Damage By Class Should Be Play-Tested

The only reason I tried to implement damage by class is because several of you on the forum suggested it. It turns out to be a pretty good system.

The designers should put damage by class in a future play-test!

My D&D5E JavaScript Roll Tracker http://dnd5.weebly.com/

Could you explain a bit what you're referring to as "damage by class" rather than hope that people have also read the thread you did?
D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition
Could you explain a bit what you're referring to as "damage by class" rather than hope that people have also read the thread you did?



Sure. But my idea of damage by class isn't the same as other's.
























































Choose a Class.ability bonus1st lvl skills1st lvl hplvl-up hparmor restrictionsmain attack damageoff-hand attack damage
fighting classstr+13con score+12hp1d12 or 6hpall armor1d12+mods1d10+mods
skilled classdex+16con score+10hp1d10 or 5hpup to leather1d10+mods1d8+mods
fighting casting classwis+13con score+8hp1d8 or 4hpup to chain1d8+mods
magic 1d10+mods
1d6+mods
magic 1d8+mods
casting classint+13con score+6hp1d6 or 3hpjewlery + 1 plate piece1d6+mods
magic 3d4+mods
1d4+mods
magic 2d6+mods





























weaponattack roll typewhy?
bludgeoningcon vs acthe goal is to keep pounding
piercingstr vs acthe goal is to strike hard
slashingstr vs acthe goal is to strike hard
thin weaponsdex vs dexthe goal is to exploit chinks


































weaponactionsdamageac
2-handedmain+off-handmain+mods+off-hand+mods
long-handledmain+off-hand1 die level lower than main and off-hand+modsX2+2
thrown or hand crossbowoff-handoff-hand+mods
bow shotmain+off-handmain+mods+off-hand+mods

My D&D5E JavaScript Roll Tracker http://dnd5.weebly.com/

Since (based on your posts) you are clearly designing your own game and using these forums as a way to get feedback on mechanics - do you have a planned publication date yet?


Cark
While I personally don't think that damage by class is something I want in D&D atleast your setup is pretty good.
there's no damage by weapon?   

differences in damage between classes are negligible.  1-2 between ajacent classes.

con vs ac is very strange.  

dex vs dex needs work.  Think rapier vs full plate + tower shield.

armor restrictions are so Gygaxian.

no special function for piercing/bludgeoning/slashing damages? eg. piercing penalizes armor.

why ability bonuses by classes?  I know they are there in DDN too but that is no excuse.
 
I am really, really tired of damage and HP being the only serious design targets for balance.  It suggests Next will be incredibly boring.  Controllers/Leaders/Defenders were fun to play in 4e.
I am really, really tired of damage and HP being the only serious design targets for balance.  It suggests Next will be incredibly boring.  Controllers/Leaders/Defenders were fun to play in 4e.



Damage does not need to be the only design target - but it is the first and the easiest.


If you can't get damage right, you will likely not get anything else right and thus it is the place to start.


And we still don't have damage right.


Carl      
there's no damage by weapon?   

differences in damage between classes are negligible.  1-2 between ajacent classes.

con vs ac is very strange.  

dex vs dex needs work.  Think rapier vs full plate + tower shield.

armor restrictions are so Gygaxian.

no special function for piercing/bludgeoning/slashing damages? eg. piercing penalizes armor.
 



Differences between weapon damage are also negligible right now.
Con Vs Ac adds variety to the weapons. When the goal of ancient combat is to bruise your opponent through his armor, constitution represents the endurance needed to do that.
Rapier's were never designed to penetrate plate armor.
Armor restrictions make logical sense. Can you imagine old man Gandalf or even Merlin from Excalibur in full plate?
I asked about special weapon functions and everyone said that nobody used them in a previous edition.

kira3696.tripod.com

My D&D5E JavaScript Roll Tracker http://dnd5.weebly.com/

No/non/nein/nyet.

 Fear is the Mind Killer

 

If I wanted to design and publish my own game, I would.
I don't. I just want to play a really good 5E based on all your ideas.
Weapon damage according to class isn't my idea. I got it here.

kira3696.tripod.com

My D&D5E JavaScript Roll Tracker http://dnd5.weebly.com/

Damage by class probably should be playtested, just not the OP's version.

There are a great many problems that can be circumvented by players and DMs having a mature discussion about what the game is going to be like before they ever sit down together to play.

 

The answer really does lie in more options, not in confining and segregating certain options.

 

You really shouldn't speak for others.  You can't hear what someone else is saying when you try to put your words in their mouth.

 

Fencing & Swashbuckling as Armor.

D20 Modern Toon PC Race.

Mecha Pilot's Skill Challenge Emporium.

 

Save the breasts.

Sure. But my idea of damage by class isn't the same as other's.

[tables go here]


Wow.  That's certainly interesting, but probably way overthought.

The only purpose of Damage-by-Class is to make weapons cosmetic, instead of either "the best weapon your class is allowed to use for some arbitrary reason" and "seriously, just use that best weapon."
ill never understand how a 2 handed sword does the same damage as a dagger when the surface area that deals damage is so much bigger with the sword. to simplify the weapons system like that would ruin the game as every fighter would use a dagger and shield or 2 daggers since they deal the same damage as 2 longswords or a dart thrown by a fighter is the same as a hit from a lance lol
ill never understand how a 2 handed sword does the same damage as a dagger when the surface area that deals damage is so much bigger with the sword. to simplify the weapons system like that would ruin the game as every fighter would use a dagger and shield or 2 daggers since they deal the same damage as 2 longswords or a dart thrown by a fighter is the same as a hit from a lance lol

Thus, Damage-By-Class already exists.  Also, thanks for verifying "seriously, just use that best weapon".

And one more thing.... www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2002/10/11
ill never understand how a 2 handed sword does the same damage as a dagger when the surface area that deals damage is so much bigger with the sword. to simplify the weapons system like that would ruin the game as every fighter would use a dagger and shield or 2 daggers since they deal the same damage as 2 longswords or a dart thrown by a fighter is the same as a hit from a lance lol


You seem to be falling into the meat points trap.  HP are more than just phsyical, so you cannot measure the hp damage a weapon does by its weight and blade length.  Damage by class foregoes that in favor of damage being determined by the fighting skill of the weapon user.  Since a dagger and a longsword are both weapons that are capable of delivering a mortal wound on a single blow, I fail to see the issue.

There are a great many problems that can be circumvented by players and DMs having a mature discussion about what the game is going to be like before they ever sit down together to play.

 

The answer really does lie in more options, not in confining and segregating certain options.

 

You really shouldn't speak for others.  You can't hear what someone else is saying when you try to put your words in their mouth.

 

Fencing & Swashbuckling as Armor.

D20 Modern Toon PC Race.

Mecha Pilot's Skill Challenge Emporium.

 

Save the breasts.

OP, no offense, but with all the weird baggage you've added while talking about it, I think you're scaring more people away from the idea of damage-by-class than drumming up interest in it.

What I think most people want with DbC is, as Qmark said, to avoid the problem of there being a "best" weapon, thereby limiting chances for character individualization. What I personally want is DbC, modified by handedness of the weapon and whether it is light or heavy, and modified by each weapon family (ax, spear, sword, etc) having different special abilities, either passive ones or special maneuvers.
EVERY DAY IS HORRIBLE POST DAY ON THE D&D FORUMS. Everything makes me ANGRY (ESPECIALLY you, reader)
ill never understand how a 2 handed sword does the same damage as a dagger when the surface area that deals damage is so much bigger with the sword. to simplify the weapons system like that would ruin the game as every fighter would use a dagger and shield or 2 daggers since they deal the same damage as 2 longswords or a dart thrown by a fighter is the same as a hit from a lance lol


You seem to be falling into the meat points trap.  HP are more than just phsyical, so you cannot measure the hp damage a weapon does by its weight and blade length.  Damage by class foregoes that in favor of damage being determined by the fighting skill of the weapon user.  Since a dagger and a longsword are both weapons that are capable of delivering a mortal wound on a single blow, I fail to see the issue.




there is no meat points trap that is the issue, so for encumberace issues why have a knight use a lance on horseback when a dagger will do, why would weapon makers make anything at all besides a dart for ranged and a dagger what a waste of metal and time and labor.
ill never understand how a 2 handed sword does the same damage as a dagger when the surface area that deals damage is so much bigger with the sword. to simplify the weapons system like that would ruin the game as every fighter would use a dagger and shield or 2 daggers since they deal the same damage as 2 longswords or a dart thrown by a fighter is the same as a hit from a lance lol


You seem to be falling into the meat points trap.  HP are more than just phsyical, so you cannot measure the hp damage a weapon does by its weight and blade length.  Damage by class foregoes that in favor of damage being determined by the fighting skill of the weapon user.  Since a dagger and a longsword are both weapons that are capable of delivering a mortal wound on a single blow, I fail to see the issue.




there is no meat points trap that is the issue, so for encumberace issues why have a knight use a lance on horseback when a dagger will do, why would weapon makers make anything at all besides a dart for ranged and a dagger what a waste of metal and time and labor.



Because damage shouldn't be the sole characteristic of a weapon.  Once you separate damage from weapons and give it to classes, you are free to load the individual weapons up with a variety of properties that make them all feel different in play.  If damage were to be the only thing that weapons had, then I would agree with your point.

There are a great many problems that can be circumvented by players and DMs having a mature discussion about what the game is going to be like before they ever sit down together to play.

 

The answer really does lie in more options, not in confining and segregating certain options.

 

You really shouldn't speak for others.  You can't hear what someone else is saying when you try to put your words in their mouth.

 

Fencing & Swashbuckling as Armor.

D20 Modern Toon PC Race.

Mecha Pilot's Skill Challenge Emporium.

 

Save the breasts.

ill never understand how a 2 handed sword does the same damage as a dagger when the surface area that deals damage is so much bigger with the sword. to simplify the weapons system like that would ruin the game as every fighter would use a dagger and shield or 2 daggers since they deal the same damage as 2 longswords or a dart thrown by a fighter is the same as a hit from a lance lol


You seem to be falling into the meat points trap.  HP are more than just phsyical, so you cannot measure the hp damage a weapon does by its weight and blade length.  Damage by class foregoes that in favor of damage being determined by the fighting skill of the weapon user.  Since a dagger and a longsword are both weapons that are capable of delivering a mortal wound on a single blow, I fail to see the issue.




there is no meat points trap that is the issue, so for encumberace issues why have a knight use a lance on horseback when a dagger will do, why would weapon makers make anything at all besides a dart for ranged and a dagger what a waste of metal and time and labor.



Because damage shouldn't be the sole characteristic of a weapon.  Once you separate damage from weapons and give it to classes, you are free to load the individual weapons up with a variety of properties that make them all feel different in play.  If damage were to be the only thing that weapons had, then I would agree with your point.



listen to the new podcast, they are making damage increases for weapons only for fighters and im cool with that, all other classes get normal damage per weapon.
you are free to load the individual weapons up with a variety of properties that make them all feel different in play.

Even without doing so, the instant gain is support for vastly more character concepts, instead of just the ones that coincidentally happen to use a weapon arbitrarily allowed by RAW, or those willing to pay a concept-tax feat for it.

you are free to load the individual weapons up with a variety of properties that make them all feel different in play.

Even without doing so, the instant gain is support for vastly more character concepts, instead of just the ones that coincidentally happen to use a weapon arbitrarily allowed by RAW, or those willing to pay a concept-tax feat for it.


That's very true.

There are a great many problems that can be circumvented by players and DMs having a mature discussion about what the game is going to be like before they ever sit down together to play.

 

The answer really does lie in more options, not in confining and segregating certain options.

 

You really shouldn't speak for others.  You can't hear what someone else is saying when you try to put your words in their mouth.

 

Fencing & Swashbuckling as Armor.

D20 Modern Toon PC Race.

Mecha Pilot's Skill Challenge Emporium.

 

Save the breasts.

OP, no offense, but with all the weird baggage you've added while talking about it, I think you're scaring more people away from the idea of damage-by-class than drumming up interest in it.

What I think most people want with DbC is, as Qmark said, to avoid the problem of there being a "best" weapon, thereby limiting chances for character individualization. What I personally want is DbC, modified by handedness of the weapon and whether it is light or heavy, and modified by each weapon family (ax, spear, sword, etc) having different special abilities, either passive ones or special maneuvers.



Thanks for the comments.

My D&D5E JavaScript Roll Tracker http://dnd5.weebly.com/

Because damage shouldn't be the sole characteristic of a weapon.  Once you separate damage from weapons and give it to classes, you are free to load the individual weapons up with a variety of properties that make them all feel different in play.  If damage were to be the only thing that weapons had, then I would agree with your point.



Yeah it certainly sounds like something worth testing. Though I'm sure it'd be shot down as being "un-D&D" because every prior edition for D&D had weapons with damage based on blade length, even though that doesn't even make sense with the hit point system, because damage isn't really actual physical damage.
Because damage shouldn't be the sole characteristic of a weapon.  Once you separate damage from weapons and give it to classes, you are free to load the individual weapons up with a variety of properties that make them all feel different in play.  If damage were to be the only thing that weapons had, then I would agree with your point.



Yeah it certainly sounds like something worth testing. Though I'm sure it'd be shot down as being "un-D&D" because every prior edition for D&D had weapons with damage based on blade length, even though that doesn't even make sense with the hit point system, because damage isn't really actual physical damage.


Did they?  I seem to recall something about one of the editions having all weapons use a single damage (I think it was d6).

There are a great many problems that can be circumvented by players and DMs having a mature discussion about what the game is going to be like before they ever sit down together to play.

 

The answer really does lie in more options, not in confining and segregating certain options.

 

You really shouldn't speak for others.  You can't hear what someone else is saying when you try to put your words in their mouth.

 

Fencing & Swashbuckling as Armor.

D20 Modern Toon PC Race.

Mecha Pilot's Skill Challenge Emporium.

 

Save the breasts.


Did they?  I seem to recall something about one of the editions having all weapons use a single damage (I think it was d6).



Hmm the very first edition of regular D&D might have done that. I know BECMI and AD&D 1E (and everything after those) all had varying dice for weapons.
Sign In to post comments