| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| mikie |
Posted - 08 Nov 2013 : 23:03:07
Well met all! Does anyone know the stats on the dwarven claymore? The only thing I can remember about them is that they are rare to have. Another question also is this weapon 2 handed for the dwarf or 1 handed? Any info helps out. Thanks all! |
| 14 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Thauramarth |
Posted - 12 Nov 2013 : 15:15:34
quote:
Originally posted by Barastir
quote:
Originally posted by The Masked Mage
(..) and gets an effective +1 magical bonus because dwarves keep their swords sharp...
Is it a magical bonus? I'm asking because not every bonus in 2e was due to magic properties... As the bonus of the Amazon fighters for men who would never expect a woman to fight well and would underestimate her abilities, or the bonus for weapons of quality as described in The Complete Fighter's Handbook, and the arrow bonus for archers from The Complete Book of Elves. Is the original article saying this bonus is magical?
The bonus was non-magical. |
| Barastir |
Posted - 12 Nov 2013 : 09:39:17
quote:
Originally posted by The Masked Mage
(..) and gets an effective +1 magical bonus because dwarves keep their swords sharp...
Is it a magical bonus? I'm asking because not every bonus in 2e was due to magic properties... As the bonus of the Amazon fighters for men who would never expect a woman to fight well and would underestimate her abilities, or the bonus for weapons of quality as described in The Complete Fighter's Handbook, and the arrow bonus for archers from The Complete Book of Elves. Is the original article saying this bonus is magical? |
| The Masked Mage |
Posted - 12 Nov 2013 : 01:38:08
It is just a contrivance to limit the usage of this new special rare weapon he created for dwarves. His rational for its other capabilities were equally lacking, ie. it works well against plate armor and gets an effective +1 magical bonus because dwarves keep their swords sharp... as if that is not a universal goal. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 11 Nov 2013 : 15:55:44
quote:
Originally posted by Thauramarth
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by Thauramarth
Its rarity outside of dwarves is mostly due to the fact that, due to its make and structure, it is very awkward for non-dwarves to wield.
That seems kinda odd, to me... Why should a weapon designed for and by something near-human be physically difficult for any other race to wield? Especially when many weapons can be used by any race...
That seems to me to be another one of those cases where something was designed for a specific race just to give them something different, regardless of the logic of it or how practical it was.
Wooly may have a point, but here's the rationale, direct quote from the article: "However, few non-dwarves desire to employ such weapons, because the dwarven style of forging their claymores yields a blade with a weight imbalance beneficial to wielders with a low center off gravity but feeling quite odd and fatiguing to taller and less stocky warriors. In game terms, this peculiarity can be handled by requiring the use of two proficiency slots when any taller race gains proficiency with the claymore."
But the article specifies non-dwarves, not just taller races. If it's all about a low center of gravity, then gnomes and halflings should be able to use the weapon without issue.
And I have to wonder just how different their center of gravity can be that a foot or two of height makes so much of a difference. |
| Barastir |
Posted - 11 Nov 2013 : 14:14:49
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
(...)
Why should a weapon designed for and by something near-human be physically difficult for any other race to wield? Especially when many weapons can be used by any race...
True enough. Maybe it would be rare because of their physical specificities, but they would be usable by physically similar races, but used by humans or elves with a penalty to hit, like saurial weapons or the elven swords described in Cormanthyr. |
| Thauramarth |
Posted - 11 Nov 2013 : 14:12:16
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by Thauramarth
Its rarity outside of dwarves is mostly due to the fact that, due to its make and structure, it is very awkward for non-dwarves to wield.
That seems kinda odd, to me... Why should a weapon designed for and by something near-human be physically difficult for any other race to wield? Especially when many weapons can be used by any race...
That seems to me to be another one of those cases where something was designed for a specific race just to give them something different, regardless of the logic of it or how practical it was.
Wooly may have a point, but here's the rationale, direct quote from the article: "However, few non-dwarves desire to employ such weapons, because the dwarven style of forging their claymores yields a blade with a weight imbalance beneficial to wielders with a low center off gravity but feeling quite odd and fatiguing to taller and less stocky warriors. In game terms, this peculiarity can be handled by requiring the use of two proficiency slots when any taller race gains proficiency with the claymore." |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 11 Nov 2013 : 13:10:49
quote:
Originally posted by Thauramarth
Its rarity outside of dwarves is mostly due to the fact that, due to its make and structure, it is very awkward for non-dwarves to wield.
That seems kinda odd, to me... Why should a weapon designed for and by something near-human be physically difficult for any other race to wield? Especially when many weapons can be used by any race...
That seems to me to be another one of those cases where something was designed for a specific race just to give them something different, regardless of the logic of it or how practical it was. |
| Barastir |
Posted - 11 Nov 2013 : 12:37:31
Very nice! In 2e, some dwarves were small, but some were medium-sized, so the taller dwarves would be able to employ large weapons, like a two-handed axe (described as a dwarven weapon in the Complete Book of the Dwarves) or a claymore (with the stats of a bastard sword, per the 2e Arms & Equipment Guide). Never heard before of the dwarven claymore, gonna check it out in my Dragon Magazines! Thank you, Thauramarth, and mikie for bringing it to surface. |
| Thauramarth |
Posted - 11 Nov 2013 : 10:12:57
This is "old", but the Dwarven Claymore was written up under AD&D 2nd Edition Rules in Dragon Magazine #169; they are described as being "about the size of a bastard sword". Because of their high quality, they get +1 to hit for the first six melee strikes (until re-sharpened). In AD&D 2E terms, it did 2d4/2d6, had a speed factor of 7, and weighed 11 pounds. Its rarity outside of dwarves is mostly due to the fact that, due to its make and structure, it is very awkward for non-dwarves to wield. |
| The Masked Mage |
Posted - 10 Nov 2013 : 04:20:50
I'm curious what the source of this question was... Is there some novel that talks about dwarven claymores? |
| Tamsar |
Posted - 09 Nov 2013 : 14:33:20
quote:
Originally posted by BEAST
Some dwarves are able to handle two-handed weapons as one-handed ones. I don't know the game terminology for it.
But Bruenor used to wield the Clan Battlehammer royal great axe the same way he did his old personal battle-axe: in his right hand, with a shield on the other arm.
He did, however, have to carry the larger axe on his back, instead of on his hip, as he did with his smaller battle-axe.
I just assumed it was a Dwarven Waraxe which can be wielded one handed. I'd think a Dwarven Claymore would be akin to a Bastard Sword for stats, and able to be wielded one or two handed as well, and exotic for all races except dwarves. |
| BEAST |
Posted - 09 Nov 2013 : 07:55:34
Some dwarves are able to handle two-handed weapons as one-handed ones. I don't know the game terminology for it.
But Bruenor used to wield the Clan Battlehammer royal great axe the same way he did his old personal battle-axe: in his right hand, with a shield on the other arm.
He did, however, have to carry the larger axe on his back, instead of on his hip, as he did with his smaller battle-axe. |
| mikie |
Posted - 09 Nov 2013 : 05:40:26
That's what I was thinking too. But, if the claymore is the size of a short sword (3'-3'6") for humans would that make it a large weapon for the dwarf? Thanks. quote:
Originally posted by The Masked Mage
Claymores are huge - definitely two handed weapons... Frankly I'd think a claymore would be too large for a dwarf to use with much success, as they would be significantly longer than the dwarf would be tall (think that big sword from Braveheart)
|
| The Masked Mage |
Posted - 09 Nov 2013 : 04:37:57
Claymores are huge - definitely two handed weapons... Frankly I'd think a claymore would be too large for a dwarf to use with much success, as they would be significantly longer than the dwarf would be tall (think that big sword from Braveheart) |
