Blue weapon weight minimums...

[Sir Par]

I totally get what you're saying. It just trying to go for any kind of a realism argument about our flails is kind of a joke.

[Todo]

I'm pretty sure I'm not alone when I say that I'm not too butthurt about the realism of the flails in our game; the balance much more so. Flails are an advantage the way they are now, and if we weighted them down some I feel it would balance out their pros.

[calebmonkey]

Personally I feel that if we are going to raise the weight min. on flails,axes,maces and hammers due to realism then we should also modify the damage done by them. Because those weapons were designed to negate armor by crushing plate onto the wearer so that person couldn't breath,and a hammer or mace to chain would just crush whatever is under the mail like it wasn't there at all,since that would be accurate,and i don't think any of our armor would be effective against camp hatchets,let alone axes.In short I say leave the weight how it is,or modify the damage.

just my 2c

[Caleidah]

Honestly, this whole thing continues to strike me as silly. Isn't Belegarth's principle usually toward KISS? Don't we have huge discussions going on homogenizing limb loss and green/blue damage on armor? Adding complication won't help anything. I can see a potential for changing flails, but they already exist with different construction guidelines than other weapons. A blue is a blue is a blue, and putting this rule change through will only lead toward people making more 12.01 oz turbo swords that people would have the same issues with that they have on rounds.

[Cade]

Honestly, this whole thing continues to strike me as silly. Isn't Belegarth's principle usually toward KISS? Don't we have huge discussions going on homogenizing limb loss and green/blue damage on armor? Adding complication won't help anything. I can see a potential for changing flails, but they already exist with different construction guidelines than other weapons. A blue is a blue is a blue, and putting this rule change through will only lead toward people making more 12.01 oz turbo swords that people would have the same issues with that they have on rounds.

But how much more complication would it really add?

The armor rules already exist for weapons that ignore armor. We call them reds.

How hard would it really be to add a crushing damage color that ignored armor? Not very. I'm not saying we should do it, but its not like we would be adding on different attributes for different kinds of armor here...

My point is that i don't think adding something to the rules that makes it a little bit more complex should be off the table...we just have to be careful as to how we go about doing it so that it doesn't slow down the flow of battle.

[Big King Jimmy]

While we're at it, let's make non sword reds min 36"

Ah, the slide backwards.

[Todo]

While we're at it, let's make non sword reds min 36"

Ah, the slide backwards.

...What?

[Kage]

Ok, I can't stand it. This tread is pretty much dumb. I already answered the original question. Now I see people talking about crushing damage and what not. How are you going to implement it? Make it like pierced limbs where crushed limbs don't count towards the death by dismemberment? I know I can still fight with a broken arm and leg. It's just adding another type of damage. If people want to increase the weight from 12oz to 16oz for one handed (blue) weapons then go along with that, but please don't add unnecessary crap to the rule set. KISS, is the way it should be all this would do is just complicate the system more. Some like the idea others hate it. People hate having to describe green damage to new fighters; what do you think adding something like crushing damage would do?

[calebmonkey]

I'm against changing blues at all.It's a dumb move in my opinion, and it looks to me like it's a big party where everyone's **** on non sword blues.If we are going to require the extra weight at the tip because the weapon isn't weighted realistically then we need to make the damage more realistic.

[Forkbeard]

Ooo, a few differnt answers.
Changing damage will not work. THere is no way, in combat, to teel the diiference by feel between different weapons. This requires calling damage. Beyond the minmal calling of red and green, we are not going to see more calling of damage in Bel. That **** just ain't ever gonna pass. No body wants it. Foy you, Cal , to try to add it on to this idea in order to derail the idea is a weak attempt to dilude the issue. It is not required for this idea to work. Dagorhir has weapon balance rules that work just fine.
I think that if we required mass weapons to balance at half their length, 36" non sword reds would be great to bring back. I real axe or hammer that is 36" long will cleave through or smash in about anything.
And Kage. Get the **** over yourself. You think becuase YOU answered a question it settles things? Like we're all waiting for wisdom to come down from Mt Kage. Seesh.
FB

[Kage]

Since asked; no me answering a question doesn't mean the thread should close. My point was this thread should have just stayed in the rules questions forum where it started. You know me. You've met me in person many many many times and YOU KNOW I'm not that conceited. Also this thread was derailed long long before Caleb ever said much of anything in it.

However what we do agree on is that changing the damage will not work. Making mass weapons do more damage will not work. Increasing the weight minimum of weapons could work, but singling out one weapon in my opinion isn't going to work; it's all blues or non at all. My lightest blue is 22oz. so I could really careless if the weight requirement is increased. I would however vote against any rule that was brought to the table to change where a weapon can and cannot balance. Bringing back dimensions for swords as well as a minimum weight would pretty much kill any quicktube out there, but I don't see this working as intended either people will still find away to have their bat.

[No'Vak]

Increasing the weight minimum of weapons could work, but singling out one weapon in my opinion isn't going to work; it's all blues or non at all.

What about length requirements for flails? Thats one that is singled out for balance.

[Kage]

Increasing the weight minimum of weapons could work, but singling out one weapon in my opinion isn't going to work; it's all blues or non at all.

What about length requirements for flails? Thats one that is singled out for balance.

Flails were singled out of a different reason and in this case the singling out of flails was warranted. Length and weight are not the same thing.