|
1 year ago ::
Feb 04, 2012 - 12:33AM
#1
|
Date Joined:
Aug 13, 2008
|
The math
Proficiencies should be penalty oriented not bonus oriented so that the less likely occurrence causes you to modify the sum of your attack.
What do I mean?
Take for example AD&D the classes had different penalties for using a weapon they are not proficient with, where a fighters penalty was less than a Magic-Users. But it was rare to have to calculate this because normally your PC's are using a weapon they are proficient with and when they did there was no modifier used.
Why add extra math for every character using there normally utilized weapons, which they are proficient with,
Let's streamline the system. When it comes to weapon proficiencies lets take a lesson from AD&D.
VR
Will
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Feb 04, 2012 - 12:38AM
#2
|
Date Joined:
Aug 19, 2007
|
I kind of agree: anything that takes the focus away from what my character is using and shifts it to what my character is is welcome.
I'm always kind of bothered by D&D's insistence to introduce sub-par weapons just for the sake of completeness. Why if I want to play a roman legionnaire using a Short Sword I need to be less effective than somebody who uses a Long Sword? It's just theme, and fluff. I'd like to see weapon types be just a Fighter-specific feature, and flatten the weapons to something like:
Light -> 1d6
One-Handed -> 1d8
Two-Handed or Two Weapons -> 2d6
Are you interested in an online 4E game on Sunday? Contact me with a PM! Spoiler:
Show
Reflavoring: the change of flavor without changing any mechanical part of the game, no matter how small, in order to fit the mechanics to an otherwise unsupported concept.
Retexturing: the change of flavor (with at most minor mechanical adaptations) in order to effortlessly create support for a concept without inventing anything new.
Houseruling: the change, either minor or major, of the mechanics in order to better reflect a certain aspect of the game, including adapting the rules to fit an otherwise unsupported concept.
Homebrewing: the complete invention of something new that fits within the system in order to reflect an unsupported concept. Ideas for 5ESpoiler:
Show
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Feb 04, 2012 - 1:27AM
#3
|
Date Joined:
Aug 13, 2008
|
Thanks for the reply. I have always admired rules and systems that do a lot with little. A good example of this are the 6 ability scores, just six words/# yet vast in utility, that being said, I must say I quite enjoy the way weapons use varying dice. Now your idea is very attractive for it's simplicity, it looks 4ed Gamma Worldish. VR Will I leave you with this my friend: 
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Feb 04, 2012 - 1:45AM
#4
|
Date Joined:
Jul 10, 2003
|
I couldn't agree more. All "short swords" of any region, race, time period still do the same base damage as they have a base function and can be used by anyone with a "short sword" proficiency. These weapons can vary in appearance (fluff) to anyone's desire but it's still a simple machine.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Feb 04, 2012 - 1:50PM
#5
|
Date Joined:
Apr 13, 2011
|
I don't really see much difference in 3e's penalty if you aren't proficient vs 4e's bonus if you are. That said, I prefer 4e's system where different weapons give different proficiency bonuses, simply because some weapons are better designed than others, and are thus, more accurate.
That warm fuzzy feeling you get when you a forum thread you're subscribed to has a new comment.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Feb 04, 2012 - 1:54PM
#6
|
Date Joined:
May 18, 2002
|
Light -> 1d6
One-Handed -> 1d8
Two-Handed or Two Weapons -> 2d6
Brilliant!
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Feb 04, 2012 - 2:28PM
#7
|
Date Joined:
Sep 26, 2001
|
Weapon proficiency bonuses didn't make a lot of sense to me, either.
There were two points to it: One was AC, which was pegged a little higher than other defenses.
The other was, I'm guessing, just avoiding penalties, as with racial modifiers - perhaps for no other reason than the connotation. A diffference of 2 or 3 in your attack bonus is the same whether its the result of losing a bonus or taking a penalty. It's simpler and clearer than a proficiency penalty system that wasn't associated directly with the weapon tables, but instead depended upon class.
For the core game, it might not even be worth it to have weapon proficiencies, just make some classes better with weapons than others.
Gamma World, BTW, handled weapons with just broad categories. Light/heavy, melee/ranged, one or two handed (with two-handed stats also covering TWF). That could be fine for the core game.
Love 4e? Concerned about its future? Join the Old Guard of 4e"You want The Tooth? You can't handle The Tooth!" - Dahlver-Nar. "If magic is unrestrained in the campaign, D&D quickly degenerates into a weird wizard show where players get bored quickly" - E. Gary Gygax
|
|
|
