|
4 months ago ::
Jan 18, 2013 - 10:14AM
#31
|
Date Joined:
Jul 27, 2009
|
This is a product, not a teaching aid. It's a rulebook, not a textbook.
Fair enough.
But the desire to pick these nits does not stem from my desire to prove people wrong. Seeing a one-handed "longsword" bothers me about as much as spotting an English usage error in the PHB would, and roughly in the same way. It's not gonna make me throw the book down, cancel my DDI subscription, and vow to never roll dice again. But for a split second, I'd be distracted and annoyed. Arguably, fixing a mistake like "longsword" will evoke the same reaction in longtime D&D fans, and also for the same traditional reasons.
The major difference, though, is that they are much more likely to get over it. Like you said, their traditional investment is in the game. The other traditional investment is in history and language.
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Jan 18, 2013 - 10:17AM
#32
|
Date Joined:
Jan 10, 2012
|
Here we go again.
D&D is not a historical simulation. It does not take place in our real world history, so therefore, there is no reason for real world historical terms to be used.
Maybe it was called an 'arming sword' in the real world. But on Faerun, Eberron, Greyhawk, etc, it's called a long sword.
But in the Historical D&D Campaign source books from 2e real world historical terms are used.
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Jan 18, 2013 - 10:24AM
#33
|
- Forum Guide
- Hero Craftsman Gold Medalist
- Master Dungeon Master
Date Joined:
Jun 23, 2005
|
The major difference, though, is that they are much more likely to get over it.
You don't know that. "Where's my longsword?!" might not be as likely to be gotten over as you suspect.
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Jan 18, 2013 - 10:29AM
#34
|
Date Joined:
Jan 15, 2009
|
I think the end result is a game which emulates the experience of Heroic Fantasy/Legend and Myth...and those are really what I prefer, however it does seem to be such a shame to throw history under the bus so early and over things that really dont interfere with the Fantasy or the Legend or the Myth.
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Jan 18, 2013 - 10:40AM
#35
|
Date Joined:
Jul 27, 2009
|
The major difference, though, is that they are much more likely to get over it.
You don't know that. "Where's my longsword?!" might not be as likely to be gotten over as you suspect.
I cite "two-handed sword" as proof that it would. Recall that in AD&D the two-handed sword was a two-handed (duh) slashing and piercing weapon which inflicted 2d6 damage.
I don't see the hordes of AD&D traditionalists up in arms about this.
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Jan 18, 2013 - 11:57AM
#36
|
Date Joined:
Jan 29, 2005
|
So why should "core" include actual weapon/armor names at all outside of flavor text?
Magic Dual Color Test
Show
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Jan 18, 2013 - 12:15PM
#37
|
Date Joined:
Jul 17, 2003
|
I'm all for giving things the proper name... so long as the names used are the proper translations into the vernacular and not trying to pretend that because you're saying "sword" in another language that its somehow more exotic than it is.
- Maille is just "Mesh" in the common tongue of a people who used Chain Mesh armor.
- Laminar is just "Layered" in the common tongue of a people who used Layered plates in their armor.
- Brigandine is just "Soldier's Armor" in the common tongue of a people who had soldiers wearing that style of armor.
- Claymore (spelled claíomh mór in its native tongue) is just "Great/Large Sword" in the common tongue of people who used a big ass sword.
If you're going to present the arms and armor in an accurate history sense it should all be translated into the common tongue of the target market (mainly English in this case) because that's how it would sound to the native speakers of the day.
When a medieval Scottman went to a weaponsmith and said "An féidir liom a cheannach claíomh mór anseo?" what the weaponsmith would understand it as would be "Can I buy a large sword here?" and not "Can I buy a Claymore here?"
An accurate armor table would probably be Padding, Leather, Reinforced Leather, Mesh, Reinforced Mesh, and Plate.
An accurate table for swords would probably be Knife, Small Sword (one-handed only), Large Sword (versatile), Two-Handed Sword and Pole Sword (i.e. a sword blade mounted on the end of a long pole). If you must, throw in specific real world examples after each type (just be aware that most of the names that medievalists use are often just the above descriptors in another language.
A similar list for axes and other weapons with Small indicating one-handed only, Large indicating it can be used with either one or both hands, Two-Handed and Pole would far better capture the feeling of speaking in the vernacular of the time than trying to resurrect words from other languages to describe otherwise common items.
Maybe throw in Double [weapon type] too... while they aren't historically accurate, they do pop up with great frequency in fantasy and deserve to be included for precisely that reason.
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Jan 18, 2013 - 12:24PM
#38
|
Date Joined:
Jan 12, 2012
|
Dagger - 1d4 piercing
Shortsword - 1d6 piercing
Sword (replaces original long sword) - 1d8 slashing
Longsword (replaces the bastard sword) - 1d8/1d10 slashing, versatile
Greatsword - 2d6 slashing, heavy, two-handed
Agree with this completely. Longswords are long, and I don't know how the guys at D&D ever got it so mixed up. I've had several longswords, and their blades have all been between 35" and 40", with long handles for two-handed use.
Leadership and class choice should have NOTHING to do with each other, EVER.
Conflating the two is simply horrendous game design.
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Jan 18, 2013 - 12:26PM
#39
|
Date Joined:
Jan 15, 2009
|
Maybe throw in Double [weapon type] too... while they aren't historically accurate, they do pop up with great frequency in fantasy and deserve to be included for precisely that reason.
I quite agree even though I support historical elements the fantasy shouldnt be dropped or undermined.
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Jan 18, 2013 - 12:27PM
#40
|
Date Joined:
Jan 15, 2009
|
Dagger - 1d4 piercing
Shortsword - 1d6 piercing
Sword (replaces original long sword) - 1d8 slashing
Longsword (replaces the bastard sword) - 1d8/1d10 slashing, versatile
Greatsword - 2d6 slashing, heavy, two-handed
Agree with this completely. Longswords are long, and I don't know how the guys at D&D ever got it so mixed up. I've had several longswords, and their blades have all been between 35" and 40", with long handles for two-handed use.
Its apparently anti-D&D and anti-American pie to name things with a nod ot actual history ... it would reduce profits so much the game will die off.
|
|
|
