Goodman Games

I'm thinking of changing weapon damage to a simple D6 for one handed weapons and a 2D6 for two handed weapons. I'm just kinda tired of EVERYONE running around with either a longsword or a Great Axe.

The change really wouldn't change the damage a whole heck of a lot but it might free people up to choose other weapon types.

Now I'm not 100% sold on the two-handers doing 2D6. Perhaps a single D8 or D10 would be better or even something crazy like roll 2D7 and pick the highest one.

2D6 is nice and simple though and easy to remember.

I was working on a weapons-table for a bronze-age setting the other day and was just considering the pro's and con's of fixed vs. variable weapon damage. (I think I wouldn't mind fixed 1d6/2d6 damage as the judge, but I think my players would prefer the more complicated variable damage.)

Would you allow daggers in a backstab to do 1d10 still? 2d6?

Gameogre wrote:I'm thinking of changing weapon damage to a simple D6 for one handed weapons and a 2D6 for two handed weapons. I'm just kinda tired of EVERYONE running around with either a longsword or a Great Axe.

The change really wouldn't change the damage a whole heck of a lot but it might free people up to choose other weapon types.

Now I'm not 100% sold on the two-handers doing 2D6. Perhaps a single D8 or D10 would be better or even something crazy like roll 2D7 and pick the highest one.

2D6 is nice and simple though and easy to remember.

How very OD&D of you!

I like the idea, actually, especially since the vast majority of a Warrior's damage differential comes from his Combat Die. Now maybe Warrior players will choose more flavorful weapons for their specialist choice, instead of the one with more oomph.

I agree that the 1d6 vs 2d6 model is an easy one, and I like it a lot. While complex tables of damage may be more "realistic" (I say this only making intuitive guesses about weapon damage, since I've never actually fought using any of them) but the end effect is that the players seem to pore over the mathematics and choose weapons simply because they have better numbers.

One thing that OD&D got "right" was the concept that all weapons are pretty much the same, so pick what fits the character and keep moving. One tweak I've done to that was to give fighters d6+1 and magic users d6-1 and everyone else d6. That tends to make up for the fact that fighters can use big swords and wizards only daggers, so when I give "class based" damage anyone can use any weapon.

oncelor wrote:Would you allow daggers in a backstab to do 1d10 still? 2d6?

Just add an extra d6 to their regular damage.

How about this?

When using a melee or ranged weapon each class do the following damage plus applicable modifiers:

Warriors and Dwarves: 1d8
Halfling, Theives, Clerics and Elves: 1d6
Wizards and 0-Level Characters: 1d4

ajtheronin wrote:How about this?

When using a melee or ranged weapon each class do the following damage plus applicable modifiers:

Warriors and Dwarves: 1d8
Halfling, Theives, Clerics and Elves: 1d6
Wizards and 0-Level Characters: 1d4

I actually like this as a jumping off point. I do some weapon training and the one thing that intrigued me when I first started was how the damage from a weapon is more related to the way you move your body then the weapon itself. Want to cut bamboo with a katana. You better strike correctly or it's not going to cut it. Doesn't matter how sharp the sword. With that being said, though, a dull sword is not going to cut as well no matter how effectively you strike.

Which is why I like this for a jumping off point as you can alter the damage for better quality weapons. A superior crafted sword in the hands of a warrior or dwarf might do 2d4. In the hands of a thief 2d3. With a better average damage it would make it worthwhile to upgrade a weapon providing incentive to spend the money that players find during play. But it still stays in the realm that it is the player doing the damage more so than the weapon.

So would you raise the damage for two-handed weapons? As in 2d8 for a two hander? Or perhaps a d10?

And what do you consider to be two-handed weapons? I honestly don't have any training with european styled weapons so is a long sword a one handed weapon? Or is it two? A katana is two. It can be used one-handed but your really not going to see that often except in some films. Where do you place the line on what is a one-hander and what is a two-hander?

With just a quick browse over the equipment list in the Core book, I would think javelins, spears and staffs would all be two-handers dependent on the size of the particular weapon and the person using it. In the 2 to 3 foot range these weapons could be used one-handed. But when you start hitting the four foot mark they start turning over to two-handers to be used effectively. Can they be used with one hand, sure, but the true power and effectiveness is with both hands.

Personally I am leaning towards just the original damage stats as quoted above for all weapons, no matter if it is one hand or two, because all weapons are equally as lethal when wielded properly. Are there any good arguments for not doing so? As in, am I not accounting for something that should increase a given weapons lethality beyond the class skill of the wielder?

-Stretch

Just stumbled upon this thread.

I was actually kicking around a similar concept, but it kind of diverges from the classic game feel and embraces more of the dice chain.

I was going through a couple of old weapons books put out long ago, and used to love the variety of weapons back in the day.

So, my idea was to make only a select 4 or 5 groups of weapons types, like based on damage dice at first. So it gives a variety of weapons, and you can just rule it a weapon based on the damage die that belongs to that group. Classes would list at what groups they are proficient in, and then any specific exclusions/exceptions.

d4 Weapons: Dagger
d6 Weapons: Staff, Short sword, etc
d8 Weapons: Longsword
d10 Weapons: Polearms
d12 Weapons: Lance

This approaches the concept of what classes can do what kind of damage, how well they can hit, and what they are proficient in from a different manner. My idea on this basically would say that a Wizard could never do more than 1d6 with a weapon proficiently, and if he tried to attack with a weapon more deadly than that, he would go down one dice in the chain as the damage group progressed. So, if he tried attacking with a glaive guisarme, he would probably be attacking on a d14.

I love the idea of making a two handed weapon 2 damage dice of that type, though.

Another thought I had for two handed attacks with a weapon designed to be one handed was the attack die goes up one in the chain, and the damage is normal.

Stretch wrote: I actually like this as a jumping off point. I do some weapon training and the one thing that intrigued me when I first started was how the damage from a weapon is more related to the way you move your body then the weapon itself. Want to cut bamboo with a katana. You better strike correctly or it's not going to cut it. Doesn't matter how sharp the sword. With that being said, though, a dull sword is not going to cut as well no matter how effectively you strike.

Which is why I like this for a jumping off point as you can alter the damage for better quality weapons. A superior crafted sword in the hands of a warrior or dwarf might do 2d4. In the hands of a thief 2d3. With a better average damage it would make it worthwhile to upgrade a weapon providing incentive to spend the money that players find during play. But it still stays in the realm that it is the player doing the damage more so than the weapon.

So would you raise the damage for two-handed weapons? As in 2d8 for a two hander? Or perhaps a d10?

And what do you consider to be two-handed weapons? I honestly don't have any training with european styled weapons so is a long sword a one handed weapon? Or is it two? A katana is two. It can be used one-handed but your really not going to see that often except in some films. Where do you place the line on what is a one-hander and what is a two-hander?

With just a quick browse over the equipment list in the Core book, I would think javelins, spears and staffs would all be two-handers dependent on the size of the particular weapon and the person using it. In the 2 to 3 foot range these weapons could be used one-handed. But when you start hitting the four foot mark they start turning over to two-handers to be used effectively. Can they be used with one hand, sure, but the true power and effectiveness is with both hands.

Personally I am leaning towards just the original damage stats as quoted above for all weapons, no matter if it is one hand or two, because all weapons are equally as lethal when wielded properly. Are there any good arguments for not doing so? As in, am I not accounting for something that should increase a given weapons lethality beyond the class skill of the wielder?

-Stretch

I wouldn't change the damage for two handed weapons but if would be pressed to do it I just would add 1.5 STR bonus to the damage round up (so someone with STR bonus of +1 would do +2 with a two handed weapon).

A superior crafted sword would be a boring, non-magical +1 weapon.

Cthulhuoid wrote:So, my idea was to make only a select 4 or 5 groups of weapons types, like based on damage dice at first. So it gives a variety of weapons, and you can just rule it a weapon based on the damage die that belongs to that group. Classes would list at what groups they are proficient in, and then any specific exclusions/exceptions.

d4 Weapons: Dagger
d6 Weapons: Staff, Short sword, etc
d8 Weapons: Longsword
d10 Weapons: Polearms
d12 Weapons: Lance

Nice post! How 'bout we bring the dice chain back into it...

d3 - d4 - d5 - d6 - d7 - d8 - d10 - d12 - d14

...and have the above damage be the correct die for most of the classes, but fighters move the chain up one die (e.g. a longsword moves from d8 to d10) and wizards move the chain down one die (e.g. a dagger moves from d4 to d3).

Best of both ideas!

The universal d6 damage die is a good solution. Making two-handed weapons 2d6 is likely to result in your players selecting those weapon types if their weapon choices are already driven by damage die.

I generally chose a weapon for its flavor, but I have always found d4 weapons to be very unattractive. I think the original warhammer in AD&D was d4+1... That always bugged me!

I actually thought DCC did a good job with the damage die really - they upgraded the spear to d8. I think rather than categories, there should be a variety of weapons with mostly d6 or d8, a couple d4 weapons that offer some other advantage (dual-wielding or melee/thrown), and a couple d10 options with limits, perhaps a penalty to initiative or limit on attacks per round. The d8 weapons would be the more martial weapons (longsword, battleaxe, warhammer) that a fighter or cleric would most likely select, and the d6 would be the more general use/non-frontline options (short sword, club, staff).

I think DCC RPG actually is pretty close to what I describe. Some players are just a little obsessed with damage numbers, and I wonder if they would be happy with a universal d6 system. Maybe offer a special weapon as treasure that isn't a longsword or whatever. Of course, then they might complain that you gave a weapon that no one wants. Good luck!

Whatever type of weapon is it as long as it is effective for fighting during the games, it would be great.

Big fan of this. What about adding tradeoffs to the mix. e.g., Daggers don't do a lot of damage, and you need to get close, but they're fast! Polearms have ranged but not real useful up close or for parry. Great weapons great for lots of damage but slow.

I ran an OD&D game like this once, with class-based damage dice. It was... pretty boring, frankly.

Weapons with longer than 5' reach tend to be the most prized nowadays, so there's that. And ranged weapons.

I guess the big thing with this is, you can get really detailed and have a crazy simulation a la weapon speed / initiative from Supplement I / AD&D, if you want, but it will slow the game to a crawl; conversely, having everyone roll d6 damage is super fast, but rather boring. Depends on what you and your players enjoy doing. I think the variable damage dice strikes a decent happy medium between some flavor/variability and ease/speed.

I have never really held a "real" sword in a fighting type combat... But I have played a lot of tennis in my life.

It is funny - even a slight change in the racquet affects my game. Also, when I hit backhand I alternate from one hand to two. I usually have more power that way. I seem better able to place the ball with accuracy. But using two hands limits the spin I can place on the ball.

I would think weapon characteristics would work much the same. A different weapon has a different weight. The difference may be subtle but could affect your performance and effectiveness greatly.

In most RPG systems I like to have a preferred weapon for each character. They can change them between adventures if they wish to use any other items they have reduced effectiveness in either damage or skill (to hit) or both. If you break your sword the replacement (unless mass manufactured) doesn't work exactly the same. At least for a short while during the getting used to things phase.

Cheers,
Michael

If you have never watched the video's in this series I highly recommend...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IGs36FPB_yo

Cheers,
Michael

Interesting post. I think the idea of reducing damage for class might be a problem if you are emulating Appendix N source material rather than D&D. Some wizards are good with swords etc..Gandalf?

Overall though I like the idea of smoothing out the damage dice variation. It does become a bit boring, players always choosing the best mathematical choice unless the item is magical.

I might look into considering this. I have always used variable weapon damage and always the same thing happens