|
|
Post by Cel on Oct 17, 2004 15:17:13 GMT -5
I noticed that the weight of items in the rule book is not right. How did I come up with that? My friend has a Bastard Sword at home, and it weights at least 10 or 12 lbs! Thats twice of what it says in the rule book. Makes you wonder about other items.. Like the greatsword. 8 lbs... Yeah, right. More likely 18 or 20.
As much as it is a fantasy game, I think it hurts the little reality that is in it. I suppose they did it so you can carry more then your sword and armor, and they are right in a way, but it could be fun too if you had to think about what you're talking with you instead of putting alot of everything into your bag. It could add an entirely new element to gaming.
What do you think?
|
|
|
|
Post by IstarinCale on Oct 17, 2004 16:04:48 GMT -5
That maybe a real bastered sword from the back days was made with other metal. Maybe you missconculated you friend's bastered sword.
But on thing for sure is that they didn't gave low lb to items so you can carry more since they could add it to carrying capacity.
Besides, if you can only carry one sword and armor than the rangers have a problem with two weapon fighting - 2 longswords I mean.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cel on Oct 17, 2004 16:11:09 GMT -5
I dont think I misscolculated. It was very heavy. As for material, they were making it from steel, right? It should be pretty heavy.
And, I didnt say you can carry 1 weapon. I said, that if the weight was more real, you would be able to carry limited gear.
The one thing I am sure is right is the shields. 15 lbs seems enough for a steel shield.
Let's not go off topic, shall we? Was asking what you think of it as an element in the game, if you could carry less gear.
|
|
|
|
Post by IstarinCale on Oct 17, 2004 16:50:59 GMT -5
Than we won't get off topic.
I think it won't be so good since in this game - beside adventuring and getting items you need to buy some by yourself so you need a lot of gold and if items would weight twice or 1.5 times than the normal (like in the book) than it would be very hard to get better items unless you decide to get a lot of gold and no swords (a monk of example, but he is not the only class that players play.)
|
|
|
|
Post by VemuKhaham on Oct 18, 2004 3:17:41 GMT -5
I don't think that when you have to consider weight at all times the game gets better. If you decrease the carrying capacity by increasing weight, you'll have to worry more about it. I think calculating weight is more a burden then a boon for players to do, and that is why I would say to my players; just make sure you don't go extremely off and you're alright with me. Cause, if it's no fun to do, why do it if it's a concept of a game?
Also, consider an average rogue for example. I love rogues; but one thing I think they are penalized in: they normally can't affort to put much in strength and at the same time they need to carry a LOT of things with them to handle the various situations they tend to come in. BUT the worst thing for a rogue is to get a medium or heavy weight (skill penalties etc) so that's a very though thing to handle for rogues who like to be a little independent (not letting the stupid barbarian carry all his equipment). Now if you would increase weight of certain things that same rogue would be totally penalized.
Simply put; more difficulties with carrying capacities and weight the more it distracts from the actual game. So if it would add extra elements to the game? Perhaps, but no good ones I think.
|
|
|
|
Post by IstarinCale on Oct 18, 2004 8:00:58 GMT -5
Vemu, you better not be talking about ED (giving the barbarian carrying all  ) By the way, why can't a rouge put all his stuff on the backpack and when he need to use his skills - for example: Open Lock, he can't just drop the backpack (than he carries less weight) and open the lock? - concerns of many classes and skills. |
|
|
|
Post by VemuKhaham on Oct 18, 2004 8:28:40 GMT -5
ED comes to mind, yes... And a rogue could do that with pick lock, but I believe things like hide, move silently and other things like tumble and jump while in action are impossible to handle as such: like when you want to tumble past an opponent and not provoke aoo's because of this, you would already provoke the aoo just by leaving behind the bag... ;D Oh, and btw; seen you do it consequently, but rogue is rogue and not rouge; that's French.  |
|
|
|
Post by TheUdjat on Oct 18, 2004 8:52:54 GMT -5
I think it's a very blurry line to consider. But ultimately, it's up to your group. If weight is a hassle, don't worry about it more than marginally. If you like worrying about the details, make it an issue. Just make sure everyone's on the same page. I also think you're wrong about the bastard sword and great sword. Or at least, incorrect in presuming that they all weigh about the same. Examples: Claymore, on of the most notorious of two-handed swords. It's big, it's heavy, and it was also generally pretty brittle. I don't know the specific weight, but it was weighty (not, mind you, around 20 pounds - You'll see why in a moment). Sweihander, or however it's spelled. A German two-handed sword. It was made to be more flexible, and more useful in close quarters and other varied purposes (like breaking other weapons, specifically polearms). It weighs about 6-8 pounds. Yes, I'm serious. Japic might be able to attest to this as well, assuming the majority of his experience isn't just rapiers. Weapons weren't the big issue for weight. Armor was and is. Armor can get heavy, really fast - especially chain. But if you want to keep getting realistic, you have to factor in that heavy armor made swings slower, made movement in combat a bit more difficult, etc. D&D sorta represents this with the 'max dex' classification, but only sorta. But do we tack on penalties to make it more realistic, try to define the rules further? No, because that's just too much work for too little reward. Keep it simple. Or at least relatively simple. |
|
|
|
Post by BluSpecs on Oct 18, 2004 8:54:56 GMT -5
I'm sure japic will weigh in hear shortly but a battle ready weapon tends to be much lighter and much better balanced that the wall hanger variety of weapon that is commonly available. This come from a ton of craftsmanship technics that I'm not terriably familier with.
You can buy a "cool" looking wall hanger for around $100 us
Or you can buy a "not as cool looking" battle ready weapon for a minimum of about $250
Since most of us don't intend to get into battle with one, the math is pretty simple and we buy the wall hanger
|
|
|
|
Post by Cel on Oct 18, 2004 9:02:14 GMT -5
Hmm, maybe you're right. It was a cool wall hanger. Still it was heavy. I actualy slashed his closet, then stabbed it, made a hole in his chair and almost killed the cat.  And i'm not kidding! ;D I'm not an expert on this stuff, just brought up an idea.  |
|
|
|
Post by Japic on Oct 18, 2004 11:32:11 GMT -5
Yes, in my time around all things renaissance I have seen and played with a large number of weapons and armor.
As for swords, they really do come in all shapes, sizes and weights. I own about 15 swords, some which are combat ready, others which are not. I have played with claymores (greatsword equialent in my opinion) on more than one occassion, and I can tell you that those SOBs are HEAVY. I can't imagine throwing one of those around for very long. Now my favorite weapon would probably have to be a longsword. Once again, coming in many weights based up on the metals used. Some are made from pot metal, others from spring steel. There is definately a difference.
I thnk that for the time in question, the weights are failry accurate. As are the rules about dual weilding and two handed and all that. Afterall it takes a BIG man to weild a claymore (greatsword) one handed. And even he would be more accurate and better off using it two handed.
As for the armor porttion, I also agree. I have a suit of chainmail armor that was produced by KMan myself a number of years ago. I have worn it to run around and fight in, and let me tell you that an extra 50-60 lbs dragging your every step down is a real pain. Dexterity being what it is, you can certainly lose some of it when wearing that kind of stuff.
Although from a purely gaming perspective, I see no reason to clutter the rules with weight calculations unless they are REALLY out of hand.
Just my two, or four, or six, or however many bits.
|
|
|
|
Post by TheZebraShakes™ on Oct 18, 2004 18:03:13 GMT -5
Celebril, I don't think you should be putting that much thought into the reality of the game. If you did you'd be up for many a night stressing.
I try not to question things. Sure, it seems strange that in my game at home, the female wood elf who stands at 4"6 has 18 strength and is able to carry a 6"0 human in full armour without collapsing to the ground. but hey, like you said, it's fantasy.
I don't think they're trying to go for EXACT weights either. They're probably just estimates and what not so you have a basic idea of what your character can carry without too much trouble. No one really weighs out their items to make sure their characters can hold them you just get the basic idea from reading the weights that, "yeah, my halfling with 10 strength probably shouldn't be carrying around a large maul and a twenty pound sack of White Castle burgers .
|
|
|
|
Post by Wizard on Oct 19, 2004 20:31:17 GMT -5
I'm one of the rare minority that actually LIKES calculating weight. It forces choices, and choices are the essence of roleplaying. Should I take an extra day's worth of food in case I get lost, even though it will make me a bit slower? Should I keep a rope in my pack because I'm terrified of pit traps, or should I keep a generic poison antidote because I'm afraid of poison traps? All of these help define the character.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cel on Oct 20, 2004 9:04:01 GMT -5
I'm one of the rare minority that actually LIKES calculating weight. It forces choices, and choices are the essence of roleplaying. Should I take an extra day's worth of food in case I get lost, even though it will make me a bit slower? Should I keep a rope in my pack because I'm terrified of pit traps, or should I keep a generic poison antidote because I'm afraid of poison traps? All of these help define the character. Exactly! ;D |
|
|
|
Post by TheZebraShakes™ on Oct 20, 2004 18:44:15 GMT -5
Should I take an extra day's worth of food in case I get lost, even though it will make me a bit slower? . I don't know about you, but when I shove that spare sandwich in my pocket I don't start tripping over my own feet. unless it's roast beef, that stuff is HEAVY! |
|
|
|
Post by Toptomcat on Oct 26, 2004 7:14:17 GMT -5
I don't know about you, but I can't use a spare sandwich as a day's worth of food. ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by Wizard on Oct 26, 2004 12:05:08 GMT -5
I was referring to a hypothetical situation in which the character was right at the medium load threshold.
The nice thing about paladins is that the armor does all the slowing down for you---you don't feel like extra supplies slow you down...'cause they don't.
|
|
|
|
Post by Toptomcat on Oct 26, 2004 12:20:30 GMT -5
I'd call that more the silver lining to armor penalties than an actual 'good thing,' but yeah.
|
|
) By the way, why can't a rouge put all his stuff on the backpack and when he need to use his skills - for example: Open Lock, he can't just drop the backpack (than he carries less weight) and open the lock? - concerns of many classes and skills.
