Double weapons: may it work?

Previous posts from Thu Jun 02, 2005 11:24 pm

Cujo: For someone who knows nothing about D&D, please explain what exactly a dual weapon is, or simply is it like a spear with a point at both ends or an axe with a spear head at the "hand" end of the haft?
thanks, thats what I got the impression a dual weapon was.
Well Orion it sounds interesting, if you made one I wouldn't mind trying it out.

Kalshane: realize this is completely unhelpful, but I'm personally glad there aren't any double weapons in ToEE. I think they're a really stupid idea. If you look at most of them, they'd be just as big a danger to their weilder as they are to his opponent (dire flail, anyone?) and/or there's no way to actually wield them in a manner that would produce the amount of damage they're listed as doing. (Ex: The Orc double axe. You're not going to get the same amount of damage as a battle axe out of something that's just a stick with axe blades on each end. There's just no way to get the force you need.)
The only double weapons in the PHB that make any sense are the Dwarven Urgosh and the quarter staff. (And the double weapons in the assorted supp books are even worse.)

ShiningTed: It also increases the probability of people wanting to add Klingon weapons to the game <shudder>
Read a great thing once on the 'mechanics' of Darth Maul's lightstaff, precisely about it being more of a danger to its wielder than anyone else.

Cujo: Well I was thinking of Maori weapons like taiaha, pouwhenua and tewhatewha the first two have four striking edges and the tewhatewha has three

Alex: Just a lill point. You are talking about a fantasy RPG... Its a game guys, and since it tries to be faitfull to D&D these weapons would be a plus, since they are in fact in D&D.

Altazar: doube weapon makes sense only if it is dealing two different types of damage (say, piercing and slashing). This way, you have greater chance damaging enemies who are portected against one type of damage. Otherwise a doublesword 1d6/1d6 slashing weapon is virtually an in-between of two 1d6 swords and a 2d6 greatswords - single weapon, but with two different rolls. That's what I meant saying it does not add much. Since we don't have a swordmace weapon in any other way than through a double weapon, I agree it makes some sense.

Cujo: A doube weapon makes sense only if it is dealing two different types of damage (say, piercing and slashing).
please explain the difference between this and a morningstar (piercing and bludgeoning) in relation to the double weapon. also what would be the difference between a doublesword and two 1d6 swords wieded TWF style?

 

Dual or double weapons are weapons that deal damages with both edges and require an exotic weapon proficiency feat to be used and allow a PC to use the bonus attacks comming from 2 weapon fighting feats like if they were fighting with 1 normal weapon and a light weapon.
Answering to Cujo, some weapons deal, for example, piercing and bludgeoning damage at the same time while some double weapons have one edge that deals slashing damage and the other one that piercing damage, like the Dwarven urgosh that is a big axe that ends like a spear to the edge opposed to the axe side.

And, absolutely no: I can't agree with a lot of what has been told above.
1st - stop telling that a double sword deal 1d6 of damage each. It deals 1d8 damage each, like many other double weapons and it is not a small detail. More consider that, when enchanted, the enchantment bonus is applied to both edges so that a doublesword +1 will effectively deal +2 damages than a non-magical one if both edges will strike.
2nd - many double weapons have minor bonuses like +2 to disarm or may be used to trip opponents without small penalities. I know that this can't be done in ToEE but still it is an existing bonus in p&p D&D.
3 - if somebody argue that they are dangerous for the user as well, I may answer that infact they need the exotic weapon proficiency feat, but this is not so important.
4 - trust me that they are all but useless: sometime ago I exposed a complex scheme where I showed how more effective a fighter is, if he spends specialization feats for a double weapon, than anyother class that just fights with 2 weapons, with some small exception. Having a weapon that deals the same damage of 2 medium size weapons but offers the same advantages of fighting with 2 light weapons (except weapon finesse that will be applied only to the light edge) and allow the warrior to invest in feats that will be applied to both edges at once is just a great deal and, if you want to try, here is a working protos that contains a masterwork hooked hammer and a masterwork doublesword (it requires bastard sword proficiency feat).
The IDs are (hooked hammer) 4321, 4322 and (double sword) 4323, 4324. Give it a try.
This proto also fixes:
- Excalibur is a longsword, more similar to a real holy avenger.
- Scather is again a magical +4 holy chaotic sword (see my latest bug report)
WARNING: this file also fixes Archorn Lantern and Will o' the Wisp.
No need to say that, if you are currently playing a game and don't mind to start over to test this, you may always make a new fighter to replace the one that you're currently using and use the console to give him the right XP ammonut to have him at the same level of the other PCs.

 

replyed over in Tempville...

but didn't notice we were back till after I posted. anyway down to business

So it would be posible to have a taiaha or pouwhenua, slashing/bludgeoning one end and piercing the other, would be a monks weapon, this weapon has been described as a sword, club and spear. and as Orion said you would definitly need exotic weapon feat to use one.
for more info look at this

 

In theory, yes. But I'm interested only in the weapons that are described in the 3.5 handbook and some expansion set, in other words:
- gyrspike (1d8 19-20x2 slashing & 1d8 20x2 bludgeoning, trip & disarm weapon)
- dwarven urgosh 1d8 20x3 slashing & 1d6 20x3 piercing, anti-charge weapon)
- double sword (2 x 1d8 19-20 x 2 slashing)
- orcish double axe (2 x 1d8 20 x 3 slashing)
- double morningstar (2 x 1d8 20x2 bludgeoning, trip & disarm weapon)
- gnome hooked hammer (1d6 20x3 bludgeoning & 1d4 20x4 piercing, disarm weapon)
Then, using the same process, you may create your own weapon, but I don't see why a monk would have the need to take the 2 weapon fighting feats.
I think that they add variety to battles and to party customization. I wonder if some able fellow like Drifter may be able to code the proper feats for the weapons described above: exotic weapon proficiency, weapon focus, weapon specialization, greater weapon focus, greater weapon specialization, improved critical, otherwise the ones that may enjoy this variation will be forced to use existing feats for the few already existing exotic weapons.
To Cujo and all the others that downloaded the file, I expect a feedbak from you!

 

Well, I'll make a couple of comments on the above thoughts.

1. No, realistic double sided weapons wouldn't be more danger to the wielder than to opponent if (of course) the wielder is proficient with the weapon. Just like any other weapon - if you ever tried to learn nunchaku, you know it really hurts But if you know how to use them, or any other nontraditional weapon, it doesn't hurt you. If you can hurt opponent good enough, is a completely different question -
So, what you see in the movies doesn't necessarily are realistic weapons. In fact, for most part it is the exact opposite. Realism is put aside for the coolness factor. Be it sci-fi guns, 'real' guns or even modern take on medieval weaponry. So yes, stuff like that SW double-lightsword is bullshit. D&D stuff like orc double axe, are probably same.
You can learn to wield them so you won't hurt yourself, but the effectiveness of such weapons compared to the usual is really questionable, and that defeats the point of using such weapon.
Now double-sided spear isn't bull. Actually any reach weapon with a spearhead on other end is completely ok as far as realism is concerned. Three section nunchuks are real. I've even seen (on some MA show in my town) variation of them when middle section is really long, basically your usual 6 ft bo.
So to sum up, slashing two-sided isn't very realistic. Blunt or piercing is.

One thing to note is that there are many unique weapons and fighting styles all over the world, and it's impossible to generalize them. To implement any of these weapons correctly would require one or even a few unique feats. Say is it worth the trouble?

2. Need of Two-weapons-style feats for such weaponry is illogical in most cases.
It's still your basic staff or polearm style fighting, just with some extra ability. Which might require some additional training to become good at using... lets say, a Double weapon feat. It wouldn't grant you any extra attacks, but make you, so to say, immune to flank.

 

umm I just F'd something up so I'm going to have to do a fresh install and find a new hex editor so don't expect feed back to soon, altho monday is a public holiday here in ol' New Zealand so I might have time then. have a good weekend guys, time for me to get out and about. :rock:

 

But...

If were talking D&D you have to have them, just to make the game feel more complete.
I think having to spend an extra feat on the weapons make it fair.
As for the not possible theory, anything is possible. If someone devotes their life to study of a weapon I am sure they could use it properly, even if its oddly shaped.
Also, a huge Orc say about 7 feet tall, who had practice with their chosen weapon since his brith... Well you get my point.
And my final argument....
But there soooooooooooooooooooooo cool looking. Oh, Darth Maul used his saber really well, and it was double sided! HAHA Star Wars saves the day again! Now if the acting wasnt so horrid I might actually go see them again.

 

Drifter, I agree with your point and with LexB as well, when he says "If were talking D&D you have to have them, just to make the game feel more complete.".
OF course many of them are bullshit, except the gyrspyke or the kusarigama (I'm not sure about the name) from Oriental Adventures, but still D&D is a fantasy game and those weapons are balanced enough to proof useful in the game.
IMHO, nobody should ever seek a too strong reality factor in D&D because D&D is a fantasy game with MAGIC, so, as long the game is balanced and drived by good sense, I'm happy.
And since ToEE is the game that is closes to D&D 3.5 rules, I want to try to get the top of the engine adding whatever is possible to add and correcting whatever is possible to correct so that it will be the best D&D experience for PC untill a new softhouse will make a new game without the lack of time and funds that troika had, maybe the new NWN 2....
so, now the question directly for you, Drifter, is: may I count on you to hack the game to add Greater Specialization feat for all weapons and the other feats for the described exotic weapons? Otherwise, I'll use shuriken e.w.proficiency feat, since probably nobody uses them... hihihihi

 

Rebutal:

But you can't have them all anyway.

Not anything, if we take into regard biomechanics of a humanoid body and the weapon structure. You just can't bend your arm the other way, just as you have very limited movements available for two swords joined into one handle, for example.
Martial weapons were thought as an extension of human body, not the other way around - create some weapon of crazy design and try to fit in.
And the main objective of real weapon is to be as effective as possible. If you can do better with other design, you just use that other design.

Well, as I understand, real life physics still applies, and humans are humans, and stuff... magic is a different matter.

I don't know. Haven't looked into such things yet. There are some notes in moebius dll zip, but as you probably can understand from them, it's not a trivial matter, especially as far as common (not class-specific passive) feats are concerned.
Moreover, I'm not sure about some aspects of how they should be working in ToEE in your opinion. So if you create two one hand weapons to use in each hand, and say it is one double-weapon, what prevents each of them to be used separately? And if it's one two-handed weapon, what makes it different from usual two-handed weapon?

 

Drifter, for sure if you may add greater weapon specialization for all weapons, it will be universally appreciated.
About my weapons, I can't see any way to make them like 2-handed weapons preserving their function for 2-weapons fighting style except than reprogramming the game.
Of course it is a trick and, yes, a player may play only with an head at once and my idea requires the help of the player that must be honest with himself by first, but, if you help me, marking each of them as an unique exotic weapon kind will prevent the player from using only one edge per time. Infact, almost every head of an exotic weapon works esactly like a longsword, axe or morningstar: all martial weapons that do not force the player to sacrifice a feat to be proficient with them. So, using only one head alone would offer the same performance of one martial weapon but with one feat wasted.
Using them at once instead, provides the player with the same benefits of a double weapon, that are increased damage (1d8 instead than 1d6) and the possibility to have weapon specialization feats for one weapon applied at the same time at both edges, all things that can't be obtained fighting with 2 light weapons or with one medium and one light weapon. So, even if cheating is possibile, it just gives almost no advantages. Dowload my file and give it a try, it just add something to the game without deleting anything else.

 

I wasn't arguing against double-sided weapons period. I realize that such things exist IRL. I'm just saying the majority of the ones in D&D are poorly designed and more or less ridiculous. At least in the whacking people with both ends one after another sort of way that they're meant to be used as according to PHB.

 

Well, I wasn't and won't argue that
That's why I'm sceptic myself.

 

I image double weapons to work like a quarestaff (that may be used as a double weapon itself) but, having different kind of blades at the edges, they deal different and a bit more damages than the quarestaff.
IMHO, of course.

 

...taiaha or pouwhenua in real life, Wooden staff flattened club blade on one end and pointed on the other. special training required. could be used very quickly maybe even finesseable.

hey just a thought, how long is one turn/round suposed to be? because if its about one second then both ends of a double weapon could be used easily. some fantasy weapons are abit far feached - if it's such a good weapon why is there nothing similar IRL? beacuse it's to complicated to make/use and the advantages are outweighted or nearly outweighted by the disadvantages.