Simple vs. Simple Weapons

On 6 Aug., 08:14, Tetsubo wrote:
> Baird Stafford wrote:
> > In article ,
> >  Tetsubo wrote:
>
> >>        So, why aren't non-powered melee weapons and ranged weapons all
> >>considered simple in D&D? I don't think the percentage of people
> >>engaging in martial activities is much different between the SW universe
> >>and D&D. Most people are going to be commoners regardless of which world
> >>you are in.
>
> >>        Any thoughts?
>
> > Consider the difference in training required to use a crossbow
> > adequately vs that required to use a longbow.  The best longbowmen
> > started training as children - and some of them were still better than
> > others.
>
> > Ever taken a course in fencing?  Even the modern, tamed down sport which
> > is reduced to one-on-one is not "simple."
>
> > Come to think of it, daggers are listed as "simple" in D&D, and
> > knife/dagger fighting takes damn' near as much skill as fighting with
> > swords.
>
> > And, IMO, the only time a short sword is "simple" is when it's used as
> > the Legions used it:  to stab through the slits in the shield wall.  
>
> > Baird
>
>         So, which is broken than: Star Wars SAGA or D&D?

Not broken, unrealistic for the sake of game balance. Both.

IRL weapons could be ordered IMHO the following way:
light is simpler than heavy
short is simpler than long
non-flexible is simpler than flexible
B is simpler than P and S
P is simpler than S (maybe)

Easiest weapon is the fist, quite natural

Judgement is required when comparing short heavy vs. light long for
example...

LL

Baird Stafford wrote:
> In article ,
> Tetsubo wrote:
>
>
>> So, why aren't non-powered melee weapons and ranged weapons all
>>considered simple in D&D? I don't think the percentage of people
>>engaging in martial activities is much different between the SW universe
>>and D&D. Most people are going to be commoners regardless of which world
>>you are in.
>
>
>> Any thoughts?
>
>
> Consider the difference in training required to use a crossbow
> adequately vs that required to use a longbow. The best longbowmen
> started training as children - and some of them were still better than
> others.
>
> Ever taken a course in fencing? Even the modern, tamed down sport which
> is reduced to one-on-one is not "simple."
>
> Come to think of it, daggers are listed as "simple" in D&D, and
> knife/dagger fighting takes damn' near as much skill as fighting with
> swords.
>
> And, IMO, the only time a short sword is "simple" is when it's used as
> the Legions used it: to stab through the slits in the shield wall.
>
> Baird
>

So, which is broken than: Star Wars SAGA or D&D?

--
Tetsubo
Deviant Art: http://ironstaff.deviantart.com/
Daily Booth: http://dailybooth.com/Tetsubo
YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/user/tetsubo57

On 6 Aug., 16:21, WDS wrote:
> Lorenz.L....DeleteThis@gmx.de wrote:
> >>         So, which is broken than: Star Wars SAGA or D&D?
>
> Yup.  Most of the classifications are completely arbitrary.
>
> > Not broken, unrealistic for the sake of game balance. Both.
>
> > IRL weapons could be ordered IMHO the following way:
> > light is simpler than heavy
> > short is simpler than long
> > non-flexible is simpler than flexible
> > B is simpler than P and S
> > P is simpler than S (maybe)
>
> Melee simpler than ranged.  ...etc...

I could pretend I included it in short vs. long,
but actually I forgot it.
But I think it should be wrapped up in this category though.

> > Easiest weapon is the fist, quite natural
>
> Club, actually.  Hand even a little kid a stick and they just know to
> start beating things with it.

They hit with their fists/hands too and some are really *evil*
pinchers.

Anyway, hitting with a stick is not much more difficult than hitting
with the fist, I think. The range is not so much greater, an average
stick
is not too heavy and it's type B too.

LL

Lorenz.Lang.DeleteThis@gmx.de wrote:
>> So, which is broken than: Star Wars SAGA or D&D?

Yup. Most of the classifications are completely arbitrary.

> Not broken, unrealistic for the sake of game balance. Both.
>
> IRL weapons could be ordered IMHO the following way:
> light is simpler than heavy
> short is simpler than long
> non-flexible is simpler than flexible
> B is simpler than P and S
> P is simpler than S (maybe)

Melee simpler than ranged. ...etc...

> Easiest weapon is the fist, quite natural

Club, actually. Hand even a little kid a stick and they just know to
start beating things with it.

Lorenz.Lang.RemoveThis@gmx.de wrote:
> On 6 Aug., 16:21, WDS wrote:
>> Lorenz.L....RemoveThis@gmx.de wrote:
>>>> So, which is broken than: Star Wars SAGA or D&D?
>> Yup. Most of the classifications are completely arbitrary.
>>
>>> Not broken, unrealistic for the sake of game balance. Both.
>>> IRL weapons could be ordered IMHO the following way:
>>> light is simpler than heavy
>>> short is simpler than long
>>> non-flexible is simpler than flexible
>>> B is simpler than P and S
>>> P is simpler than S (maybe)
>> Melee simpler than ranged. ...etc...
>
> I could pretend I included it in short vs. long,
> but actually I forgot it.
> But I think it should be wrapped up in this category though.
>
>>> Easiest weapon is the fist, quite natural
>> Club, actually. Hand even a little kid a stick and they just know to
>> start beating things with it.
>
> They hit with their fists/hands too and some are really *evil*
> pinchers.

But most adults can be pummeled by kids without fear of harm. Believe
me I've been there many times (my kids plus babysitting).

> Anyway, hitting with a stick is not much more difficult than hitting
> with the fist, I think. The range is not so much greater, an average
> stick
> is not too heavy and it's type B too.

People are actually quite ineffective in punching if they haven't been
trained. Give someone a club (or other weapon) though and they can
easily kill someone else. That's why punching someone (unless you are a
trained fighter like a boxer) is usually not a very serious criminal
offense.

WDS wrote:

> Lorenz.Lang RemoveThis @gmx.de wrote:
>
>> On 6 Aug., 16:21, WDS wrote:
>>
>>> Lorenz.L... RemoveThis @gmx.de wrote:
>>>
>>>>> So, which is broken than: Star Wars SAGA or D&D?
>>>
>>> Yup. Most of the classifications are completely arbitrary.
>>>
>>>> Not broken, unrealistic for the sake of game balance. Both.
>>>> IRL weapons could be ordered IMHO the following way:
>>>> light is simpler than heavy
>>>> short is simpler than long
>>>> non-flexible is simpler than flexible
>>>> B is simpler than P and S
>>>> P is simpler than S (maybe)
>>>
>>> Melee simpler than ranged. ...etc...
>>
>>
>> I could pretend I included it in short vs. long,
>> but actually I forgot it.
>> But I think it should be wrapped up in this category though.
>>
>>>> Easiest weapon is the fist, quite natural
>>>
>>> Club, actually. Hand even a little kid a stick and they just know to
>>> start beating things with it.
>>
>>
>> They hit with their fists/hands too and some are really *evil*
>> pinchers.
>
>
> But most adults can be pummeled by kids without fear of harm. Believe
> me I've been there many times (my kids plus babysitting).
>
>> Anyway, hitting with a stick is not much more difficult than hitting
>> with the fist, I think. The range is not so much greater, an average
>> stick
>> is not too heavy and it's type B too.
>
>
> People are actually quite ineffective in punching if they haven't been
> trained. Give someone a club (or other weapon) though and they can
> easily kill someone else. That's why punching someone (unless you are a
> trained fighter like a boxer) is usually not a very serious criminal
> offense.

There is a difference between possessing a weapon and knowing how to
use it.

--
Tetsubo
Deviant Art: http://ironstaff.deviantart.com/
Daily Booth: http://dailybooth.com/Tetsubo
YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/user/tetsubo57

In article ,
WDS wrote:

<snip>

> Melee simpler than ranged. ...etc...

How do you get simpler than point-and-pull-the-trigger?

<snip>

Baird

--
In theory there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice
there is. -Yogi Berra

On 6 Aug., 18:52, WDS wrote:
> Lorenz.L... RemoveThis @gmx.de wrote:
> > On 6 Aug., 16:21, WDS wrote:
> >> Lorenz.L... RemoveThis @gmx.de wrote:
> >>>>         So, which is broken than: Star Wars SAGA or D&D?
> >> Yup.  Most of the classifications are completely arbitrary.
>
> >>> Not broken, unrealistic for the sake of game balance. Both.
> >>> IRL weapons could be ordered IMHO the following way:
> >>> light is simpler than heavy
> >>> short is simpler than long
> >>> non-flexible is simpler than flexible
> >>> B is simpler than P and S
> >>> P is simpler than S (maybe)
> >> Melee simpler than ranged.  ...etc...
>
> > I could pretend I included it in short vs. long,
> > but actually I forgot it.
> > But I think it should be wrapped up in this category though.
>
> >>> Easiest weapon is the fist, quite natural
> >> Club, actually.  Hand even a little kid a stick and they just know to
> >> start beating things with it.
>
> > They hit with their fists/hands too and some are really *evil*
> > pinchers.
>
> But most adults can be pummeled by kids without fear of harm.  Believe
> me I've been there many times (my kids plus babysitting).
>
> > Anyway, hitting with a stick is not much more difficult than hitting
> > with the fist, I think. The range is not so much greater, an average
> > stick
> > is not too heavy and it's type B too.
>
> People are actually quite ineffective in punching if they haven't been
> trained.  Give someone a club (or other weapon) though and they can
> easily kill someone else.  

That's because a club has a much greater damage potential than a fist,
it's not because it's easier to use.
Above I talked about hitting and not damaging. For example: pin a
small target (a penny) to the wall. Hit it with a finger poke, a knife
thrust,
a thrust with a stick as long as your arm, a broom stick and a 10'
pole.
And try to be quick.
I bet it gets more difficult at each step. Next try a moving target
like a coin
tied to a ribbon dangling from the ceiling. Should make an even
greater difference.

LL

On 7 Aug., 00:48, Baird Stafford wrote:
> In article ,
>
>  WDS wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> > Melee simpler than ranged.  ...etc...
>
> How do you get simpler than point-and-pull-the-trigger?

The hard part is actually hitting and not harming yourself
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dFJjaj7pXsA



LL

On 7 Aug., 09:54, Kaos wrote:
> On Fri, 7 Aug 2009 00:08:28 -0700 (PDT), Lorenz.L....DeleteThis@gmx.de wrote:
> >On 6 Aug., 18:52, WDS wrote:
> >> Lorenz.L....DeleteThis@gmx.de wrote:
> >> > On 6 Aug., 16:21, WDS wrote:
> >> >> Lorenz.L....DeleteThis@gmx.de wrote:
> >> >>>>         So, which is broken than: Star Wars SAGA or D&D?
> >> >> Yup.  Most of the classifications are completely arbitrary.
>
> >> >>> Not broken, unrealistic for the sake of game balance. Both.
> >> >>> IRL weapons could be ordered IMHO the following way:
> >> >>> light is simpler than heavy
> >> >>> short is simpler than long
> >> >>> non-flexible is simpler than flexible
> >> >>> B is simpler than P and S
> >> >>> P is simpler than S (maybe)
> >> >> Melee simpler than ranged.  ...etc...
>
> >> > I could pretend I included it in short vs. long,
> >> > but actually I forgot it.
> >> > But I think it should be wrapped up in this category though.
>
> >> >>> Easiest weapon is the fist, quite natural
> >> >> Club, actually.  Hand even a little kid a stick and they just know to
> >> >> start beating things with it.
>
> >> > They hit with their fists/hands too and some are really *evil*
> >> > pinchers.
>
> >> But most adults can be pummeled by kids without fear of harm.  Believe
> >> me I've been there many times (my kids plus babysitting).
>
> >> > Anyway, hitting with a stick is not much more difficult than hitting
> >> > with the fist, I think. The range is not so much greater, an average
> >> > stick
> >> > is not too heavy and it's type B too.
>
> >> People are actually quite ineffective in punching if they haven't been
> >> trained.  Give someone a club (or other weapon) though and they can
> >> easily kill someone else.  
>
> >That's because a club has a much greater damage potential than a fist,
> >it's not because it's easier to use.
> >Above I talked about hitting and not damaging.
>
> In the mechanics of D&D, this is approximately the distinction between
> a touch attack and a real attack.

No. The difference between touch and "real" attack is in the AC you
have
to hit (no armor bonus for touch IIRC).
Which has nothing to do with the discussion about simple weapons,
ease of use, training to use etc.

> However, as a real attack is also the default attack by which weapon
> complexity should be baselined, it makes no sense to declare a fist
> the simplest of weapons unless you're also claiming it's the easiest
> tool with which to both hit *and* do damage with.

Yes I do claim that. Smaller amounts of damage than weapons, but yes.

> ?For example: pin a
>
> >small target (a penny) to the wall. Hit it with a finger poke, a knife
> >thrust,
> >a thrust with a stick as long as your arm, a broom stick and a 10'
> >pole.
> >And try to be quick.
> >I bet it gets more difficult at each step. Next try a moving target
> >like a coin
> >tied to a ribbon dangling from the ceiling. Should make an even
> >greater difference.
>
> Cute, but not really relevant to the game.

Could be because I'm talking about real life.

> Instead, you should try each 'weapon' against a resisting and armoured
> targe.  

No. Armor of the opponent has nothing to do with the difficulty to
handle a weapon IRL.
IRL you can't harm a plate-armoured opponent with your fists *at all*.
In game you cause 1d2 damage just as if he's unarmoured, which is
silly.
Instead you hit less often which is even more silly.

> With the intent of not just scoring a a hit, but one that isn't just
> shrugged off by the amour.  Because that's what's going on in any
> in-game  situation where you're not going for a touch attack.

In-game combat is very different from real life combat.

LL

Baird Stafford wrote:

> In article ,
> WDS wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>>Melee simpler than ranged. ...etc...
>
>
> How do you get simpler than point-and-pull-the-trigger?
>
> <snip>
>
> Baird
>

Hold solid object that has no moving parts and swing it at an opponent?
Seems simpler to me...

--
Tetsubo
Deviant Art: http://ironstaff.deviantart.com/
Daily Booth: http://dailybooth.com/Tetsubo
YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/user/tetsubo57

On 7 Aug., 11:52, Kaos wrote:
> On Fri, 7 Aug 2009 01:32:38 -0700 (PDT), Lorenz.L... RemoveThis @gmx.de wrote:
> >On 7 Aug., 09:54, Kaos wrote:
> >> On Fri, 7 Aug 2009 00:08:28 -0700 (PDT), Lorenz.L... RemoveThis @gmx.de wrote:
> >> >On 6 Aug., 18:52, WDS wrote:
> >> >> Lorenz.L... RemoveThis @gmx.de wrote:
> >> >> > On 6 Aug., 16:21, WDS wrote:
> >> >> >> Lorenz.L... RemoveThis @gmx.de wrote:
> >> >> >>>>         So, which is broken than: Star Wars SAGA or D&D?
> >> >> >> Yup.  Most of the classifications are completely arbitrary.
>
> >> >> >>> Not broken, unrealistic for the sake of game balance. Both.
> >> >> >>> IRL weapons could be ordered IMHO the following way:
> >> >> >>> light is simpler than heavy
> >> >> >>> short is simpler than long
> >> >> >>> non-flexible is simpler than flexible
> >> >> >>> B is simpler than P and S
> >> >> >>> P is simpler than S (maybe)
> >> >> >> Melee simpler than ranged.  ...etc...
>
> >> >> > I could pretend I included it in short vs. long,
> >> >> > but actually I forgot it.
> >> >> > But I think it should be wrapped up in this category though.
>
> >> >> >>> Easiest weapon is the fist, quite natural
> >> >> >> Club, actually.  Hand even a little kid a stick and they just know to
> >> >> >> start beating things with it.
>
> >> >> > They hit with their fists/hands too and some are really *evil*
> >> >> > pinchers.
>
> >> >> But most adults can be pummeled by kids without fear of harm.  Believe
> >> >> me I've been there many times (my kids plus babysitting).
>
> >> >> > Anyway, hitting with a stick is not much more difficult than hitting
> >> >> > with the fist, I think. The range is not so much greater, an average
> >> >> > stick
> >> >> > is not too heavy and it's type B too.
>
> >> >> People are actually quite ineffective in punching if they haven't been
> >> >> trained.  Give someone a club (or other weapon) though and they can
> >> >> easily kill someone else.  
>
> >> >That's because a club has a much greater damage potential than a fist,
> >> >it's not because it's easier to use.
> >> >Above I talked about hitting and not damaging.7
>
> >> In the mechanics of D&D, this is approximately the distinction between
> >> a touch attack and a real attack.
>
> >No. The difference between touch and "real" attack is in the AC you
> >have
> >to hit (no armor bonus for touch IIRC).
>
> That's the details of the mechanics used to model the situation.  But
> the idea of a touch attack is that you're hitting and not damaging.
> (With the attack itself, at least.)
>
> >Which has nothing to do with the discussion about simple weapons,
> >ease of use, training to use etc.
>
> And that was exactly my point.
>
> >> However, as a real attack is also the default attack by which weapon
> >> complexity should be baselined, it makes no sense to declare a fist
> >> the simplest of weapons unless you're also claiming it's the easiest
> >> tool with which to both hit *and* do damage with.
>
> >Yes I do claim that. Smaller amounts of damage than weapons, but yes.
>
> I would disagree, based on the greater tendency to hit without doing
> any real damage with a fist than with a club.

Broken nose, teeth lost, black eye, ribs broken, knocked out?
All happen *easily* when you hit with a fist.

> >> ?For example: pin a
>
> >> >small target (a penny) to the wall. Hit it with a finger poke, a knife
> >> >thrust,
> >> >a thrust with a stick as long as your arm, a broom stick and a 10'
> >> >pole.
> >> >And try to be quick.
> >> >I bet it gets more difficult at each step. Next try a moving target
> >> >like a coin
> >> >tied to a ribbon dangling from the ceiling. Should make an even
> >> >greater difference.
>
> >> Cute, but not really relevant to the game.
>
> >Could be because I'm talking about real life.
>
> Funny, the context of the discussion seemed to be about comparing the
> real-life to the in-game analogs.

If we want a realistic model, we need to look at reality.
Unless we can't agree on facts in real life we can't find
a common ground concerning the in-game model.

> >> Instead, you should try each 'weapon' against a resisting and armoured
> >> target.  
>
> >No. Armor of the opponent has nothing to do with the difficulty to
> >handle a weapon IRL.
>
> But it is part of the baseline considering when differentiating
> between some jackass who's never picked up a weapon in his life and
> someone who's got basic profiency with one.  

Let's talk about some jackass IRL.
If my evaluation is correct, he'll have the least difficulty using his
fists
*to hit* (for small damage) or a plain old knuckleduster
He'll have greater difficulty using a dagger or even a sap.

> Or at least, it is if you're talking about how the D20 gaming systems
> are handling the matter.  If you're not... then forgive me for not
> catching on when the thread drifted off both the newsgroup topic and
> initial context.

d20 is unrealistic for the sake of game balance, that's what I said
above.
So, I took a step back and tried to find criteria for evaluating the
difficulty
of weapon use IRL. See above for the list.

> >IRL you can't harm a plate-armoured opponent with your fists *at all*.
>
> I don't know from proper plate armour, but with the half-ass stuff
> it's possible.  Just difficult.  

Half-ass stuff?

> >> With the intent of not just scoring a a hit, but one that isn't just
> >> shrugged off by the amour.  Because that's what's going on in any
> >> in-game  situation where you're not going for a touch attack.

In-game you hit and do damage with the fist, at least in DnD.
Damage reduction for armor is an interesting concept...

> >In-game combat is very different from real life combat.
>
> So why the weeboing over whether it should be  easier *in the game* to
> move from being an "unskilled jackass" to "reasonably proficient" with
> a fist than a club?

Maybe because I'd like to have a weapon and armor system that's a
bit more realistic?

Cheers
LL

On Fri, 7 Aug 2009 00:08:28 -0700 (PDT), Lorenz.Lang.DeleteThis@gmx.de wrote:

>On 6 Aug., 18:52, WDS wrote:
>> Lorenz.L....DeleteThis@gmx.de wrote:
>> > On 6 Aug., 16:21, WDS wrote:
>> >> Lorenz.L....DeleteThis@gmx.de wrote:
>> >>>>         So, which is broken than: Star Wars SAGA or D&D?
>> >> Yup.  Most of the classifications are completely arbitrary.
>>
>> >>> Not broken, unrealistic for the sake of game balance. Both.
>> >>> IRL weapons could be ordered IMHO the following way:
>> >>> light is simpler than heavy
>> >>> short is simpler than long
>> >>> non-flexible is simpler than flexible
>> >>> B is simpler than P and S
>> >>> P is simpler than S (maybe)
>> >> Melee simpler than ranged.  ...etc...
>>
>> > I could pretend I included it in short vs. long,
>> > but actually I forgot it.
>> > But I think it should be wrapped up in this category though.
>>
>> >>> Easiest weapon is the fist, quite natural
>> >> Club, actually.  Hand even a little kid a stick and they just know to
>> >> start beating things with it.
>>
>> > They hit with their fists/hands too and some are really *evil*
>> > pinchers.
>>
>> But most adults can be pummeled by kids without fear of harm.  Believe
>> me I've been there many times (my kids plus babysitting).
>>
>> > Anyway, hitting with a stick is not much more difficult than hitting
>> > with the fist, I think. The range is not so much greater, an average
>> > stick
>> > is not too heavy and it's type B too.
>>
>> People are actually quite ineffective in punching if they haven't been
>> trained.  Give someone a club (or other weapon) though and they can
>> easily kill someone else.  
>
>That's because a club has a much greater damage potential than a fist,
>it's not because it's easier to use.
>Above I talked about hitting and not damaging.

In the mechanics of D&D, this is approximately the distinction between
a touch attack and a real attack.

However, as a real attack is also the default attack by which weapon
complexity should be baselined, it makes no sense to declare a fist
the simplest of weapons unless you're also claiming it's the easiest
tool with which to both hit *and* do damage with.


?For example: pin a
>small target (a penny) to the wall. Hit it with a finger poke, a knife
>thrust,
>a thrust with a stick as long as your arm, a broom stick and a 10'
>pole.
>And try to be quick.
>I bet it gets more difficult at each step. Next try a moving target
>like a coin
>tied to a ribbon dangling from the ceiling. Should make an even
>greater difference.

Cute, but not really relevant to the game.

Instead, you should try each 'weapon' against a resisting and armoured
targe.

With the intent of not just scoring a a hit, but one that isn't just
shrugged off by the amour. Because that's what's going on in any
in-game situation where you're not going for a touch attack.