[LTC2] Multi-tined contradiction...

[Gudiomen]

When designing a trident, LTC2 says it's at -2 to hit because it's tip-heavy, but further down, it says that "while it has more points, each spike is thinner, so cost and weight is unchanged".

Aren't those two statements impossible to hold together? From the game-mechanics point of view, I can understand this as a simplification... But if there is no change in weight (of the spearhead), then neither the -2 to hit nor the unbalanced trait are justified.

[Kuroshima]

Originally Posted by Gudiomen

When designing a trident, LTC2 says it's at -2 to hit because it's tip-heavy, but further down, it says that "while it has more points, each spike is thinner, so cost and weight is unchanged".

Aren't those two statements impossible to hold together? From the game-mechanics point of view, I can understand this as a simplification... But if there is no change in weight (of the spearhead), then neither the -2 to hit nor the unbalanced trait are justified.

The thing is, the weight is distributed differently, or so I understand. The same weight in a different configuration can be much harder to handle, that's the principle of the lever. Now, this means that the weight of a spear is much more evenly distributed, beaming that the spearhead covers a bunch of the pole, while the trident does not.

[Peter V. Dell'Orto]

Originally Posted by Kuroshima

The thing is, the weight is distributed differently, or so I understand.

This is the logic behind it - a weapon can be more tip-heavy than another, equally heavy weapon. These are.

It's not universally true for multi-tined weapons, but within a reasonable and gameable approximation it works for enough to justify "no change in cost or weight."

[Gudiomen]

Certainly, a weapon can be tip-heavy if it's the same as another... that's the reason swords are balanced and maces aren't, even if they theoretically weigh the same...

The problem here is, we're not talking about the weight of the weapon, but the weight of the tip precisely.

We're replacing a spearhead with a multi-tinned spearhead, which weighs the same. How can it become tip-heavy if the weight distribution is still the same?

Mind you, the trident from LT is heavier, and I assume the weight is concentrated at the head, that makes sense.

[Danukian]

Originally Posted by Gudiomen

C
We're replacing a spearhead with a multi-tinned spearhead, which weighs the same. How can it become tip-heavy if the weight distribution is still the same?

Because the spearhead is a single, large head, where as the trident has a smaller, lighter central head flanked by two heads off on side "wings" - weight is equal but weight distribution isn't - the trident is wider at the head, making it tip heavy.

[Gudiomen]

Distribution along the minute proportion of the spear's total length that is the head?

Let's say the spearhead is 20cm long, with another 10cm of socket to fit the haft...

That's 30cm. The spear has what? 160cm? We're talking about less than one fifth of the length... you're telling me that 1lb weight out of 4lbs, distributed differently within 30cm out of 160cm is going to make a significant difference?

We're talking a few inches difference in head length...

Here's a few pics to illustrate how small the difference in length of the spearhead is, and how little distributing weight along that small proportion of total length of the weapon looks irrelevant:

spear
trident

[Gudiomen]

Originally Posted by Danukian

Because the spearhead is a single, large head, where as the trident has a smaller, lighter central head flanked by two heads off on side "wings" - weight is equal but weight distribution isn't - the trident is wider at the head, making it tip heavy.

Width has nothing to do with it, it's tip heavy if distribution is different regarding length, not width. Just like top-heavy regards height.

[Danukian]

Originally Posted by Gudiomen

Width has nothing to do with it, it's tip heavy if distribution is different regarding length, not width. Just like top-heavy regards height.

Seeing this post, then stepping on my kids legos led me to the perfect example: If you stack eight 1-post lego blocks vertically, then add a 6x2 post rectangle to the top, it would be top-heavy because of the disproportionate weight at the top.

Not into legos? have a garden? Hold a 1 lb bucket of water at the end of a shovel, try three 1/3 buckets spaced along a rake. that's weight distribution.

[Gudiomen]

Originally Posted by Danukian

Seeing this post, then stepping on my kids legos led me to the perfect example: If you stack eight 1-post lego blocks vertically, then add a 6x2 post rectangle to the top, it would be top-heavy because of the disproportionate weight at the top.

Yes, this is a good example, and it would be valid if it were the same thing. The spear/trident example is more like: replace the last lego piece with another of a different shape, but the same weight (one that has symetric weight distribution, mind you, one that has more weight on one side than the other will affect balance).

Edit: you said it yourself, to change balance you need to have "disproportionate weight at the top/tip". If the trident head and the spearhead weigh the same, that doesn't happen. The MA/LT trident does have extra weight, presumably at the tip, so the stats are justified. But the spearhead modifier on LTC2 does not, yet, it confers the same penalties in spite of not altering weight distribution along the weapon.

Not into legos? have a garden? Hold a 1 lb bucket of water at the end of a shovel, try three 1/3 buckets spaced along a rake. that's weight distribution.

Another good example of weight distribution, but again, it's not what we have here. To simulate the spear/trident difference do this:

1) tie a 1lb stone to the end of a 4-foot pole... try the balance, see how it feels.
2) now move the stone half-a-palm closer to the tip... does it feel significantly different? Is there a significant change in balance?
3) now swap the stone for another that weighs the same, but is of a different shape, more oval, more squared... any change at all?

#2 has weight distribution changes, it should affect balance ever so slighly, but not enough to warrant -2 to hit and an unbalanced statistic...
#3 has no weight distribution changes at all, you're just changing the shape of the tip, changes in weight distribution are negligible.

[Peter V. Dell'Orto]

The rules don't contradict themselves. The overall weapon weight isn't different, but the balance and weight distribution, etc. is, and I felt that this was enough to justify both no change to cost and weight for the additional spearheads and -2 for being tip heavy at the same time.

If you strongly dislike the results, change them. Either drop the -2, or add some cost and weight. But remember the rules aren't for converting spears into tridents . . .

. . . if you want a spear with multiple tines, you don't take a spear and apply multi-tined rules under "additional spearhead." You just take a trident. A spear with multiple tines is already a weapon on the weapon tables. If you add a multi-tined additional spearhead to a weapon (or lengthen a speartip into a very long one), that additional head doesn't cost more or weigh more if it's multi-tined.

Weird things will happen if you take a weapon off the tables and apply part of the rules for additional customizations to them to make them into a different weapon already on the tables. The rules aren't really designed to do that. It's not a WDS, it's rules for sticking a frog-gig point on your poleaxe or a pick on the peen of your ax.