From a historical perspective, the difference between various weapon handling in the attack isn't nearly what games tend to make it. While one can argue that an axe handles differently than a rapier, one could also argue that compensating for these differences is what proficiencies are all about. From a game-design perspective, you wind up having to explain why someone with 6 points in Mass Weapons is worse with their weapon than someone with 6 points in Swords. We also noticed that every time you introduce any meaningful degree of handling differences, people just stop using the "worse" weapons.Siggi wrote:Have to admit, I still can't get over the concept that all weapons are equally effective at parrying. The weapons in TRoS seemed so cute and somehow alive because of their sets of characteristics, this combination of damage and cutting/thrusting/defense TNs. It turned out eventually that these stats weren't so accurate after all, but they felt cool nonetheless. And while I agree that, as a matter of game design, supplying every single weapon with a list of TNs is probably not a good idea. But I still expect that weapons' defensive properties would be incorporated into the system somehow. Because one thing is facing an enemy with a balanced hilted sword in your hand, and quite another is facing the same enemy with only a mace (or a long dagger) and no shield.
Further complicating the matter, if we really wanted to model these kind of handling differences it's actually way more complicated than just adding a defense stat. You can argue that a battle axe is worse at parrying than a sword because of its top-heavy nature, but what if it's being used two-handed? A common deflection involves choking up on the weapon and catching a blow with your haft. The top-heavy nature becomes irrelevant. Does the defense get better? The same logic will apply to one-handed vs two-handed uses of a spear, or rear-grip vs. mid-grip uses of any polearm. Daggers are one of your examples, but they have been used as civilian parrying weapons and are perfectly suited to the task. So to make any kind of realistic claim, we'd need to have separate numbers for their effectiveness against swords and daggers vs. their effectiveness against heavy weapons. For that matter, one-handed weapons as a whole can have difficulty parrying against heavier weapons. Trying to stop a halberd with an arming sword is going to be significantly more difficult than it would be with a zweihander.
It's one of those things where we can either try abstract the whole thing, or we have to get a great deal more granular in a way that I'm not sure adds enough to be worth the hassle and in the process.