little man big sword

[Old Man]

A prospective player to my game grumbled that the little people should be able to swing big swords. In my head I was thinking "uh...no. why? because I said so." In answer to his grumbles, I ignored him.

Basically speaking, in my game the little people are about 3 feet tall and can have a maximum STR of 15. Two-handed swords have a STR min of 15. Using his munchkin logic, he stated that the little people should be able to swing two-handed swords if they have STR 15. Of course, it is stated in the player guidelines that the little people cannot use two-handed swords.

Am I being heavy handed in my ruling? I didn't think so. I couldn't accept a 6 foot man effectively swinging a 12 foot sword, so a 3 foot man with a 6 foot sword is about the same no?

[keithcurtis]

If your game guidelines state a convention of your world, any prospective player would have to have giant cajones to debate them. Especially when they are logical. Give him a short broad sword and say, "Here's your two-handed sword, there's the door. Choose."
But say it more nicely.

Keith "Never let players into your world. They ruin everything." Curtis

[Monolith]

I would just allow the character to use a bastard sword like a two-handed sword and call it a day. But I would keep in mind that that 3' tall character is strong enough to pick up two full-grown human men. I do not think the character would look any more foolish wielding a 6' sword as he would carrying two men over his shouders around a tavern.

[Old Man]

Part of the problem is that the hobbit shouldn't be able to reach 15 STR to begin with. The STR range for a hobbit ought to be 0-10, if that. Maybe more like 0-8, with an average of 3.

Wait, 3' is short even for a hobbit.

And then there's the problem of "where does he grip it", since little hobbit hands aren't going to get a good grip on a nice fat claymore hilt.

[Michael Hopcroft]

Let us leave aside the question of how a Sauron-sized ring fits so nicely on Frodo's stubby little hobbit finger....

If you're using a "little person" race in your game, then you should design them in such a way that they'll have their own weapon preferences. If this guy wants to weild a whopping great sword, why does he also want to play a 3' tall character? Sounds like an inherent contradiction to me. Even if he is strong enough to carry the thing and swing it, he won;t have the balance to weild it with any skill. And when you;re fighting for your life, a clumsy weapon can be worse than no weapon at all.

He should get he to one of his own weaponsmiths and have them create a nice, balanced weapon in keeping with his size that he can train himself to use effectively.

[Talon]

Check out http://www.shalott.com/hero/fred/5th_strmins.asp for a suggestion on how to handle exactly this issue. Using this house rule, the little people wouldn't be able to wield large weapons regardless of their STR -- the leverage just isn't there.

[JohnTaber]

Do you have a physical limitation for being short? Might make sense and it would assuage the player...

[The Mad GM]

Hand the player (whom I'm assuming is average size) a twelve foot 2x4 and ask him to swing it around, only holding onto the last 24" or so. Then tie a 10 pound weight on the end and ask him to do it again.

If he's willing to pay to replace all the furniture in your house, let him use the sword.

[MarkusDark]

The Sauron Size ring is magical and 'resizes' itself to the wearer. It was even depicted in the first movie in the Prologue.

As for a 3' person swinging a 5' sword, it is a matter of manuvering and leverage and nothing to do with strength. Forget about the 2x4 as afterall the character is supposedly a trained adventurer and everything, has a 15 strength meanwhile your average gamer has half that and so on. Dunno what the 10 pound weight at the end is suppose to represent as that basically adds over a hundred pounds to the wood as well as change the HELL out of the balance (insert exponential weight/distance equation here)

If you are REALLY into proving the point, go out, give your friend an 11 foot piece of PVC (what he would wield if he was a hobling with a 5.5 foot sword and a 12 foot piece costs about 2 bucks - plus you can make boffer weapons out of it afterwards!) and you take one that is 4 foot in length. Have him wield it by the bottom Two feet of the pipe (Mark it with tape) and see how well he does against you. Low blocks become a REAL bitch.

Then have two more friends pick up 4 foot pieces and see how well he does. You don't even have to try hard and hopefully he'll get the idea.

[Old Man]

Originally posted by Michael Hopcroft

If you're using a "little person" race in your game, then you should design them in such a way that they'll have their own weapon preferences. If this guy wants to weild a whopping great sword, why does he also want to play a 3' tall character? Sounds like an inherent contradiction to me. Even if he is strong enough to carry the thing and swing it, he won;t have the balance to weild it with any skill. And when you;re fighting for your life, a clumsy weapon can be worse than no weapon at all.

Actually I think he's trying to take advantage of the free +DCV for size while at the same time wielding a weapon that does huge damage.

Anyway, I have no problem with making bastard swords require two hands for the little people. The question is, how do you set the STR min for it? Along the same line, if broad swords become the little people bastard swords, how do you determine the STR min for them? I should have realized this would come up, but I also figured that my players would be reasonable. My broad swords have STR min 10 and bastard swords set at 13/15

[keithcurtis]

Originally posted by Shadowpup
Actually I think he's trying to take advantage of the free +DCV for size while at the same time wielding a weapon that does huge damage.

Is this free DCV a house rule? Because permanently small 5ed characters have to pay for that DCV. It really sounds like your dealing with a munchkin, and that nothing you say that makes logical sense is going to make a bit of difference. He sees his character as numbers to be leveraged, not as a game description of a concept. He wants something for nothing, not to play a character.

Keith "TANSTAAFL" Curtis

[Old Man]

Originally posted by keithcurtis
Is this free DCV a house rule? Because permanently small 5ed characters have to pay for that DCV. It really sounds like your dealing with a munchkin, and that nothing you say that makes logical sense is going to make a bit of difference. He sees his character as numbers to be leveraged, not as a game description of a concept. He wants something for nothing, not to play a character.

Not just a munchkin, a poor munchkin. A good munchkin can create a wildly powerful character without resorting to such credibility-straining ideas.

Another possibility is that the player is amused only by cartoonish or comic-relief characters. The kind you always see in the movies and on tv, that you really wish weren't there.

[keithcurtis]

Originally posted by Old Man
Not just a munchkin, a poor munchkin. A good munchkin can create a wildly powerful character without resorting to such credibility-straining ideas.

Heh, if you want to see an outrageous munchkinism, Mr. Vimes' thread on surviving a Horror game has a great suggestion. Buy illiteracy, so you can't read the books. Not only does it make you immune to evil tomes and get you free points, he further suggests buying illiteracy in multiple languages to garner even more points.

Keith "Now that's Brass!" Curtis

PS. Apologies for the temporary de-rail.

[Vondy]

Its not just a matter of strength.

Its a matter of size, balance, and leverage.

A two handed sword / claymore can be as much as twice the length of this characters height. Let alone the fact that this characters arms are probably only 1.5 feet long (max)!

The grip/handle/pommel thingy on a good two-handed sword is as long as this characters arms are for G-d's sake.

If the blade is expertly balanced and has a full metal tang the balance point will be at roughly 3 - 3.5 feet from the base of the grip. The balance point alone is farther out on the apex of the swing than this character is tall. He'll fling himself all over the place with every swing.

And don't forget that it takes more strength to stop and control a blade than to swing it! Every miss will spin him around like a top.

Too be frank - you can, according to the rules, weild a weapon you don't have the strength for if your willing to take a -1 OCV (i don't remember if that's a flat pen or per 5 character points of difference).

Even so, I think your ruling is fair. Instead of just saying no, however, why don't you:

Assign a -3OCV unweildy weapon penalty AND
tell the player that everytime they miss they'll be 1/2 DCV

Personally, I don't care how tall you are, with the exception of pole arms there should be a penalty for any weapon thats longer than you are. Its just unwieldy (unless you have superstrength).

For this character a broadsword with a long grip IS a 2 handed sword.

[Old Man]

Originally posted by keithcurtis
Is this free DCV a house rule? Because permanently small 5ed characters have to pay for that DCV. It really sounds like your dealing with a munchkin, and that nothing you say that makes logical sense is going to make a bit of difference. He sees his character as numbers to be leveraged, not as a game description of a concept. He wants something for nothing, not to play a character.

Oops. I didn't mean FREE, just that the +DCV is built into the racial package.

I could think of several ways to make a little person dangerous in my game and none of them involve big swords. Geeze, I don't even require any limitations on magic...