|
12 months ago ::
Jun 21, 2012 - 7:49AM
#11
|
|
|
@Serpine, I think character race should have some crunch. The racial weapon crunch has varied through the editions, it wasn't until 3rd that every race got something - a low level crunch weapon proficiency. But don't get me wrong, the elven wizard with a longsword at his side was a great image in my mind.
I don't think every race need racial weapon increase, there are too many races for that. And I don't think every racial ability is as useful as every other racial ability. But if this is the direction 5th is going to go in, I would like to work as fluffy crunch and not CharOp crunch.
@rampant, there have always been sub-standard choices in D&D. Do you want every Basic Weapon to be d6, every Martial Weapon to be d8 and every Heavy Weapon to be d12? If there are going to be Racial Weapon die increases, let's make them to the sub-standard weapons.
@draegn, I hope there are plenty of those things. The fluffy crunch describes the game/world so much better than fluff or crunch alone.
|
|
|
|
12 months ago ::
Jun 21, 2012 - 9:07AM
#12
|
Date Joined:
Jan 29, 2005
|
I would much rather see a background that gives out the racial weapon proficiency/bonus. "Want to be a human in the dwarven army? With the dwarven soldier background you too can smack the kneecaps off those marauding giants with your trusty warhammer." Sounds like a recruitment advertisement, but IMO it separates out genetic vs cultural racial features into pieces that make sense.
Magic Dual Color Test
Show
|
|
|
|
12 months ago ::
Jun 21, 2012 - 9:31AM
#13
|
Date Joined:
Oct 26, 2004
|
NO I want weapons that don't do damage commensurate with their size/handedness/training requirements to have other benefits, like multiple damage types, finessable, or something.
Axes traditionally do not have these abilities, so making the battle axe a 1d6 weapon with no abilities unless wielded by a dwarf is a big nerf on one of my favorite weapons, and will probably extend to my big favorite, the great axe.
Furthermore I think automatic racial features that increase weapon damage/accuracy are a bad idea, weapon proficiencies seem to be less of a non-ability than they were in 4e, but +1 die type with hammers and aes is just not an ability I want to be an assuemd part of playing a dwarf, I'd rather they do more with the dwarves' legendary endurance, underground origins, etc. I want abilities that will be at least marginally useful to any class.
|
|
|
|
12 months ago ::
Jun 21, 2012 - 9:39AM
#14
|
|
|
@rampant, there have always been sub-standard choices in D&D. Do you want every Basic Weapon to be d6, every Martial Weapon to be d8 and every Heavy Weapon to be d12? If there are going to be Racial Weapon die increases, let's make them to the sub-standard weapons.
Actually, I wouldn't have a problem with this. I would be quite pleased if the game set up weapons like in the new Gamma World, with a chart based on hands-used (2-handed=more damage) and being light or heavy (Heavy uses STR/CON for damage, Light uses DEX/INT, I think there may have been some damage and accuracy differences too), and then you describe the weapon any way you want. I want to finally be able to weild a spear in D&D and not have it be a piece of trash. Same goes with ranged weapons. Possibly the "Gun" category would be thrown out, but it could work for weapons that require more exotic ammo, which could have a place in D&D. For D&D, you might want to say that there are still Simple and Martial weapons, with the Simple ones doing one less damage dice of damage or something, but there really is no need for some weapons to be worse in the same proficiency category.
I'm not saying make an ax just a refluffed sword which is a refluffed spear. Make each weapon have a unique property that only that weapon family has, ie. swords get one thing, axes another, spears another, etc. But make those properties require special training to use, either a feat or a class feature. To throw Fighters a bone and to try to capture the "weapon master" feel, make them have a level 1 class feature allowing them to use all the bonuses!
As well, I agree with many other here that I believe things like "Racial Weapon Mastery" should be themes and feats. You want to be a Dwarf who is specialized in your race's favoured weapon? Take the Dwarven Warrior theme or something. Dwarves aren't just born with the knowledge of how to use hammers good. Making it a theme/feat allows you to have the flavour desired without needing to make huge swatches of weapons "Suboptimal" so that you can give a bonus that in the end is just fluff. Think about that idea for a second. You want to avoid making racial weapons too optimal, a noble goal. To do that, however, you decided the best way is to make it so nobody EXCEPT that race will want to use that weapon. It's a ridiculous level of pidgeon holeing. You use a longsword, except if you're not human. So boring! Let me play what I want, I'm the hero! We should be giving more options, not less. Making a cost to it, like a feat or theme, stops it from being to powerful because it's a tradeoff. It's a much better way to go.
EVERY DAY IS HORRIBLE POST DAY ON THE D&D FORUMS.
Everything makes me ANGRY (ESPECIALLY you, reader)
|
|
|
|
12 months ago ::
Jun 21, 2012 - 9:51AM
#15
|
Date Joined:
May 18, 2002
|
CCB is the only acceptable "racial weapon".
|
|
|
|
12 months ago ::
Jun 21, 2012 - 10:51AM
#16
|
Date Joined:
May 27, 2012
|
If the choice is between "no hill dwarf will ever use any weapon other than a dwarven war axe," and "nobody other than a hill dwarf will ever use a dwarven war axe," then I'll choose the second option over the first one; it's much less restrictive, even though the only point of either of them is to reduce options and make the game less fun.
The metagame is not the game.
|
|
|
|
12 months ago ::
Jun 21, 2012 - 10:59AM
#17
|
Date Joined:
Jan 12, 2012
|
I'd prefer to see racial weapon bonuses go die in a fire, personally.
I don't like the idea that an Elf will always and forever be a better swordsman than my Human/Dwarf/whatever just because they're an Elf. That just ticks me off something fierce.
|
|
|
|
12 months ago ::
Jun 21, 2012 - 11:44AM
#18
|
Date Joined:
May 30, 2010
|
I can't remember where I read it, but along with the dwarf having a bonus in hammers/axes, the hafling has a bonus for slings.
|
|
|
|
12 months ago ::
Jun 21, 2012 - 11:46AM
#19
|
|
|
Actually, I wouldn't have a problem with this. I would be quite pleased if the game set up weapons like in the new Gamma World, with a chart based on hands-used (2-handed=more damage) and being light or heavy (Heavy uses STR/CON for damage, Light uses DEX/INT, I think there may have been some damage and accuracy differences too), and then you describe the weapon any way you want. I want to finally be able to weild a spear in D&D and not have it be a piece of trash. Same goes with ranged weapons. Possibly the "Gun" category would be thrown out, but it could work for weapons that require more exotic ammo, which could have a place in D&D. For D&D, you might want to say that there are still Simple and Martial weapons, with the Simple ones doing one less damage dice of damage or something, but there really is no need for some weapons to be worse in the same proficiency category.
I'm not saying make an ax just a refluffed sword which is a refluffed spear. Make each weapon have a unique property that only that weapon family has, ie. swords get one thing, axes another, spears another, etc.
I'm on board with this, and sloppily suggested it in another thread. I think it was a "no useless weapons" thread.
|
|
|
|
12 months ago ::
Jun 21, 2012 - 11:51AM
#20
|
Date Joined:
May 30, 2010
|
How does gama world deal with weapons with reach or other special features?
Does it just cost an extra X gold per special ability on the weapon? Can you just attach something like "reach" to your longsword?
|
|
|
