Post by Necropraxis on May 5, 2012 21:28:34 GMT -6
I find the weapon versus armor class tables in Supplement I difficult to understand as presented, so I transcribed them into a spreadsheet and then tried to rewrite them in prose. I really like the idea of weapon versus armor adjustments, and I think I have some ideas for how to make them more usable, but I'm sure Gygax knew medieval weapons and armor better than I do and I want to make sure that my perspective on the meaning of the table makes sense first. So here is a rough reading of the table in Supplement I:
- Daggers and hands axes are bad against heavy armor and good against no armor.
- Maces are slightly better against plate.
- Hammers are slightly better against plate and chain.
- Military picks are much better against heavy armors.
- Battle axes are slightly better against chain and slightly worse against plate.
- Morning stars are good against leather and chain.
- Flails are good against everything (but less good against shields for some reason).
- Spears are bad against heavy armors and good against nothing.
- Pole arms are bad against very heavy armor and good against lighter armors.
- Halberds are good against plate and chain.
- 2-Handed swords are good against everything.
- Mtd. Lances are good against all the lighter and medium armors.
- Pikes have a slight bonus against the heaviest armor.
A few of these things don't make sense to me.
1. I would expect a bigger bonus for a mace used against plate.
2. Why do flails get no bonuses against shields? I always thought that the chained weapon was designed partly to wrap around the shield.
3. Why are spears so bad? Assuming that they are manufactured to the same standards as the other weapons (well made steel head, not crude stone, etc) I would at least expect a bonus against chain. The spear is a pretty fearsome weapon, and very easy to wield.
4. Why are halberds good against plate? I would espect them to be like axes with perhaps a bonus against leather, but maybe I'm not really understanding how they are wielded.
5. 2-Handed Swords: Seriously? So many bonuses against everything?
- Daggers and hands axes are bad against heavy armor and good against no armor.
- Maces are slightly better against plate.
- Hammers are slightly better against plate and chain.
- Military picks are much better against heavy armors.
- Battle axes are slightly better against chain and slightly worse against plate.
- Morning stars are good against leather and chain.
- Flails are good against everything (but less good against shields for some reason).
- Spears are bad against heavy armors and good against nothing.
- Pole arms are bad against very heavy armor and good against lighter armors.
- Halberds are good against plate and chain.
- 2-Handed swords are good against everything.
- Mtd. Lances are good against all the lighter and medium armors.
- Pikes have a slight bonus against the heaviest armor.
A few of these things don't make sense to me.
1. I would expect a bigger bonus for a mace used against plate.
2. Why do flails get no bonuses against shields? I always thought that the chained weapon was designed partly to wrap around the shield.
3. Why are spears so bad? Assuming that they are manufactured to the same standards as the other weapons (well made steel head, not crude stone, etc) I would at least expect a bonus against chain. The spear is a pretty fearsome weapon, and very easy to wield.
4. Why are halberds good against plate? I would espect them to be like axes with perhaps a bonus against leather, but maybe I'm not really understanding how they are wielded.
5. 2-Handed Swords: Seriously? So many bonuses against everything?