Weapon Specialization

[AxeMental]

Or just include an NPC ADVENTURER or invite someone else over to play a PC. If a module is too difficult, its probably because you don't have enough players, or everyone picked "assassin", or is too low in level. Published modules mention on the cover how many players are intended and of what level. Did you guys forget how to read?

I personally don't believe every room should be cleared in a dungeon. Nor should players ever feel the game is "balanced" (they can hope it all they want), its that fear that makes it feel less like a game, more like playing imaginary make believe. Some dungeons should be balanced, some slightly harder (and it usually works out that way without any interference of the DM, often times related to the dynamics of the PCs getting along, spells chosen, tactics used etc.)

More or less true, but I think you are missing the point in the above. The question was not about introducing weapon specialisation to meet the challenge level, but what to do about the module if it was not designed for weapon specialisation and the group was using it.

Really? In that case the group should simply stop using it. They will be happier people.

[deathsdj]

Weapons Specialization is for PUSSIES!

I agree.

As are weapon proficiencies!

I'm good with these though.

Axe are you deliberately not paying attention? WS/WP ARE FINE FOR SMALL (1-2 OR 2-3) CHARACTER PARTIES THAT WANT TO GO ON BIG ADVENTURES.

Probably true. I generally have a lot of players so WS is a disaster, especially when combined with letting players roll up their PCs on their own using the honor system. I had five fighters with exceptional strength and WS out of eleven PCs. Never again!

"To crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentation of their women", of course!

Best quote ever!

Maybe it is time to drop the whole "canonical" argument.

Not in my mind. I am so tired of half assed house rules, especially my own! Canonical is important to me but only really where the core three books are concerned. That's why I come to places like KnK is to discuss how other DMs use the RaW as opposed to just changing things they don't understand or don't agree with.

Some people like the idea of playing AD&D by the book. AD&D itself assures the reader that playing by the book is a valid way to play. If multiple groups play by the same rules, it facilitates cross-pollination -- characters, monsters, dungeons, ideas, and conversations are relevant in a larger context because a common language exists. As I understand it, the "By The Book" forum presupposes this attitude.

Well said. I agree totally.

Gygax said fighters lacked and needed to be fixed in the Dragon article in which weapon specialization first appeared.

Which really makes me wonder why when he had Sir Robilar, a fighter without WS, and a few orcs cleaning out every dungeon he designed.

"If it isn't broken, don't fix it"! Yet so many make that mistake.

Well put. I might say it like If it aint broken don't try to imagine it is so you can fix it with a crappy house rule.

I’ve heard these complaints so many times, but as someone who has DMed the UA material consistently since its release, I’ve never seen them come up in play. No campaigns wrecked. No fighters dominating the party and setting, etc.

You must have had a small group because my experiences are the opposite. Although my game world was designed before UA came out so it was my own fault for allowing my players to use WS.

And power creep is born.

Absolutely. It starts with stat inflation and then things like WS. Before you know it all your monsters have max hit points and large numbers appearing and Giants and Dragons are pussies with puny hit point totals.

WS was supposed to be a boost for fighters. It was not supposed to be the first step in a new, higher power level, status quo. The effect is not so earth shaking as it's being made out to be.

It totally can be though which in my opinion makes it a messed up rule not worthy of my game. Think about it... 5 fighters all with exceptional strength and WS. Yes I messed up by letting these guys roll up their PCs on their own but these were experienced guys that had all been playing since the late seventies or early eighties and I really expected more from them than munchkin PCs with stats that were obviously not rolled legitimately.

Live and learn I suppose.

Cheers!

MJW

[AxeMental]

ScottyG wrote:
WS was supposed to be a boost for fighters. It was not supposed to be the first step in a new, higher power level, status quo. The effect is not so earth shaking as it's being made out to be.


WS's great sin isn't that it makes fighters more powerful (or too powerful). Its great sin is that it changes the core philosophy of the game. Average Joe doing extra-ordinary things. You feel like the same guy if you find a +2 sword that shoots magic missiles (just perhaps a bit lucky) but you don't feel like the same guy when suddenly you have some specialization (when suddenly you hitting at the equiv. next level sequence up in the to hit table).

You simply don't get the same high when your super-hero does something great that you do when your more or less average guy cookie cutter fighter (played intelligently, ballsy, sneaky etc. etc.) pulls it off. 1E AD&D is all about the FUCK YEAH moments (or the OoooH FUCK moments). You simply don't get those in the same way when you have a crutch (called WS).

I remember many an adventure where the WS guys would mow stuff down, but rarely got the same satisfaction the average cookie cutter fighter got when he simply kicked butt with good roles and, more often then not, utilizing his brain.

[ScottyG]

Axe, I never cease to be amazed ay how consistently off the mark you are. That was never the core philosophy of the game. Gygax hated the average joe approach. the game has alway assumed heroic characters (Conan, Merlin, Fafhrd and the Gray Mouser, John Carter, etc.) doing heroic things. And if WS is all it takes to stip the gratification out of your game, then there's a much bigger problem.

Robilar had great stats and a great set of magical items, including a girdle of storm giant strength, and he wasn't clearing out dungeons. He would sneak around invisibly avoiding 90% of the things he encountered.

[AxeMental]

Axe, I never cease to be amazed ay how consistently off the mark you are. That was never the core philosophy of the game. Gygax hated the average joe approach. the game has alway assumed heroic characters (Conan, Merlin, Fafhrd and the Gray Mouser, John Carter, etc.) doing heroic things. And if WS is all it takes to stip the gratification out of your game, then there's a much bigger problem.

Robilar had great stats and a great set of magical items, including a girdle of storm giant strength, and he wasn't clearing out dungeons. He would sneak around invisibly avoiding 90% of the things he encountered.

Seriously ScottyG? You don't get this?

-Robilar is cool not because of the shit he has (or even the level attained) he is cool because he's cool (his stuff just lets him move on to bigger challenges to which he is average by comparison).

If he ran into a vampire and got energy drained to 1st, lost all of his magic in some anti magic field (say the Tower of Inverse final room) he'd not only be just as cool, he'd be cooler. Because deep down, he is still Robilar (a simple human) building up stories of survival and adventure (a simili for real life).

When Robilar moved from 1st level up, slowly aquiring skills and magic stuff (found haphazardly or after a huge battle) -it came with stories of cunning, near death and simple survival (played out randomly with dice). THAT IS WHAT 1E AD&D is about, cheating death and earning from your labor.

-1E AD&D is about the ordinary doing the extraordinary. Its not that your character isn't cool until he's high level. He's cool after he proves himself a few times. Like I said, the rest is icing on the cake.

What does that have to do with WS? The player never earns the bonus he gives himself at character generation. If he earned that adventuring (say he sits in a dungeon thrown and suddenly is given special knowledge with a long sword (say +2 for life) thats cool. He EARNED THAT by taking the risk, getting off his fat ass and going dungeon delving. "Are you an adventurer or not"?

Remember its not about being powerful. Its about earning it. You don't feel satisfaction when you get an A on a test cheating, right? Gygax wanted PCs to get to high levels, sure. But he never wanted those powers to overshadow the characters personality or wit, cunning, luck (the human average qualities).

[ScottyG]

Axe, you don't get this. You can still do all those things with WS.
You continually make these outlandish statements that have no basis in anything besides you think it should be so, and you label them the original core philosophy of the game, or some other hogwash.
You don’t like it. Fine. But that’s all there is to it. That doesn’t make it game breaking, core philosophy changing, yadda, yadda, yadda.
I played the game for years before and years after. I get it.

[AxeMental]

Axe, you don't get this. You can still do all those things with WS.
You continually make these outlandish statements that have no basis in anything besides you think it should be so, and you label them the original core philosophy of the game, or some other hogwash.
You don’t like it. Fine. But that’s all there is to it. That doesn’t make it game breaking, core philosophy changing, yadda, yadda, yadda.
I played the game for years before and years after. I get it.

It is not hogwash.

WS is completely anti-1E in philosophy if fully implemented (not as Matt suggests sticking to a +1 only, but what UA ens up resulting in). Players feel like other players are advancing in power based on manipulation (becoming somewhat supermen, "is that superman in the front of the group mowing down orcs, no thats Bill the guy who started out with a fighter with 12 str. but chose to use WS when we didn't" "Oh" looking down at his +1 short sword "Fuck...thats sucks" ).

Scotty, A guy who picks up a +2 battle axe is not a superman (he is still ordinary, if he looses that axe he's back to normal), one that takes +2WS with battle axes is a superman (in terms of the game, compared to the normal fighter). Remember its a game with rules. UA came in with new rules that were too powerful and also (on another topic) changed the archetype structure too much (no longer do you have fighters you have bowmen, long sword men, etc.) kind of reminds you of schools of magic in 2E doesn't it.

This is seen as it is played out in mid to larger sized groups (I can see using it with 2 players for a one shot, but to include in every game session? It just doesn't feel like 1E anymore.

Scotty did you start playing 1E pre-UA? I think your a bit younger then me.

[ScottyG]

I've fallen victim to one of the classic blunders! I'm going to cease and desist now.

Scott

[TRP]

ScottyG, I was wondering when you'd get there. Russian winters and Sicilian hitmen have nothing on Axe.

[AxeMental]

ScottyG, I was wondering when you'd get there. Russian winters and Sicilian hitmen have nothing on Axe.

HAHAHA Fuck you TRP.

[rredmond]

What a fantastic thread.

[RobRob]

Axe, I never cease to be amazed ay how consistently off the mark you are. That was never the core philosophy of the game. Gygax hated the average joe approach. the game has alway assumed heroic characters (Conan, Merlin, Fafhrd and the Gray Mouser, John Carter, etc.) doing heroic things. And if WS is all it takes to stip the gratification out of your game, then there's a much bigger problem.

Robilar had great stats and a great set of magical items, including a girdle of storm giant strength, and he wasn't clearing out dungeons. He would sneak around invisibly avoiding 90% of the things he encountered.

I am also flabbergasted about this notion that AD&D is supposed to be played with 3d6 in order characters. You are supposed to (BTB) have at least two stats between 15-18 that is not 3d6 in order and if you look at the pregenerated characters in all the big modules by Gary they have pretty sick stats (way better than what my players has) so i will go ahead and assume that the game is supposed to be played that way.

I don't get how you read Appendix N either is it like this:

[me to new player]Oh you are not familiar with with the kind of fantasy that Gary Gygax intended AD&D to simulate? Well let me point out a list of pretty damn awesome books that will get you in the mood to play.

[new player after having read some books] That was awesome, i really liked those Fafhrd & Grey mouser stories they sure don't write stories like that anymore. I can't wait to play this game!

[me to new player] I am glad to hear that just roll up your character.

[new player] *rolls*

[me to new player] You got a feeble asthmatic retard but he is very wise... fun right!

[new player] *leaves*

It was not played like this by Gary and trying to say that it was meant to be played like that is just ludicrous, no that you can't play the game like that but it is not the one true way.

That said i don't use weapon specialization in my games as i don't think is implemented well.

[AxeMental]

Most 1E AD&D players (including myself) use 4d6 drop the lowest d6 and place at will.

[EOTB]

I don't think Ax is bitching so much about the superman part in terms of 2 15+ scores or not, as much as he's bitching about the variety between fighters being sucked out of the game. Sure, the game was meant to play heros like Grey Mouser, Elric, etc. But it wasn't necessarily intended that 85% of them would specialize in long sword with the others specializing in long bow. But, to be fair weapon specialization was probably the only thing that broke the stranglehold of the two-handed sword on fighters everywhere.

There are ways to fix the variety problem and retain weapon specialization, but Ax is too traumatized to entertain fixing it in any way.

[AxeMental]

I don't think Ax is bitching so much about the superman part in terms of 2 15+ scores or not, as much as he's bitching about the variety between fighters being sucked out of the game. Sure, the game was meant to play heros like Grey Mouser, Elric, etc. But it wasn't necessarily intended that 85% of them would specialize in long sword with the others specializing in long bow. But, to be fair weapon specialization was probably the only thing that broke the stranglehold of the two-handed sword on fighters everywhere.

There are ways to fix the variety problem and retain weapon specialization, but Ax is too traumatized to entertain fixing it in any way.

I stick to my original observation, if its not broken don't fix it.
Nothing wrong with 1E AD&D as is. And two handed swords fall out of favor fast enough (when 75% of magical swords are longswords).

Also, I agree 100% that 1E AD&D is all about playing heros. But a hero is played not made.
You don't design a hero, a hero develops over a long period of playing threw a combination of luck and actions. A hero does the impossible and beats the odds. Every character in fantasy (books, legends etc.) is a hero because he faces a challenge and overcomes it (with the aid of helpful things, abilities and friends he makes along the way). From Jack and the Bean Stock to Bilbo to Conan (the challanges they face are stronger then they are). The different attribute allows for one PC you role up to be a Jack (say average guy, perhaps quick) or a Conan (high strength, con and dex). A true hero doesn't need to have any exceptional weapons or attributes, he can use his brain, he can just have balls, or he can just make the right call. When you succeed, you are considered a hero by the group, because they recognize you did something exceptional. Weapons Specialization bypasses this presumption (its fair to make yourself above the cut from the get go). It decreases true heroism by giving you a crutch. You didn't "do" it (didn't role it or make an in game decision), you designed it before game play begins. Everyone taking your class is supposed to be the same (with the exception of race and attributes). Its what you do after the game begins that counts.
** this should be common sense.

Perhaps a bigger problem with WS is what it does to fighters (subcategorizing them into idiotic specialists. I mean come on, Long Sword Man....thats just soooooo lame....not 1E.