# Flails, Maces & MorningStars Questions



## sjmiller (Dec 7, 2005)

I was flipping through this, having purchased it solely because it contained information on the Godentag, and I am rather surprised and disappointed about a few things.  I am so puzzled I figured I should come here and ask about some things.

Flipping to the Godentag on page 9, it says the overall weapon length is 5 1/2 feet and that it weighs 8 pounds.  That's cool, I guess, based on the interpretation you are using.  Then I see that it is a One-Handed weapon.  One-handed?!  Doesn't anyone realize that holding a end-heavy weapon of that size and weight in one hand is not only impractical, but absurd.  The godentag is too big and too heavy to be wielded one-handed.  It was never designed to be used that way.  It was designed to knock guys in heavy plate armor off a horse and then crush them or drive the spike through their visor.  This is not something that one does one-handed.

So, I guess my question is, at the start, why was this weapon made a one-handed weapon?

Also, looking at the one-handed melee weapons on page 3, why are they all heavier than is practical?  Historically, even a heavy mace never came close to weighing 8 pounds.  One would definitely not want to attempt to wield that one handed, that's for sure!

I am just curious as to why these particular decisions were made.  Being that I am going to have to convert this back to 3.0 anyway, I figured getting into the minds of the designers wouldn't hurt.


----------



## sjmiller (Dec 9, 2005)

Okay, a guilty confession regarding the previous post.  It's been awhile since I actually looked at the weapon weights in a D&D book, and after looking at the 3.0 PH I remember why that is so.  My former career in archaeology and post-Roman English history studies means I know more about ancient weapons than is good for a gamer.  Just about every game I see, D&D (in all its versions) included, have obscenely heavy weapons.  I don't understand why they do this, or what references they are using.  So, when I see 10 pound swords, 12 pound maces, and other overweight weapons it drives me a bit crazy.

The largest functional (usable in combat) swords should top out at about 9 pounds.  Most swords, regardless of type, should be around 2 to 3 pounds.  Maces should run, surprisingly, around 2 to 4 pounds, even all metal ones.  A longbow that weighs more than a pound or two is just not practical.  I could go on, but I think you see where I am coming from.

So, while I am disappointed by some of the descriptions/weights given for weapons in FM&MS, I am not terribly surprised.


----------



## ElectricDragon (Dec 9, 2005)

While I have not received my copy of FM&M yet; I will try to answer your questions. Yes, I used weights comparable to those in the PHB; mainly because few of the references I found actually listed weights. A second reason is because weapon weights are a hold-over from earlier editions where "weight" was actually "encumbrance value" or a combination of actual weight and how unwieldy the thing is to store and carry. This lead to much higher weights for many things and if I recall correctly even different weights for some things according to how they were carried (a set of clothes weighed 3 lbs. worn and 6 lbs. carried in the backpack, I believe).

As to the length of the godentag at 5.5 feet; remember that it is topped by a 1 ft. long spike. That leaves 4.5 feet for the handle and head of the weapon. I figure 4 inches for the head; leaving 4 ft. 2 inches for the handle. Yeah, that may be a little long; but I wanted the weapon to have the ability to be set against a charge; consider that when used one-handed; the wielder must "choke up" a bit on the handle.

Ciao
Dave


----------

