Weapon oddities.

I don't understand the weapon balance at all.


The greataxe and the greatsword are pretty much identical, just the greatsword weighs 5 pounds less, this apparently makes it worth 250% of the greataxe....really?


The trident and the pick have a similar case.



Also, why does the heavy crossbow use strength to attack? To lift it? just seems odd.         
I really hope that crossbow issue is a typo...
I really hope that crossbow issue is a typo...



We disagree on alot of things, but I think we both agree that is just weird.

I think bows should be Dex or Strength if they want to give strength characters a ranged weapon, professional bowmen are ripped.
That's a whole new can of worms though.  Stronger characters can shoot farther, but more dextrous can shoot more accurately?



Also, why does the heavy crossbow use strength to attack? To lift it? just seems odd.         



Heh didn't notice that, funny.
I am almost sure that the weapons rules are made with a much more different approach. They didnt balance weapons, they just made a list that reflects what they should do, so you can just choose what you like and feal will be better. In reallity I generaly believe that weapons shouldnt be balanced, weapons are about choice and effectiveness and this is why we dont use swords anymore :P
My assumption (urg.. really hate having to do that)... is that the idea is that the Heavy Crossbow requires a great deal of strength to adequately wind it up (ugh, i don't know the technical terms and am displaying great ignorance!) for effectiveness -  thus, greater strength = greater effectiveness.

They apply this greater effectiveness for stronger crossbowmen as a Hit bonus. Dunno if i like the Strength = Accuracy in this regard... but D&D's combat system is pretty abstract anyhow. Personally, I'd keep the DEX for accuracy and add STR to damage output but I don't think the system will ever be able to realistically mimic weapon combat.
My assumption (urg.. really hate having to do that)... is that the idea is that the Heavy Crossbow requires a great deal of strength to adequately wind it up (ugh, i don't know the technical terms and am displaying great ignorance!) for effectiveness -  thus, greater strength = greater effectiveness.

They apply this greater effectiveness for stronger crossbowmen as a Hit bonus. Dunno if i like the Strength = Accuracy in this regard... but D&D's combat system is pretty abstract anyhow. Personally, I'd keep the DEX for accuracy and add STR to damage output but I don't think the system will ever be able to realistically mimic weapon combat.



If you've ever fired a crossbow IRL you'd realize that crossbows are by definition extremely accurate and don't need any sort of Dexterity to use. Strength to wind up though. So I don't see a problem with that.
Wizard's first rule: People are stupid.
I don't understand the weapon balance at all.

The greataxe and the greatsword are pretty much identical, just the greatsword weighs 5 pounds less, this apparently makes it worth 250% of the greataxe....really?

The trident and the pick have a similar case.


The greataxe and greatsword rules reflect medieval weaponsmithing.  Axes aren't cutting weapons so much as they are crushing weapons.  So much of the hurt comes from being hit with so much weight driven into such a small surface area (the weapon's edge).  This also means the axe doesn't necessarily need to be forged to such a high standard.  It doesn't need to be meticulously weighted or balanced.  It just needs a heavy head, a sturdy haft, and a decent edge, whereas a greatsword needs to be forged with care and attention to detail so it has a fine edge and perfect balance.  Thus, the greatsword may be lighter, but it will be more expensive.

I expect, in game terms, that the actual ruleset (and maybe later playtests) will include fun things for swordsmen and axemen to differentiate the weapons.  And later on, that price difference probably evaporates thanks to the incredible wealth of high-level adventurers.

Or, the greataxe might always be a better choice than the greatsword at level one.  In world terms, this would be because no level one adventurer is yet skilled enough to make use of the finer qualities of the sword.  I would consider that a victory for the edition.

Or, the greataxe might always be a better choice than the greatsword at level one.  In world terms, this would be because no level one adventurer is yet skilled enough to make use of the finer qualities of the sword.  I would consider that a victory for the edition.



No its writing silly fluff for metagame. How many people really teach you to use an axe before you learn the "finer qualities" of the sword.

Also by D&D Next rules the Axe is a cutting weapon. 


Also while the fighter is struggling to learn the "finer qualities of the sword" the cleric and wizard are already warping reality.
The acolyte cleric and apprentice wizard are also busy struggling with the finer points of religious devotion and arcane realities.  They don't have much to do with whether a novice fighter is more effective swinging a brutal axe or an elegant sword (side note: currently, neither is really more effective; one is simply cheapter than the other).
My assumption (urg.. really hate having to do that)... is that the idea is that the Heavy Crossbow requires a great deal of strength to adequately wind it up (ugh, i don't know the technical terms and am displaying great ignorance!) for effectiveness -  thus, greater strength = greater effectiveness.

They apply this greater effectiveness for stronger crossbowmen as a Hit bonus. Dunno if i like the Strength = Accuracy in this regard... but D&D's combat system is pretty abstract anyhow. Personally, I'd keep the DEX for accuracy and add STR to damage output but I don't think the system will ever be able to realistically mimic weapon combat.



If you've ever fired a crossbow IRL you'd realize that crossbows are by definition extremely accurate and don't need any sort of Dexterity to use. Strength to wind up though. So I don't see a problem with that.



Alas, I have not fired a crossbow in real life. I'm pretty wimpy -- likely I would be unable to even wind it up - all I have is 20 years of what RPGs have "taught" me about medieval weaponry (*shudder*). I do recall being told that crossbows, being point and shoot weaponry, didn't require much in the way of training to use.  So I can definitely get why DEX wouldn't be needed for accuracy. Not convinced that STR should substitute in its place... but some attribute definitely needs to.. and I can agree with you that STR Is as good as DEX for it.


These weapons are boring and lacking variety. Also, strength for crossbow, WTF? A crossbow is pretty much a medieval rifle. Does it really take strength to aim well with a rifle?

Why is the greatsword so expensive? Does that mean every 2H fighter is running around with a greataxe at level 1? What a stupid idea.
I suposse we will new feat about style fighting with different weapons.

Waraxe is a weapong to be used with a style offensive (a shield shoud be necesary) and longsword can be used to block some attacks.

"Say me what you're showing off for, and I'll say you what you lack!" (Spanish saying)

 

Book 13 Anaclet 23 Confucius said: "The Superior Man is in harmony but does not follow the crowd. The inferior man follows the crowd, but is not in harmony"

 

"In a country well governed, poverty is something to be ashamed of. In a country badly governed, wealth is something to be ashamed of." - Confucius 

My assumption (urg.. really hate having to do that)... is that the idea is that the Heavy Crossbow requires a great deal of strength to adequately wind it up (ugh, i don't know the technical terms and am displaying great ignorance!) for effectiveness -  thus, greater strength = greater effectiveness.

They apply this greater effectiveness for stronger crossbowmen as a Hit bonus. Dunno if i like the Strength = Accuracy in this regard... but D&D's combat system is pretty abstract anyhow. Personally, I'd keep the DEX for accuracy and add STR to damage output but I don't think the system will ever be able to realistically mimic weapon combat.



If you've ever fired a crossbow IRL you'd realize that crossbows are by definition extremely accurate and don't need any sort of Dexterity to use. Strength to wind up though. So I don't see a problem with that.



Alas, I have not fired a crossbow in real life. I'm pretty wimpy -- likely I would be unable to even wind it up - all I have is 20 years of what RPGs have "taught" me about medieval weaponry (*shudder*). I do recall being told that crossbows, being point and shoot weaponry, didn't require much in the way of training to use.  So I can definitely get why DEX wouldn't be needed for accuracy. Not convinced that STR should substitute in its place... but some attribute definitely needs to.. and I can agree with you that STR Is as good as DEX for it.





Crossbows are medieval guns. With no recoil. Actually one of my favorite episodes of Top Shot was the one with the crossbow. They really are just point and shoot.

It's not strength to aim so much as it's strength to reload.
Wizard's first rule: People are stupid.
Alas, I have not fired a crossbow in real life. I'm pretty wimpy -- likely I would be unable to even wind it up - all I have is 20 years of what RPGs have "taught" me about medieval weaponry (*shudder*). I do recall being told that crossbows, being point and shoot weaponry, didn't require much in the way of training to use.  So I can definitely get why DEX wouldn't be needed for accuracy. Not convinced that STR should substitute in its place... but some attribute definitely needs to.. and I can agree with you that STR Is as good as DEX for it.


Maybe the fact that it's heavy and awkward means that hefting it up to your shoulder and keeping it up there long enough to aim it can be draining in the long term, meaning that the stronger you are the longer you're able to hold it up there without your arms starting to fatigue or even tremble.  Maybe a little of a stretch, but I might be able to buy it.

And also, it sounds like a decent game idea: when your Str-heavy fighter wants a backup ranged weapon, you want the rules to encourage him to pick something that is representative of pragmatism and a lack of dedicated training in archery: the crossbow.

Sounds like something I would want to see shape up in character creation and high level play.  I won't make a definitive statement of opinion on this playtest alone.
The acolyte cleric and apprentice wizard are also busy struggling with the finer points of religious devotion and arcane realities.  They don't have much to do with whether a novice fighter is more effective swinging a brutal axe or an elegant sword (side note: currently, neither is really more effective; one is simply cheapter than the other).



Sure they do, they're characters of the same level.


The clerics and wizards get to learn new and powerful spells.


The Fighter MIGHT make that 25 extra gp investment worth it down the road. If the axe support is good, why not just stick to using the axe?


That doesn't seem particularly thrilling or immerive to me.
My assumption (urg.. really hate having to do that)... is that the idea is that the Heavy Crossbow requires a great deal of strength to adequately wind it up (ugh, i don't know the technical terms and am displaying great ignorance!) for effectiveness -  thus, greater strength = greater effectiveness.

They apply this greater effectiveness for stronger crossbowmen as a Hit bonus. Dunno if i like the Strength = Accuracy in this regard... but D&D's combat system is pretty abstract anyhow. Personally, I'd keep the DEX for accuracy and add STR to damage output but I don't think the system will ever be able to realistically mimic weapon combat.



If you've ever fired a crossbow IRL you'd realize that crossbows are by definition extremely accurate and don't need any sort of Dexterity to use. Strength to wind up though. So I don't see a problem with that.



Alas, I have not fired a crossbow in real life. I'm pretty wimpy -- likely I would be unable to even wind it up - all I have is 20 years of what RPGs have "taught" me about medieval weaponry (*shudder*). I do recall being told that crossbows, being point and shoot weaponry, didn't require much in the way of training to use.  So I can definitely get why DEX wouldn't be needed for accuracy. Not convinced that STR should substitute in its place... but some attribute definitely needs to.. and I can agree with you that STR Is as good as DEX for it.





Crossbows are medieval guns. With no recoil. Actually one of my favorite episodes of Top Shot was the one with the crossbow. They really are just point and shoot.

It's not strength to aim so much as it's strength to reload.



Guns with no recoil...what? So conservation of linear momentum doesn't apply to crossbows?

Guessing the crossbow Str is for pulling it back, not winching it.  It's not a typo, it's in it's own section.

I was always under the fantasy roleplaying - not real life - impression that Bows were more difficult to use and that Crossbows were easy to use just took longer to reload. 

I really like how they broke out Missile weapons from Ranged nonMissile weapons.  Spear is always Str, Dagger is Str or Dex, etc.  But I don't about the bow and crossbow allocations.

Aside from using a sacred cow as target practice, could you see Str for bows and Dex for crosssbows?
I'm an avid hunter and I can tell you that a crossbow is much MUCH easier to use than a bow. A crossbow is easier to aim than a bow because you don't have to keep the crossbow drawn with your strength and aim with opposing limb action. It's wierd because a bow requires a lot of strength AND dexterity. A crossbow really just requires strength to pull back (although rotary cranks make this easier) and a steady aim. Bows require a huge amount of skill and continuous practice.

How you translate that difference into a simplified RPG is beyond me.
I'm an avid hunter and I can tell you that a crossbow is much MUCH easier to use than a bow. A crossbow is easier to aim than a bow because you don't have to keep the crossbow drawn with your strength and aim with opposing limb action. It's wierd because a bow requires a lot of strength AND dexterity. A crossbow really just requires strength to pull back (although rotary cranks make this easier) and a steady aim. Bows require a huge amount of skill and continuous practice.

How you translate that difference into a simplified RPG is beyond me.



I'd say make Bows be Strength or Dex, and have lesses start proficient in them.
My assumption (urg.. really hate having to do that)... is that the idea is that the Heavy Crossbow requires a great deal of strength to adequately wind it up (ugh, i don't know the technical terms and am displaying great ignorance!) for effectiveness -  thus, greater strength = greater effectiveness.

They apply this greater effectiveness for stronger crossbowmen as a Hit bonus. Dunno if i like the Strength = Accuracy in this regard... but D&D's combat system is pretty abstract anyhow. Personally, I'd keep the DEX for accuracy and add STR to damage output but I don't think the system will ever be able to realistically mimic weapon combat.



If you've ever fired a crossbow IRL you'd realize that crossbows are by definition extremely accurate and don't need any sort of Dexterity to use. Strength to wind up though. So I don't see a problem with that.

this, BUT

what i think would be more acurate is for your strength mod to effect your reload speed.

strength characters should be able to reload crossbows as a free or minor and crossbows should do more damage (because they did). on the same note, medival crossbows were out the gate easier to use, but actual bows were still mroe acurate for an experienced user, so it would make sense for the bow to be more of a dex weapon with a higher to hit and less damage, and a crossbow to be a strength weapon with less to hit and higher damage.
My assumption (urg.. really hate having to do that)... is that the idea is that the Heavy Crossbow requires a great deal of strength to adequately wind it up (ugh, i don't know the technical terms and am displaying great ignorance!) for effectiveness -  thus, greater strength = greater effectiveness.

They apply this greater effectiveness for stronger crossbowmen as a Hit bonus. Dunno if i like the Strength = Accuracy in this regard... but D&D's combat system is pretty abstract anyhow. Personally, I'd keep the DEX for accuracy and add STR to damage output but I don't think the system will ever be able to realistically mimic weapon combat.



If you've ever fired a crossbow IRL you'd realize that crossbows are by definition extremely accurate and don't need any sort of Dexterity to use. Strength to wind up though. So I don't see a problem with that.

this, BUT what i think would be more acurate is for your strength mod to effect your reload speed. strength characters should be able to reload crossbows as a free or minor and crossbows should do more damage (because they did). on the same note, medival crossbows were out the gate easier to use, but actual bows were still mroe acurate for an experienced user, so it would make sense for the bow to be more of a dex weapon with a higher to hit and less damage, and a crossbow to be a strength weapon with less to hit and higher damage.

I too would prefer a Str or Dex bow, would go a long way to making heavy armor, high str, stat dump dex Fighters useful in ranged combat.

Watching Game of Thrones, they reload... what's called to draw a crossbow, rearm?  When they do it, they do it by hand and not with a winch.  When I think of 6 second crossbow reload, I don't know I have thinking winch.  Wouldn't a winch take a lonnng time?

My assumption (urg.. really hate having to do that)... is that the idea is that the Heavy Crossbow requires a great deal of strength to adequately wind it up (ugh, i don't know the technical terms and am displaying great ignorance!) for effectiveness -  thus, greater strength = greater effectiveness.

They apply this greater effectiveness for stronger crossbowmen as a Hit bonus. Dunno if i like the Strength = Accuracy in this regard... but D&D's combat system is pretty abstract anyhow. Personally, I'd keep the DEX for accuracy and add STR to damage output but I don't think the system will ever be able to realistically mimic weapon combat.



If you've ever fired a crossbow IRL you'd realize that crossbows are by definition extremely accurate and don't need any sort of Dexterity to use. Strength to wind up though. So I don't see a problem with that.

this, BUT what i think would be more acurate is for your strength mod to effect your reload speed. strength characters should be able to reload crossbows as a free or minor and crossbows should do more damage (because they did). on the same note, medival crossbows were out the gate easier to use, but actual bows were still mroe acurate for an experienced user, so it would make sense for the bow to be more of a dex weapon with a higher to hit and less damage, and a crossbow to be a strength weapon with less to hit and higher damage.

I too would prefer a Str or Dex bow, would go a long way to making heavy armor, high str, stat dump dex Fighters useful in ranged combat.

Watching Game of Thrones, they reload... what's called to draw a crossbow, rearm?  When they do it, they do it by hand and not with a winch.  When I think of 6 second crossbow reload, I don't know I have thinking winch.  Wouldn't a winch take a lonnng time?


reload speed is the number one reason that the british held onto the longbow for so long.

on average i think an english warbow from that erra (80 to 120lb draw weight) could fire roughly 6 arrows in a min (1 every 10 seconds) where as the crossbow was like 2 or 3, not sure is they were winched.

i think the str mods makes the difference here. you could give crossbows a "winching" stat. if your str is under X you need to use a winch, otherwise you can manually draw.

light crossbows have a winching stat of 1, heavy have a winchhing stat of 3.

winching = standard action
drawing = minor action

hence really strong characters can draw any crossbow, while dex chars could still probably draw a light crossbow early, and then a heavy one later in the game.

this way we do away with the feat tax.
to bring this further you could use this to gear Crossbows as upfront damage at the cost of aim, while the Bow is upfront hit at the cost of damage, and then to even it out later give bows a higher crit range? so that an end game char could either gear for reliable damage, or go for ranged crit fishing.

If you are talking about weapons I would like suggest the TV show "Conquest" by History Chanel to game designers, and...

...this a video about fast archery. I suposse some bows are created to be used for long distances, and other ones for shorter distances but a faster shooting.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=1o9RGnujlkI&feat...

"Say me what you're showing off for, and I'll say you what you lack!" (Spanish saying)

 

Book 13 Anaclet 23 Confucius said: "The Superior Man is in harmony but does not follow the crowd. The inferior man follows the crowd, but is not in harmony"

 

"In a country well governed, poverty is something to be ashamed of. In a country badly governed, wealth is something to be ashamed of." - Confucius 

If you are talking about weapons I would like suggest the TV show "Conquest" by History Chanel to game designers, and...

...this a video about fast archery. I suposse some bows are created to be used for long distances, and other ones for shorter distances but a faster shooting.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=1o9RGnujlkI&feat...


as cool as that is, thats a very low powered bow. you wouldn't even be able to draw a warbow with your fingers like that, the english used a thumg ring, or they would curve their fingers around the string, she is just holding the arrow and pinching it between her fingers.
The Heavy C.Bow using str is strange I agree. But like was said earlier, alot of what's going on in the D&D mechanics is very abstract. The constant reloading of a hevy crossbow would take a toll on anyone as you're dealing with pull strengths that put the english longbow to shame. There were however tools in place to make this a much simpler task as well.

Pull Loaded

Push Loaded
 
I suspect... Recoil.

A heavy crossbow is likely going to be deadly accurate... If held still. If the force of firing the bolt causes the wielder to jostle it, though, the trajectory can be completely off. And the firmer you can hold it in aiming at a weak point, the deadlier the hit will be.

That would be my game designer logic behind it. 
I'm an avid hunter and I can tell you that a crossbow is much MUCH easier to use than a bow. A crossbow is easier to aim than a bow because you don't have to keep the crossbow drawn with your strength and aim with opposing limb action. It's wierd because a bow requires a lot of strength AND dexterity. A crossbow really just requires strength to pull back (although rotary cranks make this easier) and a steady aim. Bows require a huge amount of skill and continuous practice.

How you translate that difference into a simplified RPG is beyond me.



I'd say make Bows be Strength or Dex, and have lesses start proficient in them.



Or have the XBow not key off of any particular stat.  It literally requires no strength or dexterity to use effectively, just proficiency ("This is how you load it, and this is how you shoot it.  Aim the pointy-bit at your target.")  Give it a level-based attack bonus, so it scales properly, and a damage rating.

Done.
My assumption (urg.. really hate having to do that)... is that the idea is that the Heavy Crossbow requires a great deal of strength to adequately wind it up (ugh, i don't know the technical terms and am displaying great ignorance!) for effectiveness -  thus, greater strength = greater effectiveness.

They apply this greater effectiveness for stronger crossbowmen as a Hit bonus. Dunno if i like the Strength = Accuracy in this regard... but D&D's combat system is pretty abstract anyhow. Personally, I'd keep the DEX for accuracy and add STR to damage output but I don't think the system will ever be able to realistically mimic weapon combat.



If you've ever fired a crossbow IRL you'd realize that crossbows are by definition extremely accurate and don't need any sort of Dexterity to use. Strength to wind up though. So I don't see a problem with that.



Alas, I have not fired a crossbow in real life. I'm pretty wimpy -- likely I would be unable to even wind it up - all I have is 20 years of what RPGs have "taught" me about medieval weaponry (*shudder*). I do recall being told that crossbows, being point and shoot weaponry, didn't require much in the way of training to use.  So I can definitely get why DEX wouldn't be needed for accuracy. Not convinced that STR should substitute in its place... but some attribute definitely needs to.. and I can agree with you that STR Is as good as DEX for it.





Crossbows are medieval guns. With no recoil. Actually one of my favorite episodes of Top Shot was the one with the crossbow. They really are just point and shoot.

It's not strength to aim so much as it's strength to reload.



Guns with no recoil...what? So conservation of linear momentum doesn't apply to crossbows?




It does. With a gun, a small explosion is happening inside the barrel, which pushes force towards both the bullet, and the back of the barrel. That's why there's recoil. But with a crossbow, all the force is going forward because it's getting pushed by a singular string.