Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Seldriss 08-06-05, 03:27 PM	INITIATIVE I / WEAPON SPEED FACTOR To keep the spirit of the good old time of weapon speed factors (2nd Edition), I developped a new speed factor system for Edition 3.5. Basically, the weapons are classified by type : Unarmed, light, one hand and two hands. Each type gives an initiative modifier. Unarmed/Natural Weapons : Initiative -0 Light Weapons : Initiative –1 Dagger, kukri, light hammer, light mace, rapier, sap, short sword, small axe... Range weapons : Thrown dagger, darts, shuriken, sling... 1 Hand Weapons : Initiative –2 Battle axe, broad sword, long sword, morning star, warhammer... Range Weapons : Bolas, javelin, light crossbow, short bow, composite short bow, thrown spear... 2 Hands Weapons : Initiative –3 Bastard sword, pole arms, quarterstaff, spear, two-handed sword... Range Weapons : Long bow, composite long bow, heavy crossbow, crossbow, heavy thrown weapons... Modifiers The character can use his Dexterity modifier or his Reflex base ST, whichever the higher (not both). Some feats can affect the initiative, such as Improved Initiative (+4), Quick Recognition (+2), Thug (+2)... Any Comments ?
Mind Rogue 08-06-05, 10:49 PM	So how does this work? If you simply subtract your modifier when you roll for initiative, I can forsee several problems with the realism you are trying to add. First off, while you could theoretically swing smaller and lighter weapons faster, the longer weapons will have better reach, thereby allowing the trained warriors to actually strike first, and since the initiative system really simply measures who gets to strike first rather than how many strikes you can make, which means you are actually having the opposite result that you should have. The second problem would be what happens if I switch weapons? Do I move up the queue, allowing me to strike before somebody who normally goes first? This would be absurd since no other factor in the game allows you to move up in the queue. Can I move down it by drawing a different weapon? This is also problematic. If this is a penalty added each round, you are adding a new layer of bookkeeping that has to be done, and it can be a pain to figure out who now goes before whom, which will cause players to accidentally be missed more often. You also thereby introduce the problems of people moving up or down the queue. The other thing is that, again, the heavier weapons are also usually the longer ones, which should theoretically give them an initial initiative bonus because the extra reach allows them to strike first. In short, you're complicating things by trying to add realism that isn't going to show up.
weasel fierce 08-07-05, 12:36 AM	Maybe adopt something like Runequests Strike Ranks, where weapons have a mod based on both speed, handling and reach.
Seldriss 08-07-05, 02:00 AM	@ MInd Rogue : Weapon Reach : Honestly, that's not something i really take into consideration. I know it might be important for some players, but so far we never used that element in my group. Weapons speed factor on the contrary, yes, since 1st edition. For weapon length, we just consider it in some situations, according to common sense. Initiative Queue : As we roll for initiative at each round, there is no queue. So if a character changes weapon, well, his new intiative is affected accordingly. About the extra math, there is none, as on the character sheet, in the weapons section, we have a column for speed factor, already modified.
Dunelord 08-07-05, 03:51 AM	What happens when you weild two weapons? What happens when you switch weapons in the middle your attacks? Do spell casters have a similar limitaion?
Temrek 08-07-05, 08:26 AM	Why should you act slower if you weild a two handed weapon but does something other then attacking such as drinking a potion?
Seldriss 08-07-05, 12:31 PM	What happens when you weild two weapons? What happens when you switch weapons in the middle your attacks? Do spell casters have a similar limitaion? If you hold 2 weapons, then you use the higher speed factor. But most of the time, 2 weapons wielders use same weapon (dagger+dagger, or shortsword+short sword). If you switch weapons, it probably means you will use the new one on your next round, so it will affect next initiative. Once again, we roll for initiative at each round. Yes, spellcasters have a similar limitation, according to the level of the spell. Cf. other thread, Initiative II/Casting Time.
Seldriss 08-07-05, 12:32 PM	Why should you act slower if you weild a two handed weapon but does something other then attacking such as drinking a potion? Well, if you dont use your weapon, and just do something else, then the speed factor of the weapon is obviously not used.
Seldriss 08-07-05, 12:41 PM	It seems to me that people are surprised by this rule. Like if they never used weapons speed factor. I know it doesn't exist in 3rd edition, but it did in 1st and 2nd edition. And it was all fine. At least for my group.
Temrek 08-07-05, 02:03 PM	I am not suprised, I just dont think it makes sense. Especially where weapon length is concerned.
weasel fierce 08-07-05, 02:07 PM	If you are adopting AD&D style rules, just use weapon reach as it appears there. Longer reach gives you first strike, in a round of charge combat
Dunelord 08-07-05, 09:10 PM	I played 2nd, and remember it. I just was wondernig how you where going to run it.
Seldriss 08-08-05, 08:24 AM	Well, like i said... d20 + Dexterity modifier or Reflex base ST (whichever higher) + Related feats (Improved Initiative, Quick reconnoiter, Thug...) - Weapon speed factor (by type, unarmed/0, light/-1, 1 hand/-2, 2 hands/-3) We roll for initiative at each round, each side rolls 1d20 and each participant applies his own modifiers. For weapon reach, like i said, we don't use this factor, or only in a few situations, like charge (as you said Weasel), or some duels (my duelist was using that).
Dunelord 08-08-05, 09:03 AM	Would that end up canceling each other out to large extent, with the reflex saves and the weapon speeds?
Seldriss 08-08-05, 09:21 AM	Would that end up canceling each other out to large extent, with the reflex saves and the weapon speeds? That's possible. It depends on the Dex or Reflex bonus and the weapon type. Obviously, a charcter with low Dex, bad Reflex and slow weapon will have a bad initiative. Another character with high Dex or high Reflex and a fast weapon will have the initative most of the time. Hey, well, when you are fast, you are fast... Example: A fighter 6, with Dex 12 (+1) and base Reflex +2 would take his Reflex modifier, so +2. Let's say he is using a longsword, speed factor -2. In this case, yes, the bonus and malus cancel each other. Other example: A rogue 5 with Dex 17 (+3) and base Reflex +4 will use his Reflex of +4. If he is fighting with a dagger (SF-1), his total modifier is +3. If he has Improved Initiative he gets +7.
Dunelord 08-08-05, 06:10 PM	That's possible. It depends on the Dex or Reflex bonus and the weapon type. Obviously, a charcter with low Dex, bad Reflex and slow weapon will have a bad initiative. Another character with high Dex or high Reflex and a fast weapon will have the initative most of the time. Hey, well, when you are fast, you are fast... Example: A fighter 6, with Dex 12 (+1) and base Reflex +2 would take his Reflex modifier, so +2. Let's say he is using a longsword, speed factor -2. In this case, yes, the bonus and malus cancel each other. Other example: A rogue 5 with Dex 17 (+3) and base Reflex +4 will use his Reflex of +4. If he is fighting with a dagger (SF-1), his total modifier is +3. If he has Improved Initiative he gets +7. So classes that tend to have low reflex saves, low dexterity scores, and use large weapons take a power hit? The only class the really has all 3 of those is the fighter, and why on earth wouldy ou need to take down the power level of a fighter?
Seldriss 08-09-05, 09:48 AM	Well, the goal is not to power down the fighter. Nothing prevents a fighter to have a good Dexterity score. Some fighters choose heavy armors and heavy weapons, but not all of them. Some others prefer to be light and fast, like swashbucklers, duelists, etc. That's a matter of choice. And with all the feats the fighter receives, Improved Initiative is not difficult to get. Being strong and having a heavy damage weapon doesn't make him faster, unles he decides so, then he takes the appropriate feats. I don't see any problem in that. My players neither.
Dunelord 08-09-05, 06:44 PM	Well, the goal is not to power down the fighter. Nothing prevents a fighter to have a good Dexterity score. Some fighters choose heavy armors and heavy weapons, but not all of them. Some others prefer to be light and fast, like swashbucklers, duelists, etc. That's a matter of choice. And with all the feats the fighter receives, Improved Initiative is not difficult to get. Being strong and having a heavy damage weapon doesn't make him faster, unles he decides so, then he takes the appropriate feats. I don't see any problem in that. My players neither. Well being the goal or not being the goal doesn't change that it would. After all the classes that have high reflex saves are going to be having a +12 to inative at 20th level. The toneing down the wizards and such is good, but it still puts the fighter, and swashbucklers and duelists AREN'T fighters, at a lower power level.
Seldriss 08-09-05, 11:07 PM	Hmm All right, i understand your point... But i still want to use a weapon speed factor system. Apparently, your objection is more about the Reflex base than about the weapon type speed. So what would you use if not reflex? Dex modifier ? But it doesn't increase with level, so i don't think so. Level adjustment? Too mu8ch as from 4th level characters wouldn't have any penalty. So what would you use?
Gilean 08-10-05, 09:40 AM	A dex-based skill called reaction, for example. Class skill for characters with high BAB, rogues and monks.
Seldriss 08-10-05, 11:53 AM	A dex-based skill called reaction, for example. Class skill for characters with high BAB, rogues and monks. Good idea...
Dunelord 08-10-05, 12:02 PM	It isn't like fighters have anything worth a damn to spend skill points on.
Lina_Inverse 08-10-05, 01:20 PM	Hmm All right, i understand your point... But i still want to use a weapon speed factor system. Apparently, your objection is more about the Reflex base than about the weapon type speed. So what would you use if not reflex? Dex modifier ? But it doesn't increase with level, so i don't think so. Level adjustment? Too mu8ch as from 4th level characters wouldn't have any penalty. So what would you use? why should initive increase with level?
Seldriss 08-10-05, 01:33 PM	Hmm... Any other suggestions, anyone? So far, i think i will keep my system like it is...
Lina_Inverse 08-11-05, 01:33 AM	you did know bigger weapons are faster irl right?so what reason is there to make them slower here unless its a game balence reason.....
weasel fierce 08-11-05, 01:36 AM	So you say, a claymore or a pike can be used to strike/thrust and readied for a second blow, faster than you can a rapier or dagger ?
Gilean 08-11-05, 02:53 AM	you did know bigger weapons are faster irl right?so what reason is there to make them slower here unless its a game balence reason.....Care to elaborate?
Lina_Inverse 08-11-05, 03:47 AM	Care to elaborate? E=MC2.you can apply more strengh to a larger weapon because it has more mass therefore by definition each swing goes out the gate faster.
weasel fierce 08-11-05, 04:20 AM	That has nothing to do with the time to bring the weapon BACK under control, and ready it to block, parry or strike again. If you swing a 10 pound sword, with a lot of force, that force is pulling /away/ from you.
Gilean 08-11-05, 04:25 AM	E=MC2.you can apply more strengh to a larger weapon because it has more mass therefore by definition each swing goes out the gate faster.It goes faster, which is bad for controlling the blade. The force needed to stop or ull back the blow is larger with heavier weapon.
Lina_Inverse 08-11-05, 05:08 AM	That has nothing to do with the time to bring the weapon BACK under control, and ready it to block, parry or strike again. If you swing a 10 pound sword, with a lot of force, that force is pulling /away/ from you. however,the weapon moveing faster will win initive on the first swing no?this is why weapons DONT affect it,beyond it being tedious.the big ones swing faster midattack,the little ones get under control faster in the end its wash and did i mention tedious?
Seldriss 08-11-05, 12:19 PM	you did know bigger weapons are faster irl right?so what reason is there to make them slower here unless its a game balence reason..... I don't agree. A bastard sword is slower than a dagger. And in old edition, the bigger the weapons were, the slower they were. And the penalty was much worse than the one i am implementing. And nobody was complaining about it. Of course, i am conscient that many players were not using weapons speed factors (same for weapon type vs armor) but still...
weasel fierce 08-11-05, 01:25 PM	You are confusing velocity and power, with maneuverability. Striking with a dagger just requires you to make a stab. Striking with a bastard sword requires you to pull the blade back for leverage, then swing it.
Lord Welkerfan 08-11-05, 02:10 PM	Sean K. Reynolds has carefully analyzed weapon speed factors using initiative here: http://seankreynolds.com/rpgfiles/rants/weaponspeeds.html Enjoy. Also, if you are implementing weapon speed factors in order to add more realism to the game, you can't ignore weapon reach. A dagger is swung faster than a longsword, but has less reach, so the wielder needs to maneuver in closer, attack, and get back out. This takes time. A longsword is slower, but has a larger reach, so the wielder can simply swing without needing to move significantly closer to the target. So, while swinging and repositioning his sword takes more time, the lack of need to get within reach saves time, making the effective time to attack relatively equal to that of the dagger wielder. Verb. Sap.
Seldriss 08-11-05, 08:35 PM	Also, if you are implementing weapon speed factors in order to add more realism to the game, you can't ignore weapon reach. Yes i can. Because i dont need it. Same for my players. Although i understand and appreciate the suggestion of weapon reach, i don't plan to use it. This thread is about weapon speed factors, and i am just asking opinions about the modifiers i propose...
Ulorian 08-11-05, 08:47 PM	however,the weapon moveing faster will win initive on the first swing no?this is why weapons DONT affect it,beyond it being tedious.the big ones swing faster midattack,the little ones get under control faster in the end its wash and did i mention tedious? If you're going to bring physics into this, don't forget to consider p=mv.. momentum. It takes more effort (i.e. more time) to get a heavy weapon going. That's why a dagger is faster.
Seldriss 08-13-05, 05:40 PM	Anyway, in the old edition, the large weapons were always much slower than the small ones, i don't see why it should change now. I don't think the laws of physics or logic changed since then ;)
Lord Welkerfan 08-13-05, 10:05 PM	Because the reach of the large weapons counteracts the speed of the small ones. The small ones have to get into reach, which takes time. Big ones don't, so the slower speed is made up for. But you asked about the system presented. First off, you are dealing with initiative, which is a concrete system for determining reaction time. This system adds other factors to it, which not only widens what it represents, but also makes it less effective at all of them. First problem: Quote: Originally Posted by Temrek Why should you act slower if you weild a two handed weapon but does something other then attacking such as drinking a potion? Well, if you dont use your weapon, and just do something else, then the speed factor of the weapon is obviously not used. You are already giving exceptions to the rule. What if I drink a potion first, then swing my greatsword? Do I take the iniative penalty on the potion, even though they really aren't applicable yet. If not, then do I split my actions between two spots on the order? To make the system more effective, you need to make initiative modifiers for every action in the game. You also need to explain what happens when different things have different modifiers. Second problem: What if I am full attacking and I first throw two daggers, then a javelin? What happens? Another thing. Modifying initiative doesn't make you attack faster. You still get the same number of attacks, so in essence, the dagger is still just as slow as the sword. Sorry if I sounded rude, I didn't mean to.
Gilean 08-15-05, 08:57 AM	Reach weapons have reach. That partially takes care of the problem.
Seldriss 08-15-05, 09:57 AM	Because the reach of the large weapons counteracts the speed of the small ones. The small ones have to get into reach, which takes time. Big ones don't, so the slower speed is made up for. But you asked about the system presented. First off, you are dealing with initiative, which is a concrete system for determining reaction time. This system adds other factors to it, which not only widens what it represents, but also makes it less effective at all of them. First problem: You are already giving exceptions to the rule. What if I drink a potion first, then swing my greatsword? Do I take the iniative penalty on the potion, even though they really aren't applicable yet. If not, then do I split my actions between two spots on the order? To make the system more effective, you need to make initiative modifiers for every action in the game. You also need to explain what happens when different things have different modifiers. Second problem: What if I am full attacking and I first throw two daggers, then a javelin? What happens? Another thing. Modifying initiative doesn't make you attack faster. You still get the same number of attacks, so in essence, the dagger is still just as slow as the sword. Sorry if I sounded rude, I didn't mean to. Well, i don't really present exceptions. I just mentionned the two main factors, combat and spell casting. But of course i use other modifiers for other types of actions, like deplacement, potions, drawing/switching items, activation of magic items, and even talk (if considered as too long). I just didn't mention them, to focus on the two main elements, the weapons and the spells. About the multiples actions, well, the modifiers add, each additional actions being delayed in the chain of actions of the round. Ex: If a character wants to shoot with his bow and then do something else, like switching weapons to draw his bastard sword, the attack with the bow is first determined, takes its place in the round, and the weapon switch will be effective later in the round, according to the modifier. d20 (let's say 11/20), +Dexmod (let's say 16/+3), +Improved Initiative (+4), -bow speed factor (-2), for a total of 16. Switching weapons, drawing sword: -3. If a monster acts at 15 or 14, he attacks the character while he is not yet ready with his sword. Of course, in some situations he might have an attack of opportunity. About your reference about being rude or not, nobody thought you were. We are discussing about a topic, that's all, no worries ;)
Lord Welkerfan 08-15-05, 10:36 AM	Another problem comes with twf. If I am wielding two weapons, what modifiers do I use? If they stack together, I should always carry a dagger in my other hand to get the bonus and just not attack with it to avoid the twf penalties. If they don't stack, which one do I use?
Seldriss 08-15-05, 11:23 AM	Another problem comes with twf. If I am wielding two weapons, what modifiers do I use? If they stack together, I should always carry a dagger in my other hand to get the bonus and just not attack with it to avoid the twf penalties. If they don't stack, which one do I use? You use the higher weapon speed factor. Ex: Dagger (-1) and longsword (-2), you have a -2 modifier.
Nimda 08-15-05, 12:30 PM	Just a few comments from the new guy... First off I seriously dought any of you has ever been in a situation that requires the use of a weapon to defend your self and / or kill another living thing. I have, and your talk of weapon speed and anything else for "initiative" is rediculous. There are literally hundreds of things that go on that could affect who does what, who moves when, who strikes first, etc...so saying that your weapon speed rule adds realism is just plain wrong. As for realism, that comes from the GMs ability to "draw" a picture for the player and the players ability to use his / her imagination to actually capture what it is that the GM is trying to convey. If you people need to worry about weapon speed and complicate a simple thing like initiative (only there to provide order in the real life chaos of battle) to provide realism, may I suggest that you take up console or computer gaming full time? You obviously don't have what it takes to actually play this game the way it was ment...
weasel fierce 08-15-05, 12:53 PM	Well A: You would say then, that it makes no difference at all, to your speed and readiness, if you have a knife or a two handed sword ? B: If you want simplicity, ignore ALL modifiers to initiative.
Nimda 08-15-05, 01:58 PM	Haven't had time to figure out how to quote yet so... A) Yes it does make a difference, but for the game why complicate things and toss in things like math? Instead of worrying about that in the game, try and improve the atmosphere, paint the picture more...the players are the "good" guys in a movie. Make things come alive for them as they are also the audience for your movie. I can think of lots of things that really would affect your real initiative...ability (how much training or experience you have), strength (can you control the weapon easily or is it to heavy for you), dexterity (are you all thumbs or can you dump a glass of water and catch it back in the same glass before it hits the ground), were you surprised, did you surprise the enemy, is it dark or light, is it raining, is it dusty and blowing, is there room to swing your weapon, etc.... B) Actually a good point...I probably would except for the feats...thats a big commitment to use a feat for that advantage...but I look at the "roll" for initiative as an all inclusive representation of the random elements that can affect our reactions in these situations. Thats really how it happens. Your place in line is random based on how you reacted and recognized the situation at hand. Again, why complicate it...I prefer to spend my time making it all "look" better and "feel" better...
Seldriss 08-15-05, 02:50 PM	Just a few comments from the new guy... Who are you talking about? Which new guy? First off I seriously dought any of you has ever been in a situation that requires the use of a weapon to defend your self and / or kill another living thing. I have, and your talk of weapon speed and anything else for "initiative" is rediculous. There are literally hundreds of things that go on that could affect who does what, who moves when, who strikes first, etc...so saying that your weapon speed rule adds realism is just plain wrong. As for realism, that comes from the GMs ability to "draw" a picture for the player and the players ability to use his / her imagination to actually capture what it is that the GM is trying to convey. If you people need to worry about weapon speed and complicate a simple thing like initiative (only there to provide order in the real life chaos of battle) to provide realism, may I suggest that you take up console or computer gaming full time? You obviously don't have what it takes to actually play this game the way it was ment... All right... Let's not even talk about this initiative stuff, but about some other things, much more important : Respect and consideration of others. How can you judge other players or game masters by just a few lines in a forum? For your information, i am playing this game for more than 20 years. As a player and a DM. And many other people here are the same. However, i don't consider the value of a player or a DM on his game, or his years of gaming. And i would even less allow myself to easy, fast and arbitrary judgements just by a forum. I am submitting some ideas on these forums to discuss them with other players and DMs. I don't look for compliments ("Oh.... What a brilliant idea!"), but for comments, criticism, to consider things from another point of view. The goal is to be objective, to progress. That's the point of communication. But i am not posting either to get flamed. Your comment is very judgemental. And very rude. You might not like technical discussions about rules. That i would understand. You might focus the game on roleplaying aspects, like the personnalities of the characters, their background, the history and politics of the world where they evolve, economics, religion, and so on. Well, guess what? Me too. And i am sure that's the case also for most of the people who come here. So i don't see what gives you the right to judge us and ban us to video games supposely because we don't have "what it needs to play the game". We might play the game like you, or in a different way, we might use some rules you don't. So what? We are players and DMs like you. And this place is a forum, meant for discussion. Everybody can have his own opinion, and express it. But within the limits of respect and courtesy. We all deserve respect. You, me, all of us. Try to be more open-minded, and not to judge things or people you don't know. Grow up...
Mind Rogue 08-15-05, 03:41 PM	Okay, ignoring Nimda's rude comment, and Seldriss's equally rude retort, there might actually be a glimmer of truth in what Nimda is trying to say. Most of us here probably haven't had much experience in what it takes to strike first, and there is much more then what you would think. Personally, most of my experience is gleamed from stick fights and snowball fights. One thing that my little personal experience tells me, however, is that you wanted the longest stick that you could wield comfortably because it would allow you to reach farther and thus hit first. Likewise, those with longer arms did better. Because stronger people tend to have longer arms and sticks, but their extra strength allows them to put extra energy into their swings, the swing speeds cancel out, and what matters is overall reach and skill. Since we are now also throwing in knife fighters, who are swinging faster than normal because their weapon is a lot smaller, have the advantage of being able to react faster when they are surprised, but they pay the cost of having to wait until their opponent is closer before they can attack, and they usually have to lunge farther then the sword fighter, which takes longer to return, thus evening out. Also, the point of reach weapons having reach is moot because there are also a number of pretty lengthy weapons, such as the halberd and greataxe, that are much longer than normal weapons, but don't quite qualify for reach. Also, what does it mean for a dagger to be "faster" than a sword? If it means they can get more attacks, then this system isn't working because they are not getting any more attacks. If it means that they should be able to strike first, then that is countered in the first round by not-quite-reach weapons being theoretically able to hit you before you can close in all of the way. Overall, I think that Sean K. Reynolds does a pretty good job at debunking both of those reasons (and others), and Lord Welkerfan did a pretty good job of providing a link to that page.
Seldriss 08-15-05, 04:36 PM	Okay, ignoring Nimda's rude comment, and Seldriss's equally rude retort ? My retort was rude ?
MoogleEmpMog 08-15-05, 08:37 PM	Knife fighters, when/if they are faster, aren't faster because their weapons are smaller. They're faster because their weapons are stabbing weapons; a good stabbing short sword, such as the Roman gladius, is "faster" than a dagger. A "heavy" (7 lbs. being about the outer limits for any sword not custom-forged for a massively powerful wielder) weapon's momentum shouldn't have a negative impact on a trained fighter's speed. In fact, most (though not all) fighting styles based around the use of relatively heavy two-handed slashing weapons take advantage of the momentum by directing one slash into another. More momentum, up to a certain point, actually INCREASES the speed of the weapon if it's a slashing or bludgeoning weapon. :eek: Obviously, if two warriors of comparable skill, standing 2 ft. away from each other draw their weapons and attack, the one with the gladius will hit before the one with the claymore. If the two start out 10 ft. away, the gladius-wielder probably can't attack the claymore-wielder AT ALL, realistically, because the latter is perfectly capable of maintaining a constant wall of spinning metal between himself and his opponent. In fact, if the two tried to swing their weapons after, say, a single 6-second combat round, the claymore-wielder, if trained in a momentum-based style, could probably swing faster. Of course, the gladius-wielder wouldn't be 'swinging,' he would be 'stabbing,' and thus taking less time. If you want to use 2e weapon speeds, be my guest, but they were never in the least realistic, nor particularly good for gameplay. If I were to use weapon speeds for "realism," I'd probably go with, off the top of my head: Piercing 0 Slashing -2 Bludgeoning -3 Undersized -2 Light 0 One-Handed -1 Large 0 Oversized -2
Mind Rogue 08-15-05, 08:41 PM	? My retort was rude ? Generally, if you believe someone is being overly critical of you, you should pull them aside rather than blasting them in public (here, this means to PM them). Also, telling someone to grow up is also usually considered disrespectful, particularly when you know that they have had to fight for their life before. I also find your comment of how you've been playing for 20 years, but how you don't care how long someone's been playing important, to be kind of strange and out of the place. You also go into a long sardonic string of him flaming you, and then turn the torch right back to him. Overall, I think it was more response than necessary considering that if it was slightly reworded it would be a valid arguement. While poorly worded, there is a little bit of element with the flame. There are more things that go into initiative than weapon size and dexterity, and apparently Nimda thinks that some of these are more important than the weapon and should recieve preferential treatment, or else they should mostly be ignored because using them would complicate things greatly. As for two-handed weapons being slower, I have just one word: quarterstaff. For one-handed ones being faster: warhammer or heavy mace. Light weapons aren't even that much faster: light shield (kills your AC for a round cause you can't get it back in time). Just some examples that 'light' weapons aren't always faster, and two-handed weapons aren't always slower.
Nimda 08-15-05, 10:37 PM	Everyone is making good points...including Seldriss. I did get to critical. I appologize to everyone. On to the question at hand...my opinion is that the initiative is fine as is, simply because there are to many variables that can go into it. Weapon speed is just as important as weather conditions as is footing as is lighting as is barriers...the gladius/claymore example was good. I am a person who can over analyze things and I have on many occasions. As for this initiative "thing", I feel that, as I have stated, it is only really useful for the GM to control the chaos of the encounter so that everyone is not trying to "go first". There are no bonuses for getting the kill, and I don't think there should be (for another time), so if I don't go before my buddy does and he gets the killing blow that just means the baddie is dead and I'm alive. Good for our side! We could all write volumes on this but it all comes down to one little thing really...play like you wanna play...my group doen't fret over initiative. If Seldriss' group like doing weapon speed then more power to'em and kill a few for me! Sorry to get everyone going but I just don't beleive initiative in the game is where I should be spending my time...been there done that and it is all just to fast paced and chaotic anyway...had some close calls and some "flawless" victories enough to become an advocate for the chaos theory! :)
weasel fierce 08-15-05, 10:42 PM	There are tons of things that can affect initiative, most of which can be either abstracted into the D20 roll. However, most of them are strictly situational, and thus can be summed up by the DM saying "you get a +2" or whatnot. Weapon speed and reach, are constants, just like your dexterity is, however, and thus can be quantified. Whether they should is up to the individual gamer :)
Seldriss 08-16-05, 08:17 AM	To schematize, most of the light weapons are fast but have a short reach. And most of the large weapon have slow speed factor but good reach. There are exceptions, of course. Which means fast weapons still have a disavantage to reach an opponent with a longer weapon. And large weapons might be slow but offer a better protection, threatening a larger area. In short, do you think a weapon's speed factor and reach should cancel each other?
Lord Welkerfan 08-16-05, 10:21 AM	To schematize, most of the light weapons are fast but have a short reach. And most of the large weapon have slow speed factor but good reach. There are exceptions, of course. Which means fast weapons still have a disavantage to reach an opponent with a longer weapon. And large weapons might be slow but offer a better protection, threatening a larger area. In short, do you think a weapon's speed factor and reach should cancel each other? Reply With Quote Yes. That is pretty much it. Reach cancels speed.
Grimdarach 08-16-05, 05:34 PM	First, Hi guys! Knows that I'm one of the long time Seldriss player. I'm french and Errrrrrr! That pretty much all the important things to say. :cool: About that "speed factor" business. First, this is not a real "realism" question. What is important is the feeling. Reality in an RPG game is just a feeling. After having read this extended thread, I tend to agree on the matter of "speed" compensating "heaviness" or "size" of the weapon. Sure, with a bastard you could keep a foe at bay, but if this foe entered your "life circle", as it is said in some martial arts, you are defenseless, because sudenly the length and weigth of your weapon suddely act against you. This could be taken in account in a game if, of course, master and gamer feel it necessary. But to what point would you want to go? Some staves are quite long, but quite light, what is the first thing to take in account? Length? weight? And what happens with a 10 kilo hammer with a 20 centimeter handle? As you see, the problem is not that simple, so you got to take shorcuts, even sometimes illogical ones. Seldriss knows about my feeling in that question, my main fear is overcomplicating a game phase for a minimal result. We have discussed about those customs rules, we are still debatting. Some of the things I have read here makes me think that we still have to work on it somehow, but the last refinements please me. My conclusion : I think we could determine speed factor to add/substract to initiative. We just have to define them in a satisfying way. Thanks for your attention. Grimdaragh
Aurotuli 08-16-05, 09:12 PM	IF I were to have such, it would be very minor indeed: perhaps -1 for any non-double weapon requiring two hands to use (such as a bastard sword, unless an exotic weapon feat is taken) and +1 for any small or smaller weapon (and rapiers, epees, and other medium sized finesseable weapons, if (and only if) weapon finesse is taken). Double weapons would use the larger weapon present for their weapon speed factor towards initiative. And the idea of dropping a lighter weapon to use a heavier one? You would need Quick Draw for that, and as you are only allowed one free action a round, the dropping of the weapon would use up the benefit of Quick Draw, I think. Without Quick Draw there is no benefit anyway, as the larger weapon's speed factor is used. There. A way to introduce something akin to weapon speed without making too much of a difference to the game. Its highly arguable as to how realistic weapon speed actually is, I think, but if I had to use it, the above is how I would implement it. Hmm, on second thought I think I should point out that my early experience with rpg involved rolling initiative every round, and thus that is what I tend to do as well. If you roll initiative only once (seems odd, but I suppose it can work and perhaps simplify things a bit) then the 'droping a lighter weapon to draw a heavier one' does come into play - and messes the whole system up.
Lord Welkerfan 08-16-05, 10:19 PM	Well, you can take as many free actions in a round as the DM allows. That's the point. They're "free." Swift actions are the "free" actions that can only be used once per round. Despite that, I feel that the modifiers you suggested are quite good. The fact that you pointed out double weapons as the obvious exception is outstanding. To simplify what you said: Finessable weapons: +1 Non-double, two-handed weapons: -1 Others: +0 If you really want monks to be going first and feel that unarmed fighters and monsters should be faster than those with daggers, make unarmed, claws, and slams +2. If I were to use this system, I would apply these modifiers to a number of rounds equal to the characters Dex mod only.
Seldriss 08-19-05, 02:52 PM	So far, here is how it goes, when adding the weapons reach... INITIATIVE d20 + Dexterity modifier or Reflex base ST (whichever higher) + Related feats (Improved Initiative, Quick reconnoiter, Thug...) - Weapon speed factor (see below) +/- Opposed weapons reach (see below) Unarmed Initiative -0 Reach -1/LightWeapons, -2/1HandWeapons, -3/2HandsWeapons Light Weapons Initiative -1 Reach +1/Unarmed, -1/1HandWeapons, -2/2HandsWeapons One Hand Weapons Initiative -2 Reach +2/Unarmed, +1/LightWeapons, -1/2HandsWeapons Two Hands Weapons Initiative -3 Reach +3/Unarmed, +2/LightWeapons, +1/1HandWeapons Example : Rogue with dagger vs Fighter with bastard sword... Dagger : speedfactor -1, reach -2, so Intiative total modifier -3 Bastard sword : speedfactor -3, reach +2, Initiative modifier -1 The fighter might get the initiative on the rogue, even if his weapon is slower, thanks to its reach. As a matter of fact, the size modifiers are not recorded on the character sheet. It would be fastidious. As they are easy to estimate and remember, they are only set by the DM at the beginning of the encounter. Note : I might even use the following rule : If the character decides to parry, the weapon's initiative modifier won't be applied. But if it has a size bonus, it will be. In the above example, our fighter would get a +2 bonus to his parry (AC+2).
Phaylan the Drow 08-22-05, 09:37 AM	i can fight quite proficiently in 3 combat styles and i have found that two handed weapons are faster because of the benefit of using two hands for str bonuses and you can parry better as well, however 1 handed weapons allow you to parry quicker and react quicker caus they weigh less. reach is a critical part of the equation due to having to close with the enemy to land a blow, inertal weapons(maces, morning stars, flails ect.) get quicker as you swing them untill you hit, pole weapons are deffensive types that work best in a block but are capable of doing massive damage with a hit at a similar speed to two handed weapons. two weapon styles of combat vary the most due to the weapons used, as a rule of thumb i would say that 2 weapons of the same type are a hinderance because you have to close to hit the target. 2 weapons differant types are preferred due to the flexibility of attack ranges, longer reach weapons should always get an attack first due closing of the attacker before you can land a hit back and then initiative should come into play. in general weapon speeds should look like this: light piercing > light blugioning/light slashing > medium catergories to the same but two handed capable weapons should have the option to add a + to deffence as well as dam. or be able to choose between the two, heavy weapons to follow the same regardless, and two weapon styles should be a sum of their componants + str score
Seldriss 08-22-05, 10:03 AM	Despite the posts arguing that two-handed should be faster, i still don't agree. I am convinced they are slower. Small weapons : lower damage but faster Large weapons : higher damage but slower It seems fair and balanced to me. It was this way in 1st and 2nd edition, and i don't see why it should change. It wouldn't make sense to give all the advantages to one type of weapon. However, the point about the weapon reach makes sense. That's why i use this factor from now on.
Lizerunn 01-20-06, 09:29 AM	Hi everyone. As an introduction, I'm another Seldriss player and, damn it, french ;) Though there is a lot of good points here, I think the main factor in this discussion is simply ignored. The last Seldriss reply is quite good for it : We (the players) like to play with variety, we like to have the choice when we are customing a new character. So as we play D&D, we have to handle with weapon's. Shall we all choose the same weapon for we don't have any discriminatives informations given by the rules ? In fact, including the weapon speed mod. gives us the opportunity to design the char. the way he want it to be. Is my char. a strongly warrior, with very heavy weapon, that makes heavy damage, but is quite slow and not very accurate, or somewhat a sharp and nimble guy that takes advantage of a fast draw, a good dynamical position, and a precise shot (assuming he wield an appropriate weapon) ? How would weapon be discriminated if we only take in concideration the average damage it is supposed to deal. Remember that this last is normalized. So we need something like the weapon speed factor. Cause it's discriminative, it's simple (enough), it's almost reallistic and most of all we, as we play 1st and 2nd edition for a long time, are familiar with it. Here are all the motivations for handling such a rule. Technically I assume it's not the best that may be, but in fact we are not looking for an exact reproduction of reallity. Fortunatly, a lot of dimensions in the game are not completly handle by the rules. As Nimda said, there's too much parameters to fit the reallity, and so long that none of us is a full time adventurer in real life, the rules are not designed in that way. But they are helpfull to the GM and the players cause they simulate (in a statistical way) what they won't be able to do without. Obviously, anyone may have other conciderations, but remember it's up to what everyone is free to like in a game and at this point we are all differents :D We only try to find an average solution. (Please be kind with my english :P)
Kem 01-23-06, 01:03 PM	Well A: You would say then, that it makes no difference at all, to your speed and readiness, if you have a knife or a two handed sword ? Yes It takes very little effort to attack with a longsword. And even less if the person has a knife. Attacking with a knife takes much more. In the case of the long sword the sword provides alot of the reach and has a large "attack area" in the form of a 3ft long blade (for example). The knife on the other hand has to get in range first. That 1ft knife (being way generous) has 2 feet LESS to hit with, and YOU must make IT travel 2 MORE feet in order to actually hit the target. Are you saying that the knife user is so much faster then the longsword user that they can move their whole body 2 extra feet before the longsword user can move the blade to let you impale yourself? Weapon Speed Systems fail to take into account weapon lengths. In doing so, they fail to take into account the speed bonus of getting in the first hit. And please stop with the "you have to take a backswing" nonsense. Go ahead and tell me how much I have to backswing when you have a dagger and have to get past my sword and avoid impaling yourself before you can hit me.
lupo796 01-26-06, 02:17 PM	There's a problem here...3rd ed. rules doesn't require to declare what you're going to do until it's your turn, while requiring to roll for initiative each round adding modifiers for what you're going to do requires to actually declare your actions at the beginning of the round.
Seldriss 01-26-06, 03:31 PM	Well, yes... In my houserules, Initiative is rolled for each round. And each player has to declare his actions when it's rolled. That's not a problem, it avoids confusion.
lupo796 01-26-06, 05:46 PM	well, declaring your action at the beginning of the round is a much more game-chaning rule than adding initiative modifiers for weapons, imho :) However, I think you could add two different speed modifiers for weapons: one for "first strikes" or anyway you'd like to call them, to use when you are attacking a character who is not already in meele with you, when greater weapons are favourites over smaller ones; and another modifier to use when the two combatants are already in meele, favouring the smallest weapon sorry for bad english, hope this is clear...
Seldriss 01-26-06, 06:02 PM	Well, someway i am doing that :) In the opening of the fight, on the very first initiative roll, i use the weapons size modifiers. Example : A paladin with a bastard sword gets a size bonus against a rogue with a dagger. In this case, the bonus is +2 (2 sizes longer) and therefore the weapons speed factors and lengths cancel each other. I dont give the size modifier as a penalty to the smaller weapon. In my opinion, a bonus for a long weapon doesn't mean a penalty for a small one. So in a way one the first round the initiative is modified by speed factors and sizes. And on the consecutive rounds, in closer combat, that's just the speeds. So far, my players don't complain...
Kem 01-26-06, 08:33 PM	Well, yes... In my houserules, Initiative is rolled for each round. And each player has to declare his actions when it's rolled. That's not a problem, it avoids confusion. I would suggest the WoD method of the lowest initiative declaring first. I am finding it works really well and seems like fun in terms of possible character developement if you focus on a high Init.
goon 01-29-06, 07:48 PM	Instead of a penalty to initiative, it seems to me that you should apply a "max dex" modifier to those weapons you feel are slower to wield much in the same way it is used for armor. This way a rogue and fighter are affected the same way when they wield a great sword or both wield a short sword. Great sword max dex 0 Short sword max dex 5 Fighter +1 dex mod Rogue +4 dex mod Both wield a great sword with the same speed but with short swords the rogue gains initiative (this simulates the physics of the weapon versus the skill of using it). Also, with a the cap only applied to your dexterity bonus you do not take away the desire to purchase feats that improve your initiative. Combined with the reach rules and AoO the mechanics of combat seem to remain intact for foes with miss-matched weapons. I have been a gamer for some time too and I must say my groups did use speed factors back in the day - this seems to be a way to update it to a 3.5 flavor without much fuss.