From: Graeme Lindsell (gal502@huxley.anu.edu.au)
Date: Sat 10 Jul 1993 - 06:00:27 EEST
To Oliver Jovanovic
The Survey: Firstly
a) Yes.
b) Yes.
Secondly, my quibbles:
i) Adjusting the weapon/armour tables downwards will increase the value
weapon/armour bonuses: obviously I am in favour of increasing the worth of
a strength bonus, but it will also make spells such as bladesharp and
protection more effective. Is this a design aim?
ii) Casting my minimaxing eye over the new weapon damage tables I note
that the best weapons have changed: the scimitar is now the best 1-H
sword in its damage (2d4), whereas before it was distinctly second rate
compared to the broadsword and bastard sword. The bastard sword in
particular has dropped from being the best 1-H weapon, with a very high
strength requirement, to being merely average. (You can tell my character
uses a bastard sword, can't you?)
The heavy crossbow has also had a very sad comedown. I would suggest
2d6 damage rather than 1d10: it is a very heavy and slow-to-fire weapon,
you've got to give people some reason to use it.
iii) Why do the Battleaxe, 1-H mace, Heavy spear and 1-H bastard sword
do more damage used 2-H? I thought this was already taken into account
using the +2 to effective strength when using a 1-H weapon with 2 hands.
After all they are the same weapon, which was the reasoning used in RQIII.
A suggestion: make the rolled damage the same, but give a +5 effective
strength in using a 1-H weapon two handed. With a +5 strength bonus,
the character will always increase damage bonus by +1. Perhaps this
should apply to all 2-H attacks.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Graeme Lindsell Email: gal502@huxley.anu.edu.au
---------------------------------------------------------------------
0,,
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Sat 05 Jul 2003 - 20:28:20 EEST