one question about weapon list and one about alignment

hi all,
first of all I would say that I'm a DW enthusiast and have already started a campaign after just a few days after  I got my pdf. Thus I'm obviously a DW newbie although I have played RPG for decades as player and as GM  ( TFT, GURPS, Warhammer, Runequest ) .

now my questions:
are the longsword, the battleaxe and the flail two-handed weapons despite the lack of the Two-Handed tag in the weapon list?
I would say yes, for the integrity of the system:  if not where are the classic T-H weapon always included in all RPGs? if not why one should  ever use a shortsword that makes less damage and has the same range of a long sword?

the answer is very important because implies also the possible use or not  of the shield at the same time of a long weapon.   

the second question  is probably a very stupid one, (apologies in advances) I think the doubt is due to the fact we are not English mothertongue.

In the Alignment of the Fighter sheet, under the "Good" line, is written " Defend those weaker than you". Well, does this mean literally "make a Defend Move to protect someone weaker (= with less strength) than you " OR - as I guess- I must take this obligation not literally and  the Good Fighter gains his Experience acting to protect someone weak needing help, for example hiding a poor peasant pursued by the evil tax collector of the king? 

Same in the Ranger Character, under the "Good" line. To gain the experience is really needed to help an animal (clearly identified), or is possible an action more creative and indirect, like for example kill an evil and unscrupulous animal trainer?
This is an actions that does not protect "an" animal, but "animals". I guess it should be still legal (possibly better than helping  one single animal), but someone insists that the  commandment must be followed strictly...

In other words, and sorry again if the question is silly, must the player literally follow the instruction, OR (as I guess) the phrases under the allignment are just suggestions,  portray the general picture,  and the action of the player can be different if it tends to the same result (GM decides) ? 

Thanks 

 

if not why one should  ever use a shortsword that makes less damage and has the same range of a long sword?

Because you used up their resources or showed them the downside of equipment? Short sword is much more useful in tight caverns or something. Or long sword generally makes more damage but werewolves only care about silver short sword you found recently.

About alignment: it's the player who decides whether her character gets XP or not. Neither GM nor another player and certainly not authors of the game may force him not to mark XP if she feels like it.
If your player have fun playing it literally, good for him, though I doubt it was original intention.

are the longsword, the battleaxe and the flail two-handed weapons despite the lack of the Two-Handed tag in the weapon list?

no, they are not. I always thought this has to be related to the historical absence of 2 handed weapons in medieval warfare, with the exception of polearms (which in fact are present in DW under the name of halberd). However, it's been said plenty of times: if you need to have a difference between one and two handed swords, just apply some +1 damage, x2 weight, x2 coin on the latter, and that's all. You should always expand the equipment list with whatever you would need in your game. It's not that there are only those four poisons in the world...

The downside of the longsword, battleaxe, and flail is simply that they're heavier and cost more coin.  They're still one-handed weapons.

Look at the Paladin's starting gear:  He either has the longsword and shield or the halberd (which is a two-handed weapon).  Either defense or reach.

This maps pretty well to D&D, where the only reason to carry a short sword is if you can't afford something better or don't care about weapon damage.

In D&D, Bards, Fighters, Paladins, and Rangers are proficient with the longsword.  These are also the classes that benefit from using them in DW.  The Rogue would much rather have a precise weapon like the rapier, while the Wizard and Druid have attack moves that make weapon damage pointless.  In all three cases, they also don't have much load to spare for a heavier weapon.

The only oddity is the Cleric.  There's no equivalent of the D&D weapon restrictions for the Cleric, and they've got plenty of load.  So they benefit from wielding a longsword or battleaxe.  You can always encourage well-armed Clerics to use the Flail instead.  It's a traditional cleric weapon.

The downside of the longsword, battleaxe, and flail is simply that they're heavier and cost more coin.  They're still one-handed weapons.

Yes, now I agree they are really one-handed, but I think this unbalances things a little.
The extra cost is negligible, less than a week of work as "unskilled" labourer.
 
I believe that in any weapon list should  be impossible to find a weapon "clearly better" than others. The downsides should always balance the advantages and players should struggle to find out the "better weapon" never getting the final answer... But my criticism  is really soft, and it involves just a detail, this game is a blast! I won't change anything in the weapon list. Probably I'll add new T-H weapons ( Greatsword, Great Axe, Great Flail, with new tags  to balance and justify the new weapons) as suggested in the rules.

are the longsword, the battleaxe and the flail two-handed weapons despite the lack of the Two-Handed tag in the weapon list?

Hey. Cross=Posting from RPGG Ahoy. Anyway, I asked this on the DW Tavern, and didn't get an answer. I do find arscott's reasoning (about the Paladin) compelling.

It also means Bows can wielded one-hand, though.

no, they are not. I always thought this has to be related to the historical absence of 2 handed weapons in medieval warfare

Who is this person who thinks two-handed weapons are missing from medieval warfare? Ha' ye n'ere seen a Claymore? Or English Archer's Maul?

Besides, what relevance is that, anyway? Isn't it rather more relevant what Conan or Gimli used?

Isn't it rather more relevant what Conan or Gimli used?

yes, it is.

Just think how much damage a 2-handed bow could do!