|
9 months ago ::
Oct 08, 2012 - 11:48PM
#1
|
Date Joined:
Jul 31, 2007
|
So, for the life of me, I can't find a definition of proficiency. As the rules are written, a weapon attack bonus made with a weapon with which a person is proficient is the same as the bonus for a weapon with which the character is not proficient. Your melee attack modifier is your Strength modifier plus bonuses or penalties from other sources.
Your character class might provide a bonus to attack rolls with weapons .... If [your class table] includes a “Weapon Attack” column, add the listed number to your attack modifier with weapons....
So, taking, for example, a war cleric with 16 Strength, his attack bonus at level 1 with a battleaxe would be:
+3 (Strength mod) +2 (class bonus) = +5 attack bonus
But, using a greataxe (with which he does not have proficiency), the attack bonus is:
+3 (Strength mod) +2 (class bonus) = +5 attack bonus
This doesn't seem right. Now, I could see you getting your class bonus only when using weapons with which you are proficient, but that restriction is not in the document that I can find.
The "How to Play" document even backs this up:
An attack roll looks like this: d20 + ability modifier + weapon or magic training (if any) + situational modifiers.
No mention of proficiency there.
The same case is true with armor. I see nothing that gives any sort of disadvantage for a Sun cleric wearing plate armor, other than the disadvantages of the armor itself.
So, am I missing some well-hidden phrase in the document that explains exactly what proficiency does? I know what it does in 3E, and I know what it does in 4E, but I have no idea what it does in 5E, unless proficiency means "you can't wield anything else but these."
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Oct 09, 2012 - 4:25AM
#2
|
Date Joined:
Aug 19, 2007
|
Honestly... proficiency means "you can use it". In the final rules you want something more nuanced. A mechanical benefit or penalty that at the end of the day means "you can't do this", kind of like dual wielding in 3e - it's "possible" but not really. But you don't want the video game solution- "Sorry the sword turns red when you reach for it..."
My suggestion: Disadvantage on attack rolls for weapons. Using armor you aren't proficient with would give disadvantage on movement related skill checks and possibly perception checks for armor that would include a helmet.
----
well of course... a character that is not proficient with a sword would probably still be better off picking up a sword then a broken bottle. So the penalty shouldn't exceed the penalty for improvised weapons. Whatever that is.
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Oct 09, 2012 - 9:54AM
#3
|
Date Joined:
Aug 22, 2010
|
Profieciency is what allows you to apply your class's attack bonus to an attack. If it's not in the rules, then I'm sure it will be clarified soon enough. It's the same way they handled proficiency in 4e, and it worked really well; you gain a bonus for being proficient, not a penalty for not.
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Oct 09, 2012 - 10:00AM
#4
|
Date Joined:
Nov 10, 2011
|
They especially need to be more precise about what proficiency means with regard to finesse weapons. Even in the October playtest packet the wizard (and maybe one of the clerics, I havent looked) are using str for their finesse weapon rolls, even though they would better off using dex. On the other hand the rogue is using dex.
I thought it was a typo at first, but now I'm not so sure. Maybe you need something beyond regular proficiency to be able to use dex.
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Oct 09, 2012 - 10:01AM
#5
|
Date Joined:
May 27, 2012
|
I guess it's not spelled out clearly yet, but I read it as proficiency is the "weapon or magic training (if any)." Of course, I also use "proficiency" fairly interchangeably with "training" in my daily usage.
If you're not proficient in a weapon, you don't get the class bonus to attack.
The metagame is not the game.
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Oct 09, 2012 - 10:05AM
#6
|
|
|
Its definately something that has to be better defined. I think it takes a back seat right now because it assumes characters always have access to weapons/armour they are proficient with. It doesn't assume that PCs may be stuck using a weapon they arn't proficient with. Really that depends on the DM and the style of adventure he/she is running.
|
|
|
