Basic Fantasy RPG Forums

Was re-reading 1st edition the other day and noticed something I had totally forgotten:

Really complex tables for determining exactly what bonus or penalty all the weapon types had against different armor types, worked out by AC.

I'm pretty sure I hardly ever used those as a kid.

Did anyone ever use them when playing 1st edition? And did they make the game any better?

I am contemplating some 1st edition action sometime soon and thought I would ask this group. The question has been answered a dozen times on Dragonsfoot, but this group has some insights into playstyle thatI like.

I used it when I first started 1e but discovered how bad it slowed down combat with the extra work required to look up the weapon then cross reference over to the specific armor then tell the player his weapon was not effective against that particular armor and he argues otherwise. Turn a 30 minute combat into a 2 hr arguement so I dropped using it.

I've read that is mostly used for gms that use the unified d6 damage rule as it makea each weapon into a unique thing.

But I agree with the previous answer, it really slows combat procedure.

I prefer the simplyfied 2ed way.

If you did want to do that, Iron Falcon has a table that would work. Though some BFRPG weapons are missing there...

We did. It took two combats to get used to, but once we did it got way cool. Suddenly we started thinking about maces vs skeletons, spears vs Knights, etc. it didn't make much difference for mages, but fighters suddenly started carting around more than a single melee weapon.

Ed: Un-autocorrected

Woe wrote:but fighters suddenly started carting around more than a single melds weapon.

That is why I always say that the ability to use every weapon with the same skill is the fighter's best ability

Woe wrote:We did. It took two combats to get used to, but once we did it got way cool. Suddenly we started thinking about maces vs skeletons, spears vs Knights, etc. it didn't make much difference for mages, but fighters suddenly started carting around more than a single melee weapon.

Yeah, that's what I want. I've read people on the DF forums raving about what a difference those tables make to weapon selection, and the fun of being a fighter. But, I want a simplified way of doing it so you don't have to look up for every attack.

I will look up the IF tables and think about it.

If you want to simplify it, just take the weapon families vs the three types of armor. Weapons would be: axes, bows, daggers and swords, hammers and maces, spears and other pointy objects. Armor types would be none, leather (including hide), and metal (including scale). 5x3, something manageable in combat.

Now, to be truly evil, don't tell the players you're doing this and manage the math behind the DM screen.

The IF tables look pretty good to me - although I think I might drop '& shield', and leave a 'shield' as a simple +1 bonus.

Also I'd like to use the tables as a way of somehow increasing the effectiveness of crossbows, answering the question, why would you elect to use them over a bow? I think they were superior to bows against chain and plate mail at short range.

I like how these tables bring reach and space required into play, otherwise everyone would have a flail all the time!

Yes if I remember right the beauty of Crossbows was their ability to punch through heavy armor..