outlander78 wrote:2E was the first AD&D I saw, and weapon specialization was no big deal - +1/+2 isn't a huge bump up.
Here's why I think the 1e/UA weapon specialization rules are significant:
Philotomy Jurament, in a previous WS discussion, wrote:...a normal man has between 1-7 hit points and "combat ability" anywhere from -3 to 0, with zero being the "0-level" column on the Fighter attack matrix. Everything in the game scales off the assumptions about what a "normal man" is and how that average man is described. The classic weapon, a sword, does 1-8 damage, which nicely balances with the 1-7 hit point range of the normal man. I think the concept of scaling off the "normal man" extends to things like the mercenary levels, monster "levels," random encounter tables and no. appearing, the efficacy of magic weaponry and armor, et cetera.
A 1st level (veteran) Fighter has a base of 1-10 hit points and "combat ability" (which refers only to the chance to hit, ignoring hit dice) of 1 (THAC0 19). He's a touch better than the average (normal) man, but he's no Conan or John Carter. He's probably not even Moonglum. For example, the rules assume a 1st level Fighter is roughly a 1-to-1 match with a 1HD orc. (The orc has slightly lower hit dice, but a slightly better "combat ability.") Experienced sergeants might be 1st level Fighters, local heroes and famous captains might be 4th level, and legends and lords are 8th or 9th level on up.
If you give that Fighter double specialization with the longsword, you're giving him "combat ability" 4 (THAC0 16), which is the same chance to hit that a 5th level Fighter gets, normally. It gives a 1st level Fighter the same combat ability that a bugbear has! Better, actually, because every other round the specialized fighter is getting an extra attack. An additional attack is roughly equivalent to a +2 to hit, which means on those rounds the 1st level Fighter now has the equivalent of combat ability 6, which means his chance of hitting is slightly better than an ogre's. (And that doesn't even touch on his damage. With a longsword, 4-11 / 4-15, even if he's got a Strength of 9.)
EDIT:
Now, you may say "so what -- it makes the Fighter more powerful and that's the whole point." But the thing is, D&D already has a structure for powering up: character level. Why not just advance the level? Why change the way you need to think about Fighters and the way the class scales against the rest of the system if you just want more powerful characters?
The most reasonable response to that is "I want to increase the power of the Fighter relative to the other classes." In that case, I still think you're better off tweaking other factors that don't mess with the basic meaning of fighter levels (i.e. "an X level fighter is this tough"). You could put a floor on the Fighter's hit die rolls (e.g., any roll less than 5 is treated as 5), which makes Fighters tougher without changing any system fundamentals or the "meaning" of an X level Fighter. Or you could lower the XP requirements for the Fighter, which will make the Fighter advance faster, making him more powerful relative to the other classes without changing the "meaning" of an X level Fighter. Et cetera. Even though these examples bump up the Fighter relative to the other classes, "4th level Fighter" means the same thing, combat wise, as it does in the original rules. You don't have to mentally adjust your definition of "4th level Fighter" and its capabilities vs. the rest of the system (e.g. 4th level dungeon, 4HD monsters, et cetera). I like that approach better.
