|
13 months ago ::
May 27, 2012 - 12:07AM
#1
|
Date Joined:
May 24, 2012
|
Something i've actually done some research into for my own gaming purposes are Claymores, Greatswords, and Zweihanders. Essentially, granting a Greatsword more damage at the cost of not using a shield is nice, but i really think that their utility shouldn't end there. Historically, Greatswords were invented for one reason: to stop Pike wielders. This meant they had to have a significant reach, moreso than that of a Longsword. I think that granting Greatswords the Reach benefit of Lances and Longspears would be more realistic, but still with obvious drawbacks. You can't use a shield, it's heavier than Lances and Longspears, and it costs more than even the Greataxe or Maul which do equal damage. Basically, in terms of game balance, why would i buy a Greatsword? I could save money with any other Heavy Weapon on that list and do as much damage, or trade in 2 points of max damage for 5 foot of reach with a Halberd. The Greatsword is not worth 50 gp as is. It basically seems like an iconic item, nothing more. (In character) I carry this huge sword because it looks good and i can impress the peasants with how much it cost, but when i go to the weapon store to arm my mercenaries i'm buying them Greataxes instead. (out of character) Almost sounds like the weapon should grant a Charisma bonus.  I hope this doesn't come across as too much ragging, it is such a tiny detail, but it does bother me. Personally, i prefer swords to axes. As i said, they are iconic to me. But i can't justify, in character, the gold cost of buying a Greatsword when i can buy a Greataxe or Maul instead and save my pennies for better armor/shield/healing item.
|
|
|
|
13 months ago ::
May 27, 2012 - 12:23AM
#2
|
Date Joined:
May 24, 2012
|
1st, i miss the 2d6 damage from 3e. that put more damage on average to the side of great sword vs greataxe. also damage was more consistent and reliable.
2nd, its lighter, real life greatswords(Zweihanders) weighted about 2-3,5Kg or 4-8lbs
3rd. greatswords could be used as halfspear weapons that pierce and can be set against a charge.
4th. I agree 5e greatsword suck, except looks
|
|
|
|
13 months ago ::
May 27, 2012 - 12:59AM
#3
|
Date Joined:
May 24, 2012
|
Yeah, i was kinda surprised when i saw that Greatswords were listed at 15 lbs. That's a crazy heavy weapon for melee. Unless it were something like Cloud Strife's Buster Sword, which i'm sure weighs more than 15. I guess this begs the question, are they going for this kind of Greatsword www.youtube.com/watch?v=Un1M7xbCCIsor this kind of greatsword? www.youtube.com/watch?v=_hfLZozBVpM
|
|
|
|
13 months ago ::
May 27, 2012 - 1:30AM
#4
|
Date Joined:
May 24, 2012
|
3rd. greatswords could be used as halfspear weapons that pierce and can be set against a charge.
You can do that with Longswords too. It's call half-swording, and it was a fairly standard technique for defeating heavy armor; gave you better leverage and effectively stiffened the blade to allow the tip to pierce armor better. You can also manipulate the shape of the crossguard in a half-swording stance to act as a fulcrum for locks, throws and breaks.
It's even possible to reverse your blade in your grip entirely, holding it by the blade with both hands and using the crossguard and pommel cap as your striking (or trapping and binding) implements. When your opponent lunges and you parry with pommel high, bring your off-hand to a half-sword grip, followed by your strong hand, transferring your parry into an overhead hammer-blow, aimed at hitting your opponent in the head with the crossguard. Your opponent is forced to parry high with his off-hand near his tip to stop you. You hook your guard over his blade and yank it down, then smash him in the chin. If your opponent knows that's coming, he lets go with his off-hand and your yank sweeps his sword down to his side instead, drawing your attack off-line and leaving your exposed. If you go to hit him then, your pommel is still toward him, and he can slap it aside with his off-hand to leave you exposed to a thrust to the abdomen. Your better bet is to yield a step and get your strong hand back on the grip; still a bad position if he follows you and goes for the draw cut, but better than nothing. If he comes in for a straight thrust, bring your off-hand back to a defensive position, parry close to your hilt and glissade. If he overextended his lunge trying to follow your retreat, you just might disarm him.
There's a reason arming swords owned the battlefield for six hundred years. I'm firmly convinced that nobody at WotC has ever actually seen someone in action who knew what they were doing with one. "Simple Fighter" my ass.
|
|
|
|
13 months ago ::
May 27, 2012 - 1:32AM
#5
|
Date Joined:
May 24, 2012
|
Yeah, i was kinda surprised when i saw that Greatswords were listed at 15 lbs. That's a crazy heavy weapon for melee. Unless it were something like Cloud Strife's Buster Sword, which i'm sure weighs more than 15.
I guess this begs the question, are they going for this kind of Greatsword
www.youtube.com/watch?v=Un1M7xbCCIs
or this kind of greatsword?
www.youtube.com/watch?v=_hfLZozBVpM
hahaha!!
I nearly choke when I saw the buster sword in action 
So, I hope they are going with Cold steel version,
hey, cutting 2 pigs at once gives it pass in any fantasy sword criterium.
|
|
|
|
13 months ago ::
May 27, 2012 - 1:48AM
#6
|
Date Joined:
May 24, 2012
|
3rd. greatswords could be used as halfspear weapons that pierce and can be set against a charge.
You can do that with Longswords too. It's call half-swording, and it was a fairly standard technique for defeating heavy armor; gave you better leverage and effectively stiffened the blade to allow the tip to pierce armor better. You can also manipulate the shape of the crossguard in a half-swording stance to act as a fulcrum for locks, throws and breaks.
It's even possible to reverse your blade in your grip entirely, holding it by the blade with both hands and using the crossguard and pommel cap as your striking (or trapping and binding) implements. When your opponent lunges and you parry with pommel high, bring your off-hand to a half-sword grip, followed by your strong hand, transferring your parry into an overhead hammer-blow, aimed at hitting your opponent in the head with the crossguard. Your opponent is forced to parry high with his off-hand near his tip to stop you. You hook your guard over his blade and yank it down, then smash him in the chin. If your opponent knows that's coming, he lets go with his off-hand and your yank sweeps his sword down to his side instead, drawing your attack off-line and leaving your exposed. If you go to hit him then, your pommel is still toward him, and he can slap it aside with his off-hand to leave you exposed to a thrust to the abdomen. Your better bet is to yield a step and get your strong hand back on the grip; still a bad position if he follows you and goes for the draw cut, but better than nothing. If he comes in for a straight thrust, bring your off-hand back to a defensive position, parry close to your hilt and glissade. If he overextended his lunge trying to follow your retreat, you just might disarm him.
There's a reason arming swords owned the battlefield for six hundred years. I'm firmly convinced that nobody at WotC has ever actually seen someone in action who knew what they were doing with one. "Simple Fighter" my ass.
I know you can halfsword to pierce with longsword too and quite effectively, but average longsword is about 120cm, and greatsword is 160cm+ so that gives you big advantage in reach. And my point was to compete with spears in pure game mechanics.
|
|
|
|
13 months ago ::
May 27, 2012 - 2:10AM
#7
|
Date Joined:
May 24, 2012
|
It's the reach advantage that's significant in a real fight, more than anything else. Swords of any kind are just flat out more versatile and more useful than spears.
They were also horribly expensive, because they were very difficult to make, which is why spears and axes were common battlefield weapons--they are what you used if you (or whoever was paying for your equipment) couldn't afford a sword.
|
|
|
|
13 months ago ::
May 27, 2012 - 2:19AM
#8
|
Date Joined:
Apr 27, 2009
|
Please don't begin to advertise more reach distances as they are currently present. Overly complex rules systems like The Black Eye made me feel comfortable with D&D 4E, and I don't want to have like 4 reach categories. If you want to have better reach for the Greatsword, then others might come to advertise even more reach for a Pike or even worse, less reach for Daggers, Kamas or Unarmed fighting. Great ... 
|
|
|
|
13 months ago ::
May 27, 2012 - 2:59AM
#9
|
|
|
I am curious about a balanced way to represent reach. The rapier has a similar reach.
On the other side of the coin, this reach prevents swordsters from wielding these in tight spaces.
|
|
|
|
13 months ago ::
May 27, 2012 - 4:15AM
#10
|
Date Joined:
May 24, 2012
|
Please don't begin to advertise more reach distances as they are currently present. Overly complex rules systems like The Black Eye made me feel comfortable with D&D 4E, and I don't want to have like 4 reach categories.
If you want to have better reach for the Greatsword, then others might come to advertise even more reach for a Pike or even worse, less reach for Daggers, Kamas or Unarmed fighting.
Great ...
I'm not advocating anything of the sort. D&D is a highly abstracted simulation and I don't think it needs distinctions finer than "reach" and "not reach". That said, I do think the Greatsword should be a reach weapon. That Cold Steel video upthread showed us a fifteen-foot lunge, and that wasn't even a particularly good lunge.
What's missing right now is a way to take advantage of a reach weapon, which circles us around to the idea that it's not the Greatsword that's simulated wrong, it's the man wielding it.
|
|
|
