Hi guys, probably someone has already asked those questions before, but, since I've been unable to find the answers, here they come:
1st - Strength is almost useless: Size gives the same bonus to damage and also gives bonus to hit points. Using the current table, there is no way to raise the damage bonus higher than +1d2, and so everyone that wishes to make a combat-effective warrior will put points on size until they get +1d2 to damage and then forget it altogether. This don't bug out anyone? Have someone came with a solution? Maybe bring back the strength and dexterity requisites to wield certain weapons, transform the damage bonus in a static bonus, like D&D (+1 for each 2 or 3 points of strength past 10), maybe we can use a formula like (Strength x2 + Size)/3 to base the bonus on, I don't know. Maybe it is realistic the way the rules are right now, but it looks weird in game, with Strength 8 warriors wielding Greatswords like they were sticks. Also, Strength should influence in the Strike Rank penalty to initiative.
2nd - Slings and staff-slings: the damage is too high! I know that they were great weapons at their time, but they should not have the same damage as a long bow! (Worst yet, higher than a heavy crossbow, in the case of the staff-sling!). Also, slings have higher range than longbows. Maybe they need some limitation, like armour having double its value against sling bullets? And what about the range of the staff-sling? It hits like a siege weapon, yet, with less range than a thrown rock?
3rd and last - Well... I forgot my question... But I will come back with it later.
Thanks, and sorry for my broken english
Login below to reply: