Baldur's Gate : The Sword Coast Chronicles : NWN2 Persistent World

If any change were to be made (which I'm not expecting), I'd still rather see an inherent AC bonus when using single large 2H weapons, rather than increased damage or crit. The benefit of larger weapons IRL really is their length, not their damage potential. I also think it'd be easier to balance. There are already feats to get a defensive bonus from using 2 weapons, it would make sense to me to give similar to 2H weapons. I shouldn't have to pick up a shield to get a defensive bonus when I'm using a spear (with several feet of distance away from my opponent). Especially when a spear is only 1d8 damage, as low or lower than some 1H weapons (which is fine, I don't think dps is the problem).

Rhifox wrote:If any change were to be made (which I'm not expecting), I'd still rather see an inherent AC bonus when using single large 2H weapons, rather than increased damage or crit. The benefit of larger weapons IRL really is their length, not their damage potential. I also think it'd be easier to balance. There are already feats to get a defensive bonus from using 2 weapons, it would make sense to me to give similar to 2H weapons. I shouldn't have to pick up a shield to get a defensive bonus when I'm using a spear (with several feet of distance away from my opponent). Especially when a spear is only 1d8 damage, as low or lower than some 1H weapons (which is fine, I don't think dps is the problem).

Since we're talking reach... would the rapier also enjoy something similar? I mean, just look at all the rapier/rapier and dagger vs longsword/saver bouts!

A rapier would be the one 1H weapon I could see also getting that bonus, yes.

To the OP : the reason is for RP. Mechanically they are inferior and so their use is not as common. But we should be okay with this because not all weapons were created equally and we are aware of their limitations before we make our choices.

Which brings me nicely to my next point: all those asking for extra benefits when using two-handed weapons. I play a character who prefers to use two-handed style. The trade-off for his extra damage is lower AC. I knew this, I accepted it. If you want extra AC, choose Monkey Grip, take a hit to AB and damage and get on with it. There are always compromises to be made, most of which we as players are fully aware of yet some still want to have their cake and eat it too.

-

I agree that the warmace should be x3 and have done for a while. What I can't agree with is people choosing two-handed weapons knowing that their AC will be lower then turning around and asking for AC! The warmace most definitely should be a strong weapon - but should it or other large weapons provide an AC bonus ? No.

I choose weapons for IC reasons. I am personally asking for an AC bonus to them because that is how it would be if they work the way they do IRL. And note as well that I said I do not expect anything to be changed, just offering a suggestion of how to change it if the devs actually desired to.

I do not play a melee character. But I play a character that uses a spear because a spear is realistically an easy-to-use, defensive weapon, used to keep people at length. I IC choose the weapon for its defensive benefits. Mechanically, I get none of the benefits that my character actually uses the weapon for. That is what bothers me.

I don't care about powerbuilding, it's not something I do. All I want to see is weapon attributes accurately represent their RL models. This absolutely should not lead to perfectly equal weapons, because some weapons simply are better than others. I would just like those strengths and weaknesses to accurately depict the type of weapon instead of having the mechanics so out of whack with reality.

Once again though, this is all hypothetical. I'm not personally asking for changes, just stating what I would like to see if things did change.

Not all weapons are created equal. Who is concerned with equality of current weapon technology in the real world? That's just not how it works...

In human history, and specifically in medieval history, weapons were engineered or invented to improve upon older models or to meet and overcome advances in armour that made some designs ineffective or redundant. Technology is competitive. It was a race between arms and armour. As armour got heavier, the maces and hammers came out. Swords got thinner for thrusting instead of slashing. Later, blackpowder weapons made platemail almost redundant. But didn't cease to exist. It remained available. In the right situation it still did its job.

In this game there's weapons and armour of all sorts. Some may seem less than others - they probably are. Mechanically, why wear splint mail when you can wear full plate?

The main answer is RP; matters of character culture, preference. They may prefer bludgeoning weapons over slashing because they don't like bloodshed.

Other reasons may be mechanical: can't carry the weight, less skill penalties, availability in game, expense.

A warmace may do less base damage than a greataxe, but it will do more damage to a skeleton who has slashing damage halved against it.

A light hammer is perfect for a small creature like a gnome who wants to use a bludgeoning weapon with a shield. Sure, a mace might be the best option. But I'm glad that because of the light hammer, its not the only option.

Sadly not all strengths and weaknesses are portrayed in NWN2 - its a game restricted by its mechanics. Pen & Paper as I remember is more realistic with a variety of qualities and weaknesses (can't usd longspear up close) but I believe the weapon system in NWN2 is good as it is. I don't think we should try to change it up in the name of equality of all things - that to me just seems against the nature of technological advancement!

I admire those taking the "underpowered" options of equipment and building. Those choices that don't make sense from the exclusively powergaming perspective add richness to character and depth to immersion. Thanks for counting the cost and doing it anyway.