Sorry GM4Him, but nerf weapon fighting is nothing like fighting with real weapons. Someone quick and nimble could jump inside your swing of a great axe or a long sword and stick their dagger in you 4 or 5 times before you could even begin to recover from your missed swing.
Check out your local Ren faire next time you get a chance and pick up some of those weapons they have for display / sale.
You're missing my point. It's not about whether you can get in multiple jabs compared to someone's greatsword. It's about whether you actually would. When facing off against someone, you don't just rush in and go all crazy jab fest. You look for a single opening and strike, dodge, block, dodge, strike. In real combat, you die if you just rush in and try stabbing 5 times with a dagger.
I'm sorry, but you're just wrong.
In real combat, not nerf or dnd combat, if you've got a giant weapon that you have to "wind up" to swing, you're dead if I can jump in and stick my dagger in your neck before you can hit me, period. That's just how it works.
I'm not arguing DND rules or nerf combat, I'm talking realism.
Have you ever, or even seen someone, swing a baseball bat at someone when they don't already have it cocked back? If the target isn't drunk or stupid, they're not getting hit.
A quick nimble guy with a pocket knife is going to kill a big slow guy with a baseball bat 99% of the time. That's just how real fighting works.
Lol. I love when people just flat out say you're wrong. There’s no doubt a dagger CAN make a much faster strike than a two handed sword at full swing. But most weapon attacks aren't full swings. They are also quick thrusts, jabs and slashes. Because the reach is greater on a sword or axe, a dagger is typically less effective in combat because the sword or axe bearer has a much greater area of attack. It's harder for the dagger wielder to even get close enough to strike.
I'm also not talking nerf or D&D here. I only brought up nerf because my point is when you are in even mock combat with someone else, you don't just rush in and strike a bunch of times simply because your weapon can make a faster strike. Timing is everything. You fake a jab, dodge, sidestep, dodge, wait for your opening and then go for it. You would ONLY ever go for the barrage of fast strikes with a dagger if your opponent was momentarily stunned or defenseless - aka a Sneak Attack or Coup de Grace.
D&D 5e combat simplifies all this. I hit with my greataxe and do 4 damage. That's like a swift jab of the weapon, maybe even with the butt end. I hit and do 16 damage. Ah, now that's a full swing timed just right. I jab with the dagger and do 2 damage. I cut a slice on my enemy's arm. I did Crit and dealt 12 damage with the dagger and sneak attack, simulating maybe a series of quick jabs to the back or side after my enemy swung and left himself exposed. It's however you want to interpret it. However, it's all still there.
Well, this is exactly what i meant. I said weapon speed. That is not exactly what i meant. Thing is, a 2-handed sword for example weighs about 7-10 pounds. May not sound much, but swinging that around is quite exhausting. Noone even a little trained in that just goes around and does big swings. Those things are pretty balanced though so they can be pretty versatile.
Taking a greataxe or maul, even if the weight is the same, is a lot harder to control. Most of the weight is in the head. Ever tried to do a full power swing with a sledgehammer and stop it? And those usually do have only like...4 pound heads.
in D&D a 2H does 2d6, GAxe 1d12 and the maul...also 2d6 i think? But a full swing with a 2H sword will not be as devastating as a full swing with a greataxe. So even the Dmg is not even realistic. Logically a 2h should do less dmg but have a better speed (or rather initiative) than a Greataxe.
To implement that in D&D you would have to change quite a bit though.
I just said i missed it exactly because of that. But i tried playing RoleMaster once and i prefer D&D. too much realism can ruin the fun^^
