Swords in Homebrew

>>49692223
You can carry sword on your belt pretty comfortably while doing other things.

>>49692223
Defensive abilities?

>>49692265
True, but that's not going to be a big enough bonus to keep up with the other weapon types given the fairly combat-oriented feel I'm going to be shooting for with this one.

>>49692286
I already considered that, but it feels kind of hamfisted. It's probably what I'll go with if I can't think of anything better, though.

>>49692318
Realistically speaking swords were rarely used as primary weapon. See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kdx8kNo_ouA
It's very nuanced and I don't think rules-light system can achieve satisfactory results. Just give them speed and better parry or whatever.

In fiction, though, swords somehow are more powerful than fucking halberds. Or author just don't give a fuck and everyone fights on par no matter what weapon they are using.

>>49692431
What about in fiction, though? The hero usually carries a sword (and frequently it's some powerful magic sword), but how could that reasonably be represented? Rerolls or extra damage against bosses sound too meta, but I don't want swords to be the "bad" weapons.

Come to think of it, I'm already looking at making swords slightly better at hitting multiple targets (where special attacks for other weapons hit 2 adjacent tiles, swords hit 3, etc), but I'd like something that applies to regular, no-frills, 0 mana cost attacks as well (and is in the general vicinity of the approximately +33% damage boost that axes get).

>>49692483
In fiction you just don't see other weapons. Well, maybe evil guys use some wicked shit and hero has to cheat because his sword sucks against oversized axes. I can't remember anything in fiction that portraits sword as better weapon rather than main hero being super effective at fencing.

Another idea: if you have any rules for striking vulnerable parts like eyes or neck or gaps in armor, make swords better at that. More simply - increased chance for crit.

>>49692561
>increased chance for crit
Actually that's a good idea, I'll have to crunch some numbers for that.

And as for other weapons, I usually see Fellowship of the Ring type setups; halfish (maybe a little more) have swords, there's a Dwarf with an axe somewhere, possibly a not-Viking with another, plus a bow or two and once in a while some kind of polearm (though that's usually only stuff where people are fairly magical, so it's usually FF-style Dragoons and that sort of thing). Plus, in some genres, a dick-ass thief type with two daggers (and a gazillion spares hidden away).

>>49692223
Maybe you could make them very good weapons for magic aligned characters. Like, the long straight metal part is great for carving in runes and they need to be on the metal for some reason. So magic/melee hybrids would be the main users of swords as a magic focus that can also kill stuff. Other characters could still use it as a sidearm for it's flexibility or with some situational enchantments.

Or, with the flexibillity of swords in mind, you could implement a stance system. Offensive stance that strikes normally, defensive one that parries and thrusts, etc.
Even if you implement this for all weapons, swords could still be the ace in flexibillity because other weapons aren't that good with certain styles. Axes can't thrust, spears are very bulky, that stuff.

>>49692745
I don't think I want to deal with making one weapon type better at magic or being enchanted than the others, but the stances idea is potentially worth looking into.

Perhaps let people trade offense for defense and vice-versa, and swords get a slight discount on the downside (or a slight increase in the upside).

>>49692816
That's pretty much what I thought of. You go into defensive stance, you get +X to parry rolls, but -Y to attack rolls. Swords got modest values on everything, making them very adaptable. But axes get a pretty big malus in defensive stance, so you want to avoid it rather use a shield for defense.

As for the magic angle, maybe enchanted swords are easier to make, thus more available or cheaper. Or they're geared more towards a specific caster type and so you find nieche enchantments more often on them. That way you're still keeping the sidearm aspect in.
Though that is about the desing of the individual items, not the actual rule system.

>>49692431
>Realistically speaking swords were rarely used as primary weapon.

Much more often than axes and maces were though.

Realistically, swords are basically better than other 'sidearm' weapons. They cut flesh pretty much as good as an axe and they hurt people in armour as well as anything else.

Maces aren't some magical armour-busting device. Most of the impact comes from the fact it's a long lever, which you get from swords as well. Axes and maces have a slight advantage in terms of the force they deliver from a blow, due to concentrating their mass at the head. With an axe that makes it pretty unbalanced, while a mace is a little better for that but obviously doesn't cut as deeply into unprotected flesh. Maces are also slightly less likely to slide off the surface of armour, but that effect has been massively exaggerated (as has deflective armour in general) by pop-historians.

>>49692874
>As for the magic angle
Yeah that's pretty reasonable, and something to consider. It's more of a setting concern, so not something I'm dealing with just yet, but something to keep in mind.

In any event, it's late here and I'm going to bed. I'll be by in the morning in case this thread is still around. Thank you all for your suggestions.

>>49692223
Seems like your system assumes that the opponent stands patiently waiting for you to swing at them, after which they will swing. Although that's been in TTRPGs a long time, it's not very plausible. Most sword technology advanced beyond the pugio was about being faster than other weapons, parrying, disarming, or breaking them, or delivering wounds very rapidly without dropping your defense. Your system doesn't seem to bear any relation to that, so I say treat them as axes.

The sword is an all-around weapon: it has more reach than a mace or axe but less than a spear, it can cut while a spear cannot but can also thrust while an axe cannot. It can also serve as a mace if need be, by grabbing it by the blade and hitting with the hilt.
The only best thing a sword usually has that an axe or spear has not is the protection it offers for the hand, with most european swords, at least.

>>49693266
>what is abstraction
>hurrdurr I'll just assume you're an idiot so I can give you a shitty unhelpful answer