
Joshua Jasper
In article <31EA8E...@techmatics.com>,
>Finally, the DM does not have to give the player magic weapons of their
>choice. If Phred the Phantastic insists on using a Bardiche-Guisarme-
>Voulge-Fork even though no one else in the Kingdom has one, he should not
>be surprised that none have been enchated before. that is simply the
>price Phred pays for using a bizarre weapon (or imported hair gel).
>Think how difficult it can be to get replacement parts for a Swiss Cuckoo
>Clock or a rare imported car. Finding a magical version of the rare
>weapon is difficult. How many smiths have ever tried to make one, how
>many are still alive who could make one that is suitable for enchantment,
>and what would they charge?
>
> The rare weapon also commands extra attention and notoriety. (scorn,
>ridicule, adoring 14 year-olds who want to be like Phred...) Try hiding?
> "Officer he was normal height, average build and he had dark hair, but
>oh yeah, he was carrying a bardcihe-fork-guisarme-voulge.
>
>
>Dave...
Well, the ransuer, at least in 1'st ed (cant say on 2nd) is a
great weapon. It disarms on to hit ac 8, as does the spetum. Personaly,
I'd say that the city guard would cary them en mass if you allow the
rule, so an enchanted one might be not to absurd.
Sinboy
hnei...@access.awinc.com
bf...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (R. John Morrow) wrote:
> Well, one thing that people seem to be forgetting in this
>discussion is that it is up to the DM to determine was magic weapons
>players have. People keep saying, "we only ever find magic longswords".
>Well, that would be the DM's fault, no? I mean, God doesn't sprinkle
>magic items through the campaign... When I DM, I tend to give out magic
>items that can be used by the party (on those rare occasions when I give
>out magic at all!).
Agreed! Speaking for myself, I don't try to give players with unusual
weapon choices "automatic" access to magic weapons. That said, I
believe longswords are entirely too common, so I generally reduce the
magical longswords in favour of other weapons which should be more
common (a true judgment call). If you really want to see players
consider their weapon choices carefully, reset all the magical item
charts based on both utility of the weapons (popular, common weapons
will more likely be enchanted than unusual, rarely used weapons) and
its age. If the longsword was only developed, say, 100 years ago, but
the short sword has been around for 500 years, and was the weapon of
choice before the longsword, those ancient mages will have enchanted a
lot of short swords before the longsword came along!
In a perfect world (ie if we got paid for background DM work and could
do it full-time), each region would have charts for weapons favoured
by the cultures that had evolved and resided there!
Gregory Bernath
In article <31EA8E...@Techmatics.com>
>This is why most fighters learn the longsword. First of all, in most
>campaign worlds the long sword is the standard weapon because it is
>fairly fast and does respectable damage to large and small creatures.
Most common fighting men encounter large creatures only very rarely. Humans
and humanoids are the usual opponents for the normal soldier or guardman,
who make up the vast majority of fighter types. It's generally only
those nutty adventurer types that make a habit of attacking big things.
With that in mind, I've always said that the broadsword is the "standard"
fighting man's (or humanoid's) sword, due to it's slightly higher damage
vs. S/M. The longsword is more of a specialty weapon.
>Since it is the standard weapon, it is the weapon most likely to be
>enchanted. (Followed by Dagger, Quarterstaff, Mace and Short Sword)
Since adventurers are more likely to commission enchanted weapons, I
say that magic longswords do get created in percentages larger than the
percentage of fighters using them. However, they're still outnumbered
by magic broadswords and short swords. Ya' takes your chances, whatever
you pick.
--
Greg Bernath gber...@oucsace.cs.ohiou.edu
The Inner Circle
Unfortunately, in this case your certainty is misplaced. Thrown
weapons are listed individually and specifically in the multiple
attack rules, hence the ludicrous rate of dart fire for high level
fighters. It gets far worse than the original posters suggestion
however. FAR worse.
Consider an NPC - a storm giant fighter of 13th level. A force to be
reckoned with by any monster. Now consider that he has specialized in
thrown darts as his primary weapon. These are, of course, giant darts
which have double dice roll for damage.
We have 6 attacks for 2d4+14/2d4+16 including the specialization bonus
or an average damage of 19/21 per hit. Given a thac0 of 1 ( -6 for
strength, -12 for level, -1 for specialization ) this would mean an
expected damage of damage of 57/63 against a target of ac -10 or
114/126 against a target ac 0.
But we have not yet begun to fight 8).
Of course, being a 13th level fighter, the giant has wisely invested
in a stock of +3 magical darts to supplement his fighting skills.
Average damage is now 22/24, total against ac -10 is 79.2/86.4,
against ac 0, 132/144
Consider at this stage, a haste spell, or psionic.
ac -10: 158.4/172.8
ac 0: 264/288
Now for the ultimate shocking munchkinesque insanity ( as if this
wasn't enough ):
The darts are not +3 darts.
They are darts of hornets nest.
The 2d4 variety.
Minimum damage ( assuming each of the 12 darts fails to split more
than once and rolls minimum damage roll )
ac -10: 259.2/288
ac 0: 432/480
Average damage ( darts split to the average of 5 and roll average
damage )
ac -10: 792/864
ac 0: 1320/1440
Maximum damage ( all 12 darts split into 8, all 12 darts roll maximum)
ac -10: 1440/1555.2
ac 0: 2400/2592
Picture this:
Asmodeus appears before you !
"MORTALS, YOUR PUNY LIVES ARE AS NOTHING TO ME, WORSHIP ME AND I MAY
ALLOW YOUR EXISTENCE TO CONTINUE"
**machine gun like thudding noises**
"OW"
**a fine rain of greenish ichor settles over most of the acre you are
stanging in***
guppy
> >their favorite weapons, and often specialize in them. And the DM just chose
> >to perpetuate this sort of thing by making sure that the only magical weapons
> >we found were bastard swords. This was really annoying for me because I
> >was playing a Paladin who refused to learn bastard sword as a profociency. In
> >fact, at level 4 I took Halberd (which is one of my favorite weapons of all
> >time) and our DM actually laughed at me!
> >
> >What comes around goes around though. This year, I'll be DMing and I refuse
> >to cater to my players weapon proficiencies! I've got a whole slew of magic
> >weapons, starting with a short sword, that are most specifically NOT bastard
> >swords. It some unrealistic to me that the sword you just happen to be good
> >with is also the sword you just happen to find!
> >
> >(*Evil grin*) I can just imagine the look on the poor fighter's face when he
> >has to put down his bastard sword to fight undead because his only maigc weapon
> >is a short sword +2.
> >
> >Seriously though, most characters choose their favorite weapon type at first
> >level and then just fill out their weapon prroficiencies with junk they'll
> >never need. The situation I'm trying to create here is that the players'
> >find a weapon (an axe say) that none of them can use, but is so powerful they
> >have to/want to learn how to use it! This seems realistic to me. You like
> >your sword so you use your sword. When you find a quarterstaff that's better
> >than your sword, you learn to use the quarterstaff.
>
> pc's choice of weapons in regards to magical items. Neither, for that matter
> should they all be swords. The chances of finding magical weapons should
> be biased according to certain weapon types
> (It should be far more common to see a magic broad sword then a magic
> bastard sword, for instance, and both should be more common then a military
> pick or voulge)
> , and also for cultures
> (For instance, elves would create alot of magic short/long swords/bows,
> while dwarves might create magical battle axes and war hammer)
>
> One of the solutions I came up with, is not permitting the players to
> specialize until they gain a new weapon proficiency at level 3.
> This way, if they do find an unusual magical weapon, (Or even an
> interesting non-magical weapon with heavy role playing significance) they
> can choose to become expert at it once they hit level 3.
>
> As well, I tend to avoid the 'usual' magical type weapon, just to see
> how the players will adapt. (Not so far as to force them to use magic
> whips, or other such nonsense, but magic battle axes and spears and
> flails and the like... (mostly anything but long swords, to tell you
> the truth)
>
> *shrug*
>
boring, i have a mixture of opinion on the subject. certainly, nothing is
stopping a DM from creating a world in which swords don't exist, or in
which powerful magic weapons that arent swords may be found. however,in
defense of swords (and some helpful suggestions)...
there is historical precedence for the comparitively large amount of
magical swords in the game. swords were the weapon of the upper classes,
"gentlemen", nobility, and knights. thus, it is no surprise that many
characters want to use them. most often, the wealthy and socially
advantaged were the only ones rich enough to have weapons of exceptional
quality (just substitute the word magic there to translate history to the
game) made, and when they did, they almost always had a sword made.
Not to mention that swords are really pretty handy general-use weapons that
do a good amount of damage and have pretty decent speed factors, and are
versitile, being able to stab in many cases, as well as both hack *and*
slash (whereas axes can merely hack).
considering other types of weapons, i think it would be a _lot_ less likely
to find a magical pole-arm (though some ceremonial halberds that are
enchanted for the king's personal guard might make sense) merely because of
the fact that these types of weapons primarily used by and made for peasant
militias and the common footsoldier. magical, they're just too expensive
to make for such forces.
Non-enchanted pole-arms and agricultural tools-come-weapons are going to be
much more common and available (or should be) in most campaigns. the DM
may (and probably should) rule that there is a high demand for swords which
cannot be met by the local blacksmiths and weaponsmiths, so most swords
made in the character's area are reserved for the king's friends, his
personal guard, or army. even *if* the players can afford a sword (price
driven up by high demand) they may not be able to purchase one legally (the
king has commissioned all swordmakers to build only for him) so, short of
making their own sword for their personal use, it will be up for the
players to decide: should i be proficient in the weapons i'm most likely
to find, or should i be proficient in the sword, which would give me a
certain amount of social standing and, in the event that i chance upon a
magical one, i'd be better able to use it? it's a tough decision in a
world with less magic items and even few normal swords.
Alternately, the DM could institute strict weapons carrying rules in his
cities (akin to present day gun control laws) stating that only city
officials can wear a sword, and that the players must go about unarmed (or
carrying concealed weapons--at the risk of being caught) or carry a small
knife or dagger, or possibly a club, or a "tool" type weapon (quarterstaff,
flail, pick, hammer). in such a campaign things like cane-swords or
umbrellas would suddenly become much more desirable (but only able to be
bought on the black market) AND the players would have the incentive to
become town officials, so they can wear the sword, which then truly becomes
a badge of honor and signifier of station. which in turn gives the DM some
measure of control over the PCs, since they have to stay in good standing
with the mayor or their lord or what have you, as well as presents
opportunities for adventure, when their boss wants them to do something.
i _can_ see the argument for the better representation of magical maces
(which are also war-only tools, and have a certain amount of high social
stigma to them) and possibly spears and bows. certainly magic swords have
received the most attention in the rulebooks, and almost all the most
powerful weapons (except the hammer of thunderbolts and possibly a few
others) are swords. i also like the idea of races building magical weapons
according to their cultural tastes. (magic bolos and yo-yo's in a
polynesian culture! or dwarven axes, hammers, and picks; indian or
turkish scimitars, kris daggers, and more exotic stuff...) and magic whips
are just plain cool... a whip of sharpness or a flame tongue whip, for
example, is just plain exciting, and a whip of strangling would be cool.
so, as DM, be creative and think a little! and be sure to come up with a
logical reason why such weapons exist. maybe a thief had a friend who was a
wizard, or acted as his body guard, and he always liked to use whips, etc.
just a few suggestions.
----guppy
Lord Uther
00mast...@bsuvc.bsu.edu wrote:
>
> In article <seitz-11079...@krick133.krick.com>, se...@krick.com (Christian Seitz) writes:
> > In article <4rckim$j...@sole.hooked.net>, t...@sole.hooked.net (Timothy
> >> >> And this is a range attack?
> >> >> Now this may be nothing in your world, but think about when that
> >> >> same fighter starts getting 2 attacks per round or more.
> >> >> Thats 6 darts per round x6 minimum damage, 36 dmg MINIMUM, if they hit!
> >> >> IN ONE ROUND, And all this from range!
> >> >> He was shooting darts like a cannon shoots cannonballs.
> >> >> Is this correct? Or even plausible?
I thought that it was a max. of 3/1 for darts. However, the 2.5 ed.
seems to allow for grandmastery of weapons.
Could be plausible, with girdle, haste, Tensers Deadly Strike. . . .
Uther
Michael Brown
[bridget farace ?]
: I find from experience that the fighters I play who Don't specialize
: or take proficiency with one of the more common, boring weapons like
: the ever-popular longsword tend to not find much in the way of magical
: weapons they can use, and later, in combat with enemies only hit by magic,
: they tend to not last all that long.
: How many magical halberds have You seen?
: When was the last time you found a magical whip?
Hmm. This thread has a strange undercurrent; an idea that PCs
*deserve* magical weaponry of their preferred types, and that it
is unfair if they don't receive such toys. If a character
uses a truly weird weapon, it *is* unreasonable to expect to
_randomly_ encounter any enchanted ones along the path of his life.
Now, it would be something of a downer if a character's choice
of tools could wind up keeping them locked out of the magical
arms race forever . . . but that isn't the case!
For, what can't be found accidentally - can be made deliberately.
The character may be gifted with an enchantment to his arms as a result
of service to a king or church. Perhaps he just saves up enough $$ to
just purchase outright the services of an enchanger (note that a magic
weapon that the character can't/won't use makes for great barter
value in such a situation). There are magical items/spells that
move enchantements from one vessel to another which could be worth
searching for. Perhaps the character can strike a deal with a
friendly/neutral wizard or priest - doing him some (dangerous!) favor
(such as the retreival of some dangerous components- good for a
quest or two) in return for the enchantement of his desire.
It isn't that hard to whip out a plus X weapon - especially if
the player is also required to provide the raw materials (more quests!).
Alternatively, there must be *some* dead heroes out there
(or living villains) with the same taste in weaponry. Quests
can be undertaken to find their tombs/strongholds and wrest
some prime magical weaponry from their cold, dead fingers . .
Hope this gives some hope back to the Halberd and Whip weilders out there.
-Michael
Lawrence R. Mead
R. John Morrow (bf...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA) wrote:
:
: > Agreed; however, it is the players *choice*. If he knows that other-than-
: > longsword magic weapons are rare and chooses on his own not to be
: > proficient in one, well ...
:
: Well, one thing that people seem to be forgetting in this
: discussion is that it is up to the DM to determine was magic weapons
: players have. People keep saying, "we only ever find magic longswords".
: Well, that would be the DM's fault, no? I mean, God doesn't sprinkle
: magic items through the campaign... When I DM, I tend to give out magic
: items that can be used by the party (on those rare occasions when I give
: out magic at all!).
Don't get me wrong - I happen to agree with you! However, the *tables*
have got 75% long swords, etc. when a sword comes up, and a very few
percent of *miscellaneous* weapons, most of which are a "mere" +1 or +2.
(You won't find a +4 whip to use an example brought up before, or +3
"gloves" to use an example from another thread). Most players know this
when they start; this is all I was pointing out. The DM is under no
obligation to change any of this, right? On the other hand, as a practical
matter if there is a monk in the group and I have decided to place a
magic item in a particular lair (or more likely being used by a
competitor }:-> ), I might replace a standard +1 mace or long sword with
a +1 bo-stick or +1 gloves. In short, a very interesting character should
have as much chance to get a usable magic weapon as any other; sometimes
that requires DM intervention into the standard tables by placing non-
standard magic items - just what any creaive DM does anyway!
Jim Sisolak
"lrm" == Lawrence R Mead <lrm...@pacific.st.usm.edu> writes:
lrm> used by a competitor }:-> ), I might replace a standard +1 mace or
lrm> long sword with a +1 bo-stick or +1 gloves. In short, a very
lrm> interesting character should have as much chance to get a usable
lrm> magic weapon as any other; sometimes that requires DM intervention
I agree that an interesting character should have a fair chance to develop,
but I've found that funneling an unusual magic item of this type to a
specific character can be done by dropping a few hints to the party/monk
that a monk of great power used to live near YYY and that some of his
weapons might still be found there: a clever party might research this sort
of thing on their own. If the monk wants or needs a magic weapon, he can
seek one out -- satisfaction for the player and an adventure hook for me.
So I have no compunction about putting only "useless" magic items in my
adventures.
I have one player in particular who make it a point to search out (or
commission a mage to create) items which he considers to fit his
character's style. He usually ends up with fewer items (as mages charge
quite a bit) but they are more effective for having been so carefully
chosen.
--
JS
The Amorphous Mass
michae...@vnet.ibm.com (The Inner Circle) wrote:
>On 11 Jul 96 13:26:59 -0500, 00mast...@bsuvc.bsu.edu wrote:
>
>>Actually, I thought the multiple attack rule applied ONLY to *melee*
>>weapons, not missile weapons. I'll have to double check, but I'm certain
>>that even if of sufficent level to gain multiple attacks, they apply only
>>to melee weapons.
>>
>>Mark
>
>Unfortunately, in this case your certainty is misplaced. Thrown
>weapons are listed individually and specifically in the multiple
>attack rules, hence the ludicrous rate of dart fire for high level
>fighters. It gets far worse than the original posters suggestion
>however. FAR worse.
According to what? My PHB2 says, on pg 70:
"ROF" is the rate of fire--how many shots that weapon
can fire off in one round. This is independent of the
number of melee attacks a character can make in a round.
This means that regardless of the listed number of attacks a fighter
can make, if he decides to throw daggers he will throw them at the
rate of two per round, because the ROF for a thrown dagger is 2. The
_only_ way to increase the ROF of a weapon is to specialize in it
(although of course the Complete Book of Elves has a couple of other
ways exclusively available to elves...).
----------------
The Amorphous Mass There are certain abilities, such as "getting into
james-r...@uiowa.edu character", that are considered "good." This
equates rather well with "light and flaky."
-- Cisco Lopez-Fresquet, on roleplaying.