Musings on Weapon Damage in Old-School D&D

[merias]

New post is up! What do you like as far as weapon damage options in old-school D&D?

https://osr.smolderingwizard.com/musing ... dampd.html

[rredmond]

I would LOVE to try the d6 for everything method - if I can decrease crunch, I do so. But my players like the variable by weapon and by opponent size, which I think is option 4 in the poll - the less crunchy AD&D option. But I do DM 1e, so that makes a difference I'm sure. "vs. armor" is too deep and mathy for me, so that's a no. It's good for the trade-offs too, you want the power of the two-handed or battle-axe, then "no shield for you!"

[merias]

Makes sense if you play 1e already ... does anyone really use the weapon vs. armor stuff? After reading Delta's post on how badly the weapon vs. armor table was broken, I don't think it was ever play-tested before being published.

[rredmond]

Yeah, I'm biased. But I've played a bunch of OD&D, quick down and dirty was the key there. My 1HP cleric lasted until SECOND level!
A simple 1d6 inspires creativity for sure.

[badams30]

While I do see the reason behind variable damage (a pole arm is logically going to do more dmg than a dagger) I always hated to see players build the min/max characters and always take a 2 handed sword or something that is most damage. Nice to see players make a character that fits what they want to play, not a max damage machine.

[merias]

Yeah, I'm biased. But I've played a bunch of OD&D, quick down and dirty was the key there. My 1HP cleric lasted until SECOND level!
A simple 1d6 inspires creativity for sure.

A 1hp wonder! That is always fun when the "hopeless" PC outlives the others.

[merias]

While I do see the reason behind variable damage (a pole arm is logically going to do more dmg than a dagger) I always hated to see players build the min/max characters and always take a 2 handed sword or something that is most damage. Nice to see players make a character that fits what they want to play, not a max damage machine.

I think that is what was most annoying with the Labyrinth Lord rule that says Dwarves cannot use two-handed weapons, which includes battle axes. That takes away a lot of player agency, for no good reason. I always thought it was an error anyway, since in B/X the rules state Dwarves cannot use long bows or two-handed swords. Other two-handed weapons are fine.

[badams30]

While I do see the reason behind variable damage (a pole arm is logically going to do more dmg than a dagger) I always hated to see players build the min/max characters and always take a 2 handed sword or something that is most damage. Nice to see players make a character that fits what they want to play, not a max damage machine.

I think that is what was most annoying with the Labyrinth Lord rule that says Dwarves cannot use two-handed weapons, which includes battle axes. That takes away a lot of player agency, for no good reason. I always thought it was an error anyway, since in B/X the rules state Dwarves cannot use long bows or two-handed swords. Other two-handed weapons are fine.

Oh yeah, I didn’t like that either. One of my big houserules.

[Magremore]

I like d6 with a d8 for two-handed melee weapons (except staves).