tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post765304010861076989..comments2024-03-28T06:20:47.668-04:00Comments on GROGNARDIA: The Articles of Dragon: "Should They Have an Edge?"James Maliszewskihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00341941102398271464noreply@blogger.comBlogger78125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-2857582405618461632011-11-13T12:17:25.893-05:002011-11-13T12:17:25.893-05:00I don't pay attention to weapon restrictions o...I don't pay attention to weapon restrictions on clerics in general, but I do pay attention to weapon restrictions on the clerics of particular religions. Some religions may have specific taboos or requirements. Others may not address the issue at all. Unless weapon selection is specifically proscribed or prescribed, I allow players of clerics to decide for themselves what is appropriate.<br /><br />Regarding the issue of balance <i>vis-à-vis</i> magic swords, that is easily resolved without resorting to all-encompassing weapon type restrictions. I would simply rule that a cleric or priest can only use those magic weapons specifically made to be used by members of their religion. This gives them a potentially wide range of nonmagical weapons to choose from, but the selection of <em>magic</em> weapons would be much smaller for clerics than any other class because a cleric can only use magic weapons that are consecrated, so to speak.Gordon Cooperhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12907319916602597979noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-261447130923432822011-11-12T03:57:12.629-05:002011-11-12T03:57:12.629-05:00Also, my own AD&D campaign is set in a pseudo ...Also, my own AD&D campaign is set in a pseudo historical medieval quasi europe (actually in southern Italy, so I can use stops along the highways to get adventures ideas :) ) so almost christian like clerics are not a problem.Space Coyotehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08853149586005897172noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-37654325000486782802011-11-11T19:16:46.448-05:002011-11-11T19:16:46.448-05:00James Maliszewski said: "There's a fundam...James Maliszewski said: "There's a fundamental disconnect between what clerics were and what they became and that disconnect is, in my opinion, at the root of a lot of the biggest criticisms of the class as presented in D&D..."<br /><br />Totally agreed, of course.Deltahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00705402326320853684noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-71993131313248883262011-11-11T17:54:32.947-05:002011-11-11T17:54:32.947-05:00There must be a couple of articles in the 100-145 ...<i>There must be a couple of articles in the 100-145 issue range that had something novel to say about D&D.</i><br /><br>You're probably right. My regular reading of <i>Dragon</i> stopped in the early 100s, so I tend to assume that anything after that point is just gilding the lily.James Maliszewskihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00341941102398271464noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-1750238822232321232011-11-11T17:51:29.679-05:002011-11-11T17:51:29.679-05:00As soon as you present clerics as wearing heavy ar...<i>As soon as you present clerics as wearing heavy armor by default, then the presumption that they're full-on warriors is going to be immediate and widespread (swords being just a corollary of that). For the image that you & I have in mind, you'd likely need to have holy men who are unarmored as a baseline.</i><br /><br>There's a fundamental disconnect between what clerics <i>were</i> and what they <i>became</i> and that disconnect is, in my opinion, at the root of a lot of the biggest criticisms of the class as presented in <i>D&D</i>. I go back and forth in my own mind about the extent to which the game actually needs a proper "holy man" class distinct from the cleric, but I increasingly agree that it's problematic on a number of levels to treat the cleric as if he is or was intended to be such a class.James Maliszewskihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00341941102398271464noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-52372647852246082062011-11-11T17:44:29.662-05:002011-11-11T17:44:29.662-05:00I would also really dislike class-based weapon dam...<i>I would also really dislike class-based weapon damage. For me, if the choice of weapon has no in-game effect, then I just don't want to hear about it at all (might as well just strike them from the game). IMO, it's the same urge to over-abstract that leads to calls for "purely abstract spell that does X damage" or "purely abstract monster template M".</i><br /><br>I'm not a fan of class-based damage myself, for the reasons you outline here. That said, I still think Sapienza did a better job making his case than did Humphrey, whose article seemed to be mostly double-talk and platitudes.James Maliszewskihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00341941102398271464noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-83274602219883171262011-11-11T15:19:18.588-05:002011-11-11T15:19:18.588-05:00@ Matthew Johnson
It most certainly isn't his...@ Matthew Johnson<br /><br />It most certainly isn't historically "true" and there are thousands of historical examples to demonstrate this. It's just a Victorian era urban myth and I feel sorry for anyone who repeats it as fact in a published work on history. It is quite a nice conceit for our game of D&D that is true.<br /><br />A nice succinct overview here:<br /><br />http://dungeonmum.blogspot.com/2010/08/my-300th-post-clerics-and-edged-weapons.htmlLeopardihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00498290619991560357noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-64784507393422044182011-11-11T10:54:33.576-05:002011-11-11T10:54:33.576-05:00I think it's also worth pointing out that mace...I think it's also worth pointing out that maces and hammers - in the European tradition at least - were often designed specifically to penetrate armour. A C16th 'warhammer' isn't a short-handled sledgehammer; it's five feet long with a head no wider than your thumb and forged from very hard steel. Likewise, maces - even those not of the flanged variety - often had protuberances or ridges and so forth, all designed to focus that heavy weight onto a small area and puncture the steel.<br /><br />And of course if you're wearing chainmail, the links can get punched into you by even a cleanly cylindrical mace - and that will make you bleed quite profusely.<br /><br />Now, if you were going to head down the Friar Tuck route for your clerics and give them a wooden staff as the only weapon permitted, a prohibition on spilling blood might make more sense. As it is, though, any time you hit someone with a lump of metal, you're quite likely to make them bleed.The Wordmongerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05812866827808902568noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-5631450130639452442011-11-10T17:51:26.064-05:002011-11-10T17:51:26.064-05:00@Jon Hendry:
I just meant that blunt and edged me...@Jon Hendry:<br /><br />I just meant that blunt and edged melee weapons have a lot more in common than a javelin and an object never meant for combat.<br /><br />It's also easier to hit the head than it is to hit a vein. Even easier is a hit against the torso. Broken ribs can also puncture your lungs, and I don't think that's any more pleasant than a sliced throat.<br /><br />Why do you believe that clerics can heal edged damage better than cutting damage? It's magic XD !<br /><br />And why do you take the best possible outcome for blunt damage (lots of bruises, no concussions), but take the worst for edged damage (dismemberment)?Doreshhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06287649794589606798noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-29825041192167167882011-11-10T17:31:41.978-05:002011-11-10T17:31:41.978-05:00Space Coyote said: "@Delta: I like your weapo...Space Coyote said: "@Delta: I like your weapons tactical details!..."<br /><br />Thank you for saying that!Deltahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00705402326320853684noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-6634421480519322812011-11-10T17:07:40.299-05:002011-11-10T17:07:40.299-05:00@Doresh wrote: "I don't think you can com...@Doresh wrote: "I don't think you can compare "Getting hit by a discus vs. getting hit by a javelin" with "Getting hit by a sword vs. getting hit by a javelin""<br /><br />Er, no, the analogy is blunt vs piercing/cutting, so the discus is akin to a mace hit, and a javelin wound is like a sword slash or stab. You may disagree, but in the scenario described I'd rather get hit in the chest by an errant discus, than an errant javelin, and I'd rather get hit in the chest with a mace, than with a sword or axe. A mace in the chest is likely to hurt, might hurt badly, might well be fatal, but a stab in the chest has a narrower range of outcomes, skewing towards the bad.<br /><br />"Your breastplate example is a bit lacking: A sword can surely glance off it (that's what most plate armor was designed for). A mace however will most likely NOT glance off, but create a nice dent that will inhibit the wearer - who already has to deal with some internal damage."<br /><br />Inhibit? Big deal, I'd rather be "inhibited" and have some broken ribs than have a sword slice through my neck, possibly cutting a major vein or artery. Especially in a setting with magical healing. If a guy with a mace beats me into submission, but avoids head shots, I can probably be healed without major healing magic. If someone with a sword or axe fights me into submission, I may be missing limbs, and might well require a cleric to raise me from the dead.Jon Hendryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18270477004436129556noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-28704267748014567792011-11-10T16:25:33.460-05:002011-11-10T16:25:33.460-05:00@Jon:
I don't think you can compare "Get...@Jon:<br /><br />I don't think you can compare "Getting hit by a discus vs. getting hit by a javelin" with "Getting hit by a sword vs. getting hit by a javelin"<br /><br />Your breastplate example is a bit lacking: A sword can surely glance off it (that's what most plate armor was designed for). A mace however will most likely NOT glance off, but create a nice dent that will inhibit the wearer - who already has to deal with some internal damage.<br /><br />As for these sources about mace-wielding clerics: maces were a pretty normal weapon for all kinds of knights - because they can deal damage without having to penetrate armor.Doreshhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06287649794589606798noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-60253921626556080462011-11-10T11:46:31.669-05:002011-11-10T11:46:31.669-05:00Jano wrote: "Do you really think you can cont...Jano wrote: "Do you really think you can control the wounds you do in a fight? "<br /><br />Not always, but the degree to which wounding is controllable *at all* is determined by the weapon. An oaken staff is unlikely to glance off a breastplate and run through the opponent's neck. A small, lightly-thrown stone is unlikely to stick in an eye socket, whereas a lightly-thrown dagger of the same weight certainly could.<br /><br />If you were walking past a track & field competition, and there were a mishap, would you prefer to be struck in the chest by a blunt discuss, or a javelin?Jon Hendryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18270477004436129556noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-52928778501448984592011-11-10T09:52:18.562-05:002011-11-10T09:52:18.562-05:00@Delta: I like your weapons tactical details! Righ...@Delta: I like your weapons tactical details! Right now I am using the full weapon type vs. AC modifiers (IMO they even make more sense than variable weapon damage), but your ideas remind me of pendragon, where the damage with a sword is an attribute of the character (after all, every character uses a sword) and other weapons are differentiated with such details as, say axes do +1d6 damage vs shields (and since shields absorb 6 damage points this means that axes partially offset shields' protection).Space Coyotehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08853149586005897172noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-1354438919942234072011-11-10T07:47:52.918-05:002011-11-10T07:47:52.918-05:00PCB said: "As for the oft repeated saw 'w...PCB said: "As for the oft repeated saw 'what about priests of Odin or Ares?', you shouldn't confuse the deity's priesthood with their worshippers... I think that people wanting to give their clerics swords is a sign that we aren't doing enough to reflect that religious aspect in our own games."<br /><br />Agree with about everything in your post, and I'll add one more point of texture -- As soon as you present clerics as wearing heavy armor by default, then the presumption that they're full-on warriors is going to be immediate and widespread (swords being just a corollary of that). For the image that you & I have in mind, you'd likely need to have holy men who are unarmored as a baseline.Deltahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00705402326320853684noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-44368202940494694052011-11-10T07:42:52.816-05:002011-11-10T07:42:52.816-05:00I would also really dislike class-based weapon dam...I would also really dislike class-based weapon damage. For me, if the choice of weapon has no in-game effect, then I just don't want to hear about it at all (might as well just strike them from the game). IMO, it's the same urge to over-abstract that leads to calls for "purely abstract spell that does X damage" or "purely abstract monster template M". <br /><br />I prefer to go in the other direction and give some <a href="http://deltasdnd.blogspot.com/2009/02/proposal-weapon-classes.html" rel="nofollow">simple tactical details in addition to raw weapon damage</a>, to make those weapon choices even <i>more</i> concrete and important.Deltahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00705402326320853684noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-45778843205425561232011-11-10T06:32:23.719-05:002011-11-10T06:32:23.719-05:00I always hated class based damage, but I think a m...I always hated class based damage, but I think a more complex way of banning weapons might be in order. For example, some sort of "set" choice for clerics based on deities, or a ban based on others.Turkish Proverbhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02423061909797064886noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-63402896922925105962011-11-09T13:56:18.788-05:002011-11-09T13:56:18.788-05:00A fighter's ability to hit more often than oth...A fighter's ability to hit more often than other classes is indicative of his focus as a fighter. Other classes have to split their attention and training. Instead of focusing solely on combat, a cleric is also learning and unraveling the mysteries of their faith. As far as HP, hit points are not only a measure of a character's raw damage absorption, but also a measure of how well that character can take a hit. A warrior with 10 HP shrugs off 2 damage points because he has studied and had plenty of experience in being wounded. A magic user by contrast has no such experience and this is reflected in his HP. When the same 2 damage comes to the magic user, it's a lot more serious. The blow is likely to catch him flat footed, or he may lean into it. Imagine the difference between a professional boxer taking a hit versus a soccer mom or a philosophy professor. <br />Class-based damage, to me, seems to make damage dice a function of the class, not the weapon. Suddenly the weapon is just flavor text, and a warrior with a pointed stick will always out perform the cleric with the chainsaw.aharshDMhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03643545106415587401noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-29242426778608275602011-11-09T13:50:10.497-05:002011-11-09T13:50:10.497-05:00@Brian:
Actually, it DOES matter: Clerics are kno...@Brian:<br /><br />Actually, it DOES matter: Clerics are known for their ability to fight the undead, and blunt weapons are perfect for bashing some undead skulls.Doreshhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06287649794589606798noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-56764586466093225882011-11-09T12:49:25.754-05:002011-11-09T12:49:25.754-05:00One big elephant that I haven't seen discussed...One big elephant that I haven't seen discussed is the question of whether it matters who your opponent is. There's no conceivable ethical argument against a cleric using edged weapons on e.g. ghouls, ghasts, ghouls, green dragons, green slime, or gelatinous cubes. In D&D, these are not incidental opponents. Rather, the reason why D&D clerics should take up weapons in the first place would be to slay unnatural monsters, rather than to engage in anything resembling historical human warfare.<br /><br />The one explanation for weapon restrictions is that you want your clerics to be easily recognizable as a cleric. (As if you were watching a movie. Or playing a miniatures game. Or looking at a tapestry). There's a way that I find that really compelling and another that I find really limiting.Brian (brian_cooper at hotmail d o t com)https://www.blogger.com/profile/02805168206752602148noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-25768498419172866302011-11-09T09:17:21.714-05:002011-11-09T09:17:21.714-05:00A couple more recent sources on maces and clerics:...A couple more recent sources on maces and clerics: Bates, David R. “The Character and Career of Odo, Bishop of Bayeux (1049/50-<br />1097).” Speculum, Vol. 50, No. 1. (Jan., 1975).<br /><br />"People in the Bayeux Tapestry," the Museum of Reading. (No author given.) http://www.bayeuxtapestry.org.uk/BayeuxPeople.htmMatthew Johnsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04905727799828366356noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-84440584307196249792011-11-09T09:10:23.002-05:002011-11-09T09:10:23.002-05:00Matthew David Surridge: Check out http://books.goo...Matthew David Surridge: Check out http://books.google.ca/books?id=Ct6xktCkgUQC&pg=PT21&lpg=PT21&dq=priests+%22spill+blood%22&source=bl&ots=1ZoRGTILmh&sig=hUjizLETfy46cUmFWlxZukEHbHA&hl=en&ei=BIi6Tp7rMqPc2AW356W_Bw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=9&ved=0CFUQ6AEwCDgU#v=onepage&q&f=false -- not sure what his source is, but the book is fairly recent. At any rate, whether that story is true or not is not really relevant to my point -- what matters is that wargamers (such as Gygax and Arneson) believed it was true, and fightin' bishop Odo was part of the archetype of the cleric.Matthew Johnsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04905727799828366356noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-61136538750790338462011-11-09T08:59:47.269-05:002011-11-09T08:59:47.269-05:00@Jano:
Yeah, people tend to think blunt weapons a...@Jano:<br /><br />Yeah, people tend to think blunt weapons are less dangerous.<br />In reality, hammers and maces tended to be more effective against heavily armored knights than swords, mainly because plate armor doesn't really protect against raw kinetic impact.<br /><br />Oh, and first time poster here XD !Doreshhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06287649794589606798noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-53397040697953650492011-11-09T08:30:10.066-05:002011-11-09T08:30:10.066-05:00I think one problem of the "no" argument...I think one problem of the "no" argument here, and one which seems to me quite frequent especially in 2nd ed., is trying to explain AD&D with AD&D (as if it was the bible!). D&D classes are not generic but are explicitly modelled after a known source (Ranger lords can use palantìrs... ehm, crystal balls).Space Coyotehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08853149586005897172noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-67611001309235460652011-11-09T08:28:55.077-05:002011-11-09T08:28:55.077-05:00"So far as I ever heard, the idea that priest..."So far as I ever heard, the idea that priests in the Middle Ages only used blunt instruments was a 19th-century myth"<br /><br />Myth might be too strong a word. Oversimplification. And it's generally not said that priests did anything one way or another. They weren't part of the warrior class (those who fight). The Church did attempt to put controls and limits on warfare. How widespread or common that was, and just what the limits were, is probably worth a good term paper. But while it is probably way off course to say 'priests could only use maces in the Middle Ages', it was based on real limits that were attempted in the day.David Griffeyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06629314279592541401noreply@blogger.com