RE: [Fwd: Steel tech and weapons]

[Lyle H Janney <lhjanney@adpc.purdue.edu>]

Well, guys, I've always treated the 2, count them, _2_ steel weapons I've
ever had a character own, both long swords, as +1 to damage only.  I
agree that there should be no bonuses to hit.  I'm not even sure that there
should be bonuses to damage (again, all we're really doing is ensuring that
the edge stays longer and allowing for the possibility of lighter/stronger
weapons), but I'd rather have that than have a steel weapon equal a once-
enchanted weapon.  As regards other materials, again, what is the actual
effect to the weapon/armor?  Is it stronger?  Then it should be harder to
break/penetrate when using equal amounts; on the other hand, you could
opt for equal protection effect (i.e., adamant plate mail = iron plate mail),
and just have a lighter version of the armor (a thinner gauge is required
to provide the same protection).  I still don't see any reason for bonuses to
hit on weapons, but I do agree with bonuses to armor if the same amount
is used.  (I know, I know; I am assuming similar material density when I
suggest that with a stronger material, less can be used to get the same
protection, thus resulting in lighter armor.  It just seems easier to deal
with that way; after all, we are striving for a balance of realism _and_
playability, right?)

By the by, Greg, you should never play anything based simply on a
precedent (as many a precedent has been set by GM's who simply made
a mistake).  Only play by what is listed in rules or errata.  The rules state
that steel armor gives a +DV/3 (round down).  Hence: steel chain mail
has DV's of 5/1/2; steel plate mail has DV's of 8/5/2; steel shield gives
DV bonuses of 4/4/1, and a steel helm is still just 1/1/0.  (NOTE: I am
coming up with these numbers from memory, which at this time of the
morning is a bit foggy, so please forgive rule or math errors.  The main
point I am trying to make is that a player, especially one who GM's,
should know better than to play something based simply on precedent.
As GM's, we _must_ play by the rules, or we set a bad example.)

My suggestion regarding steel weapons/armor is that a consensus on the
issue be reached, with all supporting evidence, and then have it presented
to Dan for rules change considerations.

-----Original Message-----
From:	Joel Gunderson [SMTP:belgarat@expert.cc.purdue.edu]
Sent:	Tuesday, June 16, 1998 11:24 PM
To:	Jevan Furmanski
Cc:	leads metal products inc.; Pat Collins; GMlist
Subject:	Re: [Fwd: Steel tech and weapons]



Jevan, Kevin and I had a relatively productive conversation on steel
tonight.  I think we came to a somewhat mutual agreement on the fact that
steel weapons should not give a bonus to hit.  Damage is acceptable,
however.  This makes them be a bit better than iron, and yet not devalue
the once enchanted weapon.  Some people would bring up the point that they
would do less damage if the person you are attacking is wearing a higher
grade of metal armor than the metal in your weapon, but this is not true.
Hypothetically, say a person with a steel weapon is attacking someone in
adamantite armor.  I feel that the qualities of the weapon versus those of
the armor balance
each other out in that the adamant armor is much harder to penetrate no
matter
what weapon you are using.  Just to make it a standard rule, I'd also like
to have it stated in an errata that the damage bonus will only be added to
edged weapons that do 1d6 of damage or more.  A short, piercing weapon
such as a dagger or shank will have no extra effect if it is made out of
steel as opposed to iron.  Obviously, there will be no bonus damage on
blunt weapons.


Joel


P.S.  Let's hear some replies, please.  Jevan has been bitching about this
for awhile, and I think me and Kevin are the only other players that have
taken to replying to the group.