Weapons length and reach in combat

When posting a comment on the A Paladin in Citadel blog about the value of weapon length modifiers I realized it had turned into a post of its own. I have posted on this topic before, but it's worth revisiting. Here we go.

Those rules, adding a sense of simulation to the play, are probably jettisoned because they make combats longer.

While it might be heresy, I might suggest that those who prefer tactical crunch should take a closer look at D&D 4th ed. The teamwork and tactical play needed for efficient combat is a big part of that game. Even with the fiddly bits of 1st ed., it never was a very tactically detailed game.

Now, that being said, there are some ways to incorporate tactical details while making the game decently swift. One good way to add some depth and planning to the combat phases is to have different phases in combat. Ranged combat and magic have their own phases, and I'd suggest they go before melee.

When it comes to weapon length, I think Elric!/Stormbringer can add a simple way to handle that. This is how it works. If you have your weapons categorized as "long" or "short", the longer ones will have reach to hit before the short ones do. Simple enough.

When attacking, in whatever order you choose, let "long" weapons go first. If you use DEX order or side initiative, follow that but let long weapons trumph that order.

For fighters with "short" weapons, they will have to make a dodge of some kind to get within the reach of the "long" weapon. Otherwise they can not attack. The same thing then apply when the opponent have dodged within your reach. Wielding a "long" weapon you then need to make a disengaging dodge in order to use your weapon again.

While it reduces the reach to a binary situation, it have the benefit of being very simple, but still managing to create a lot more tactical depth to the choice of weapons. Should your game system of choice, D&D say, not have a dodge skill, use the initiative! Dice off or use DEX or whatever method you normally use. A great idea from Tomas Arfert's Saga RPG.

Hopefully that gave some food for thought.

The minutiae of gaming - money changing

I listen to a few gaming podcasts, and I will write about those another time. Now I wanted to talk about something that they spoke about on RFI issue 15, namely  money changing fees.

Why haven't I used money changing fees? Imagine delvers coming back from the dungeon, and their packs are filled with gold minted during bygone eras. If you want to compare the classic fantasy gaming era with the middle ages of earth history, money was often used by weight. Not always were the minted coin worth anything because of the emperor whose face was stamped into the metal, but the metal itself. If you care about "realism" then somebody with scales who will give you some usable change or be able to buy some old coins for their true value would be a natural part of the campaign. Also, the existence of money changing fees are in the AD&D DMG, which is reason enough for some people.

So. Why haven't I bothered with things like that?

Twenty years ago, I would have said that interacting with merchants, money changers and such people was roleplaying. Back in those days we had endless swaths of free time and equipping for adventure could easily take a session. We engaged in interaction with every facet of the imaginary world. Now when I think of money changing fees and encumbrance I just sigh.

The thing is I could easily see the value of these kinds of things in the game world. Encumbrance is another resource management, and paying fees and taxes are reasons for players to get inventive. But, is it still worth it when sessions are shorter and far and few between?