Over at the HârnForum there is a discussion about the importance of minimum strength with regards to which weapons that can be used, here. I understand the points that have been made here on our forum about why TRoS doesn't use them, but I question if maybe a character height to weapon length ratio should some how determine what weapons a character can use with a single hand, can use one-handed but could use more effectively with two hands, and which weapons a character must use with both hands. Does anyone elso think this idea has some merit?

I guess I can imagine some "hand and a half" weapons that would need to be used two-handed by very weak weak persons; or else some kind of penalty is applied. A simple loss of dice might be the easiest method.

On the other hand, this might be too much detail, because there's no obvious cut-off point for what's "too heavy." You could easily get caught up in making very complicated tables that reference ST and weapon weight.... Some kind of common sense ruling seems the best approach, ala the encumberance rules. If you have a 3' Fey in your game, don't let him use a longsword, and don't let him use a normal sword without penalty -- as I said, activation cost in dice seems simplest, though you could go with a higher TN/DN I suppose.

If you're talking about height, weapon length is not the only issue. For example, if the hand grip diameter is proportioned for a human, a 2' tall fey will still have lots of trouble using a dagger, even if it's a nice sword-length for him.

Strength takes care of 99% of these problems I think. Generally the smaller, the weaker, the less they can actually do damage with the weapon (other than ST, why is special effects). If you have an exception, like a 2' tall fey who still somehow has the strength to use the weapon effectively, but his hands are too small, it's as simple as saying "That weapon wasn't made for your species' hands, so you can't get a proper grip. -1/2 CP or whatever"
If that same freak gets a sword more his size, don't make it complicated. For the 2' tall unusually strong freak, it may be a greatsword, but it's still a shortsword to everyone else, and those are its stats. Only now the sword would give a penalty for a normal person trying to use it.

If you are anything remotely resembling normal sized as a human, no weapon is going to be "too big". Certainly none is going to be too heavy, not even a maul or a great-flail was that heavy. I've seen a girl who barely topped 5 foot weild a greatsword quite effectively. The difference in effectiveness any weapon would suffer in the hands of a particulalry weak character is rather effectively covered by the fact that melee weapon damage is rated in terms of St -/+.

If your characters not human and really weirdly sized... just use your common sense about it.


It's actually more of an issue with Bows than anything else simply due to the fact that you do have to be at least strong enough to draw one before it's anything other than a sucky walking stick to you.

Caz wrote: Strength takes care of 99% of these problems I think. Generally the smaller, the weaker, the less they can actually do damage with the weapon (other than ST, why is special effects). If you have an exception, like a 2' tall fey who still somehow has the strength to use the weapon effectively, but his hands are too small, it's as simple as saying "That weapon wasn't made for your species' hands, so you can't get a proper grip. -1/2 CP or whatever"
If that same freak gets a sword more his size, don't make it complicated. For the 2' tall unusually strong freak, it may be a greatsword, but it's still a shortsword to everyone else, and those are its stats. Only now the sword would give a penalty for a normal person trying to use it.

I don't really understand the propensity to want to limit player's CPs even more. The truth is, people don't use weapons that they cannot wield. If one were playing a fairy or some such, and under dire circumstances the only thing available to use as a weapon was a human sized shortsword, I could see a cp penalty. With that being said, unless you've incorporated quite a bit of high fantasy in your game, it souldn't be an issue. Even a child is quite strong enough to swing a greatsword, considering most didn't weigh over five pounds. An average sized human (male or female) should be quite strong enough to wield any weapon in the book, barring severe bloodloss or illness. Even then, IMO, the only penalties should be to the strength portion of the DR, not to the combat pool (apart from whatever CP penalties come from shock and pain, of course).

Just my $.02

Draigh

Are all correct. In my Fechtschul we recently had a pair of 12 year old girls sign up to begin with the longsword. They are slinging around wasters that are almost as tall as they are and are doing okay for beginners. My wife wield my longsword around at a pretty good clip as well.

You know, 3 -5 lbs, well balanced swords aren't really an issue until you have 3 1/2 to 4 foot hobbits wanting to use a great sword or a dwarf who wants to use a dopplehander. A lot of games try to take care of this issue with a minimum strength rule, which I don't think does a fair accounting for the situation. What seems to be suggested here is either allow just about anything or some arbitrary GM decission.

I don't know much about 5' tall little girls and longswords, but I do know that helping Dad chop wood with an axe when I was around 10 was a lot harder (more awkward) than it is now, and I've always been under the impression that it had more to do with a person's size than with their strength, i.e. a smaller person is going to be a lot easier to off balance by swinging a longer weapon than a taller person. If there was a relatively easier way of dealing with it than just say no you can't use that or I think I'll penalize you 3CP if you use that, I think that would be a lot better.

I'm a wee feller, I weigh 70kg and 5'7" tall (mixing my measurement systems), and I spar with a pollaxe 3" taller than myself. Because the weapon was made for me I find no problems with it, my armour is more an issue than the weapon ever is. The axe weighs as much as a War of the Roses knightly weapon, but my armour weighs more than comparative WotR gothic.
What does all this ramble mean to the question?
Umm, if you're not a strong individual it is not likely that the weapon is going to be the issue, but your combat load, the environmental conditions and the terrain that effects you more strongly.