How so? How would a roughly 8" grip on a 30" bladed shortsword ever be describable as so "large" or "awkward" as to be unusable by most anyone? Realistically?
I don't know. In the scenario I described, that would be your decision, so if you don't think that it makes sense, don't make it. I agree that you probably shouldn't make that decision. We're on the same page there.
You're making up silly, impractical issues to warrant a set of rules that need not exist.
If you think that worrying about racial pigeon-holing is silly and impractical, then... Well, I don't feel like I really need to respond to that. Race-class restrictions are gone for a reason, etc.
The description I gave would be nothing out of the ordinary for any of the three theorized users (halfling, human or ogre mage)... and here's the kicker... all at the same time. Becaue the sword is what it is. Its size, shape, dimensions, weight and style are fixed. Codified. True. They are unmalleable. The universe looks down on it and says, "That there is a very nice shortsword". Because it-is-what-it-is for the purposes of rules governing weapons and their categorization within the framework of the game... Clearly the sword I described is **simultaneously** a longsword to small creatures, a shortsword to medium and a dagger to something large. But only by their individual perspectives. They can each call it whatevertheheck they want. It doesn't matter externally in the slightest. Doesn't matter who made it, the purpose for which was intended, or who now wields it. In every case it is a finessable d6 weapon that weights 3 pounds. Period. Fin.
You keep looking at these situations at such a shallow level, though. Unless you're are willing to analyze deeper than that, of course you're not going to get where I'm coming from. You're being very human-centric and failing to take into account that any of these three theoretical wielders would be wielding the weapon in entirely different ways. Until you are actually willing to take a look at how the wielders' perspective differences alter the ways that they fight, you're not going to be able to break through that wall that you say you keep banging your head against.
Think about the ways that those three characters, the Halfling, the Ogre, and the Human, are going to actually use that weapon. Remember in 3.5 when, very logically, Small races got +1 AC because they were smaller targets, Large races got -1 AC because they were larger targets, and so on? Well, that only makes sense with corresponding modifiers for perspective difference, right? That's why the Halfling got a +1 size bonus to attack rolls, because otherwise Halflings would illogically have a harder time hitting one another than Humans would, and why Ogres got a -1 size penaly to attack rolls, because otherwise Ogres would illogically have an easier time hitting one another than Humans would.
All that I am doing is mechanically translating that perspective bonus as a damage bonus instead of an attack roll bonus. Modifiers for accuracy and precision have gone either wa in D&D in terms of being modeled back attack roll bonus or damage bonus, so we're free to do either. Very conveniantly, what this does is effectively make the end result that when a Halfling picks up a blade and wields it in the same way that a Human would wield a longsword, its damage also ends up the same as that of a Human wielding a longsword (the weapon is smaller, but the accuracy is higher, cancelling out). By the same token, when an Ogre picks up a blade and wields it in the same way that a Human wields a dagger, its damage also ends up the same as that of a Human wielding a dagger (the weapon is larger, but the accuracy is lower, canceling out).
That is all that the goal is. Want to know why I've never bothered to develop deeper rules for wielding weapons designed for a creature not for your size? Because it's never come up before. Nobody has ever asked before. Nobody has ever cared before. I came up with a simple solution as a minor concession, but if simulationists like you really need more complexity, then fine, we can make more complexity. The added complexity is going to be relegated to a side scenario anyway, so I don't care.
With that being the case, what was the purpose of your system again?
To stop small races from being screwed over in terms of their weapon choices again and to thus make small warriors something other than a terrible idea. I thought that I had made this clear.
You know what? Why don't you tell me how you would do it? I'm open to suggestions, a fact that you seem not to have realized. Considering that the end goal is for a small character to have the same weapon selection as a medium character and for that small character to be able to wield its weapons exactly as effectively as a medium character (which is the only part of my system that I feel actually matters), how would you go about making rules for the corner cases of differently sized weapons? I am sincerely all ears.
Speaking of things that were badly designed, please check out this thread for my Minotaur fix. What have the critics said, you ask? "If any of my players ask to play a Minotaur, I'm definitely offering this as an alternative to the official version." - EmpactWB "If I ever feel like playing a Minotaur I'll know where to look!" - Undrave "WoTC if you are reading this - please take this guy's advice." - Ferol_Debtor_of_Torm "Really full of win. A minotaur that is actually attractive for more than just melee classes." - Cpt_Micha
Also, check out my recent GENASI variant! If you've ever wished that your Fire Genasi could actually set stuff on fire, your Water Genasi could actually swim, or your Wind Genasi could at least glide, then look no further.
Finally, check out my OPTIONS FOR EVERYONE article, an effort to give unique support to the races that WotC keeps forgetting about. Includes new racial feature options for the Changeling, Deva, Githzerai, Gnoll, Gnome, Goliath, Half-Orc, Kalashtar, Minotaur, Shadar-Kai, Thri-Kreen, Warforged and more!
Think about the ways that those three characters, the Halfling, the Ogre, and the Human, are going to actually use that weapon.
You actually want that ogre to be rolling a d4 while using that same shortsword that a halfling would get a d8 with. Wow... That's. Just. So... I don't even know how to address that...
You know what? Why don't you tell me how you would do it?
Oh. Easiest question - and solution - yet...
You don't. Simple, no? Wanna know why? Guess why? Cummon... I know you can... Because it's not a problem. That's right! You're just needlessly making it out to be one.
Halflings use smaller weapons. Plain and simple. That's what they get for being small. It makes up for the other really cool racial abilities they get. Not to mention halflings already get a +1 damage bonus for being small. It's called *not having a strength penalty despite being small*.
Anything else? 'Cause I can hit these out of the park all day.
[And so we continue to be clear here: Halflings are restricted only from the largest of weapons (heavy category). In the current ruleset, halflings can wield longswords and battleaxes one-handed just like humans. Heck, they can even wield bastard swords. Two-handed, of course, just like humans currently are required to as well. So no difference there either. Want a greatword wielding halfling fighter? Great. Sounds like a cool character concept. Here's your "halfling greatsword"... We technically classify it on this weapon chart as a bastard sword. But, hey, you can call it whatever you want...]
You actually want that ogre to be rolling a d4 while using that same shortsword that a halfling would get a d8 with.
Sure. Why not? The Halfling is going to be significantly more accurate with it due to the perspective advantage offered by its smaller size. That accuracy advantage is then mechanically modeled by a higher base damage die.
In 3.5, the difference wouldn't be that different with that same blade. The Halfling's die would be the same size as the Ogre's, but it would also have +2 to hit due to size compared to the Ogre, a definite advantage. There is no difference but what the advantage is applied to. I just apply it to damage because that conveniently cancels out the theoretical damage penalty due to weapon size and results in a simple uniformity straight across based on how a weapon is used, rather than purely on its size as you keep close-mindedly insisting is the only right way to do it.
You don't.
See, and if you're not willing to actually work with me, then of course you're not going to find a solution that pleases you.
Halflings use smaller weapons... It makes up for the other really cool racial abilities they get.
That has never happened in any edition of D&D that I have played. Not 3E, not 3.5, not 4E, not what I've seen of D&D Next, not even Pathfinder.
[And so we continue to be clear here: Halflings are restricted only from the largest of weapons (heavy category).
I am perfectly clear on that, and I do not find it acceptable.
Speaking of things that were badly designed, please check out this thread for my Minotaur fix. What have the critics said, you ask? "If any of my players ask to play a Minotaur, I'm definitely offering this as an alternative to the official version." - EmpactWB "If I ever feel like playing a Minotaur I'll know where to look!" - Undrave "WoTC if you are reading this - please take this guy's advice." - Ferol_Debtor_of_Torm "Really full of win. A minotaur that is actually attractive for more than just melee classes." - Cpt_Micha
Also, check out my recent GENASI variant! If you've ever wished that your Fire Genasi could actually set stuff on fire, your Water Genasi could actually swim, or your Wind Genasi could at least glide, then look no further.
Finally, check out my OPTIONS FOR EVERYONE article, an effort to give unique support to the races that WotC keeps forgetting about. Includes new racial feature options for the Changeling, Deva, Githzerai, Gnoll, Gnome, Goliath, Half-Orc, Kalashtar, Minotaur, Shadar-Kai, Thri-Kreen, Warforged and more!
Sure. Why not? The Halfling is going to be significantly more accurate with it due to the perspective advantage offered by its smaller size. That accuracy advantage is then mechanically modeled by a higher base damage die.
In 3.5, the difference wouldn't be that different with that same blade. The Halfling's die would be the same size as the Ogre's, but it would also have +2 to hit due to size compared to the Ogre, a definite advantage. There is no difference but what the advantage is applied to. I just apply it to damage because that conveniantly cancels out the theoretical damage penalty due to weapon size and results in a simple uniformity straight across based on how a weapon is used.
Do you not get that I see what you think you're trying to do: compensate for size, replacing damage for BAB since that's the way of bounded accuracy. Unfortunately for you, you can't do that in a vacuum. There's a gaping flaw to your approach of this whole concept. And that is bounded accuracy itself.
In order to do what you intend, you would need to reduce a halfling's strength and HPs to account for their small stature. Which the system does not (that is their bonus - it is a bonus by way of lacking a penalty - I really wished you'd keep up). Currently a halfling can have the same 20 strength of any other (medium-sized) PC. And they also do not have any fewer HPs. They are not being penalized.
[And so we continue to be clear here: Halflings are restricted only from the largest of weapons (heavy category).
I am perfectly clear on that, and I do not find it acceptable.
Get used to it. Things are as they are. They aren't going to change. And neither should they (thank heavens). At this point you're just pissin' in the wind, mah'man.
Make a Halfling play like a Halfling. They should be small, and not as strong as Humans, and the game rules should reflect that such a thing is different and not necessarily worse. If you have a thing that you call a Halfling, and none of the game rules reflect its obvious Halfling-like qualities, then why is it even there? Why not just play a Human, and say it's a Halfling?
I don't disagree with any of this. You have convinced yourself that I think something that I don't think.
In case you forgot (because I really dislike multi-quotes), this is in direct response to your statement that no race should ever have a penalty to anything ever. I said that Halflings should have a penalty to Strength, because any impartial observer could tell you that Halflings aren't as strong as Humans.
You can't both agree with me, that Halflings should be Halflings rather than Humans, and disagree that they should have a penalty to Strength. Attempting to hold both views simultaneously would be logically inconsistent.
There's a gaping flaw to your approach of this whole concept. And that is bounded accuracy itself.
I don't see how that's relevant. It is exactly because of bounded accuracy that it is more inappropriate than ever to model the accuracy bonus I described as a bonus to attack rolls rather than damage rolls. If you want to try to say that bounded accuracy puts a hole in the concept, you will need to elaborate.
In order to do what you intend, you would need to reduce a halfling's HP to account for their small stature.
Not at all. See, if we reduce their HP but then give them equal access to the same murdering tools that we give to Humans (and don't decrease their Strength or other damage dealing potential), then the end result is that they kill each other faster than Humans do with similarly proportioned weapons. This is exactly as silly as if back in 3.5 they had give them a size bonus to AC without thinking it through and also giving them a size bonus to attack, which would have resulted in their having a harder time hitting one another than analogous Humans.
(that is their bonus - it is a bonus by way of lacking a penalty
Lacking a penalty is not a bonus. That is silly. Now, I will even readily agree that, in a perfectly simulationist world, the Halfling would have to take a Strength penalty to be realistic. However, this is a concession that we must all make for the good of the game's playability, me gladly and you apprently less so. If the only "hole" you're legitimately able to poke in my concept is one that has nothing at all to do with the concept itself but rather a compeltely separate and unrelated rule concession, then that's going to be something that I'm perfectly okay with.
They are not being penalized.
Are you trying to say that having more limited weapon choices is not a penalty? "You cannot use heavy weapons." is not a penalty?
Huh? You gotta be kidding me now.
I am certainly not. The Halfling has not in any of the versions of D&D that I have played gotten anything that counteracts the penalties for its small size. Any of its bonuses that it could use well as a weapon-using class could be just as well if not better used as a non-weapon-using class or as a restricted-weapon-using class unable to make use of the weapons that the Halflings was already barred from using anyway. The only possible exception to this might be the racial weapon bonuses, which are terrible and should be removed for the game anyway.
You can't both agree with me, that Halflings should be Halflings rather than Humans, and disagree that they should have a penalty to Strength.
Of course I can. All that it requires is realizing that "being a Halfling" is about more than a size penalty to Strength. If it gets all of the other tools that it needs to "be a Halfling", then the minor simulationist inconsistency is easy for me to ignore.
Speaking of things that were badly designed, please check out this thread for my Minotaur fix. What have the critics said, you ask? "If any of my players ask to play a Minotaur, I'm definitely offering this as an alternative to the official version." - EmpactWB "If I ever feel like playing a Minotaur I'll know where to look!" - Undrave "WoTC if you are reading this - please take this guy's advice." - Ferol_Debtor_of_Torm "Really full of win. A minotaur that is actually attractive for more than just melee classes." - Cpt_Micha
Also, check out my recent GENASI variant! If you've ever wished that your Fire Genasi could actually set stuff on fire, your Water Genasi could actually swim, or your Wind Genasi could at least glide, then look no further.
Finally, check out my OPTIONS FOR EVERYONE article, an effort to give unique support to the races that WotC keeps forgetting about. Includes new racial feature options for the Changeling, Deva, Githzerai, Gnoll, Gnome, Goliath, Half-Orc, Kalashtar, Minotaur, Shadar-Kai, Thri-Kreen, Warforged and more!
