Interesting. I don't think I would just port the whole thing over as is, but interesting.
I also share some agreement with the folks who are saying, "the memorization of the the weapon effects falls on the player using it". Just because monster has a battle axe doesn't mean he has to be super sexy with it. If he is, it can easily be written into his stats (be it pluses to hit or what not) without worry. I feel the same way about spell casting bad guys. I don't want to flip through the game grimoire; just list his attacks in stat block form please.
I think one thing you difinitely run into with all those neat, "on a critical hit" options is that two weapon fighting now becomes the king of status effects. Sword in one hand to disengage as a move, hammer in the other to stun on a crit. Maybe hammer and pick, or just two hammer to increase my chance to stun...
You can get around this by stating the extra bite of the weapon only applies to "main hand"...or you can be happy that twf gets more chances to stun with slightly less chance to damage.
Well, in real life, the crossbow was easy to use - anyone could point it, shoot it, and figure out how to reload it in a matter of seconds. Bows, however, took a lot more practice to get anywhere near your target.
So maybe the mechanical advantage crossbows should have is that almost anyone can use them, while only martial trained characters can use bows.
I agree and that's interesting.
Crossbow: Can be used proficiently regardless of training with weapons.
Unfortunately, that would remove any reason for players 'not' to choose the highest damage-dealing crossbow. And if we exclude certain crossbows from the list, then it ceases to become a 'Weapon Property by Group'.
I doubt WotC will include something that works differently against someone wearing a different type of armour. They stopped doing that in 3rd edition (the closest they came to that is with "touch" and "flat-footed" ACs), so I doubt they'll bring back something that works better against someone wearing different armour.
The crossbow property wouldn't work differently against someone with different armour. It would work the same against 'any' manufactured armour. The advantage granted by crossbows with this property isn't particular. It applies equally to 'all' armoured opponents. The balancing mechanic is that crossbows take an action to reload.
I think one thing you difinitely run into with all those neat, "on a critical hit" options is that two weapon fighting now becomes the king of status effects. Sword in one hand to disengage as a move, hammer in the other to stun on a crit. Maybe hammer and pick, or just two hammer to increase my chance to stun...
You can get around this by stating the extra bite of the weapon only applies to "main hand"...or you can be happy that twf gets more chances to stun with slightly less chance to damage.
Hehe. I'm inclined to allow both weapons to enjoy their Weapon Property by Group, but my 'inner DM' (who insists on balanced game mechanics) kiboshes that inclination. And when I really let that inner DM take over, he goes a little further by saying that any attacks with 'reduced damage' can't benefit from the Weapons Properties by Group.
Your solution (main weapon only) is likely the compromise.
That said Austinwulf, which of the existing Weapon Properties by Group would you tweak and how?
Also - it shouldn't be very difficult to add it right onto the monster stat bloc from straight out of the DMG, requiring no memorization.
Here's an example:
Bugbear
Medium Humanoid (Goblin) Armor Class 14 (leather, shield) ...blah blah blah... ACTIONS Melee Attack—Large Morningstar: +2 to hit (reach 5 ft.; one creature).Flail: advantage against opponents with shields when used two-handed. ...blah blah blah>>>
Indeed. The more we have this discussion, the more Weapon Properties by Group (rather than individualized weapon properties like every previous edition of D&D) makes the most sense. Also, it still feels like D&D rather than burrowing too much mechanic from other game systems.
Except for 4E which had weapon properties by group buried in the Expertise feats.
Carl
And buried in individual powers.. A fighter with weapon masters strike for instance... nicely versatile.
Weapon Properties by Group Axe: Can reroll the lowest result of weapon damage once per attack and add the amounts.
I'm not super fond of this. One of the Axe's overlooked properties is its wonderful ability to sneak over top of a shield. Its very situational, and might be a bit too crunchy for some, but I wouldn't mind something as simple(maybe) as "weapons with the Axe property always ignore the armor bonus from a shield when used in melee" So if the monster is using a shield, the guy with the axe drops its AC vs him by 1 (currently), or said another way, against people with shields, axe wielders gain +1 to hit. (backwards from 4th)
Dagger: Can add Strength and Dexterity modifier to weapon damage while keeping one hand empty.
Using current non-dice rolling character creating rules, I can have a character with an 18 dex and a 15 strength (human) who gets to do 1d4+6 (+7 at 4th) or a Halfing doing 1d6+5 (1d6 +6 at 4th) You would always lead with your dex on this build for the extra AC to replace the lack of shield, and its favor of the rogue style. I think the best 1 handed you are going to do vs. this is a dwarf with 1d10 +3, or a human with 1d8+4. By 4th level, the halfling daggerist is doing the same max damage as the human with a better minimum, and one less than the dwarf, but still with a better minimum. Feels a bit too good to me. Dungeons and Daggers. Keep it simple. "Daggers may always be drawn as a free action/no action"
Bow: Gain advantage after spending previous action aiming without moving before next action.
As said before, redundant with sniper. Honestly, I think blowing a turn with any aimed weapon should give you advantage. (you sacrifice a round of damage for a round of great accuracy/maybe sneak damage) Shouldn't cost a feat as it currently does. I like your "on a crit" options. "on a crit, target movement drops to 5ft a turn"
Crossbow: Gain advantage on attacks against armoured opponents.
Crossbow, crossbow, poor maligned crossbow. I used to like the old days of, "if your crossbow is knocked pre combat, you win initiative!" As is, every thief would sit back with crossbows, (and the noble background, so their retainers could reload them for them) to get sneak every round. Maybe on a crit, the crossbow bolt knocks a target prone.
Mace: Can double Strength modifier againsts armoured opponents.
1, I'd call it "club". 2, I think that's way too good. Maybe on a crit clubs do double strength damage.
Pick: Can restrain opponents on a critical hit until the end of their next turn.
I'd treat Picks like an axe that's piercing instead of slashing (or crushing, whatever axes are these days)
Spear: Gain 10 feet short range (40 feet long) by taking disadvantage on any attack using the extra range.
again, this is something that I think should be an anytime action for anything thrown. If you willingly sacrifice accuracy (which disadvantage really does) you get some extra reach. This is far to situational for anyone to really want it. (kinda like restraint on the pick, I think) Instead, I'd let all spears, (excluding darts) allow you to make a reaction attack vs anyone "charging" or any natural weapon attacks. Damage would be your Strength mod only. So basically if a bear/charging orc/hydra is snapping at you, you can poke them for 4 damage, or keep them away from you because of the promise of that 4 or 3 damage.
Staff: Gain reach by taking disadvantage on any attack using the extra 5 feet.
again, the bow, the spear. Staves should get a bunch of little things like "can count as two one handed weapons for the purposes of two weapon fighting feats". Staves are cheap, and right now, very sexy as a 1d8 finese weapon. They don't need a lot to make them better.
Unarmed: Can make two unarmed attacks while keeping both hands empty. Can also make two attacks when wielding one-handed improvised weapons.
only as a part of two weapon fighting, so it keeps the half damage. Unarmed should be something that is improved directly by specialty or class (monk)
Any I didn't mention I thought were decent as is, though "stunned" and "unconcious" may need to be looked at.
Can reroll the lowest result of weapon damage once per attack and add the amounts.
I'm not super fond of this. One of the Axe's overlooked properties is its wonderful ability to sneak over top of a shield. Its very situational, and might be a bit too crunchy for some, but I wouldn't mind something as simple(maybe) as "weapons with the Axe property always ignore the armor bonus from a shield when used in melee" So if the monster is using a shield, the guy with the axe drops its AC vs him by 1 (currently), or said another way, against people with shields, axe wielders gain +1 to hit. (backwards from 4th).
I agree that this this is too crunchy for most games. In the abstract and stylized combat of D&D, axes are no better at getting past shields than any other weapon. The axe in particular was historically preferred against armoured opponents over swords to cleave through metal. The extra damage is meant to replicate that.
Dagger: Can add Strength and Dexterity modifier to weapon damage while keeping one hand empty.
Using current non-dice rolling character creating rules, I can have a character with an 18 dex and a 15 strength (human) who gets to do 1d4+6 (+7 at 4th) or a Halfing doing 1d6+5 (1d6 +6 at 4th) You would always lead with your dex on this build for the extra AC to replace the lack of shield, and its favor of the rogue style. I think the best 1 handed you are going to do vs. this is a dwarf with 1d10 +3, or a human with 1d8+4. By 4th level, the halfling daggerist is doing the same max damage as the human with a better minimum, and one less than the dwarf, but still with a better minimum. Feels a bit too good to me. Dungeons and Daggers. Keep it simple. "Daggers may always be drawn as a free action/no action."
Drawing 'any' weapon no longer requires an action in 5th edition. As for dagger keeping up with other weapon damage, thank you very much for the math, and yes, I am perfectly happy with that result. Rogues will still be much easier to hit than heavily armoured opponents with their shields in one hand and battleaxes or warhammers in the other.
Mace: Can double Strength modifier againsts armoured opponents.
1, I'd call it "club". 2, I think that's way too good. Maybe on a crit clubs do double strength damage.
The goal here is to represent how maces are effective against armoured opponents. Considering all the monsters that our characters will inevitably fight, many of whom rely on natural armour instead of manufactured armour, this property feels 'conditionally good' at best.
Spear: Gain 10 feet short range (40 feet long) by taking disadvantage on any attack using the extra range.
again, this is something that I think should be an anytime action for anything thrown. If you willingly sacrifice accuracy (which disadvantage really does) you get some extra reach. This is far to situational for anyone to really want it. (kinda like restraint on the pick, I think) Instead, I'd let all spears, (excluding darts) allow you to make a reaction attack vs anyone "charging" or any natural weapon attacks. Damage would be your Strength mod only. So basically if a bear/charging orc/hydra is snapping at you, you can poke them for 4 damage, or keep them away from you because of the promise of that 4 or 3 damage.
Right now, a spear cannot be thrown at all, which just feels counter-intuitive. There is no shortspear in the game, so we can't look there for satisfaction. That leaves us with the javelin, and, apparently, the 'dart' (which is now considered a spear). As such, I have to disagree with your 'situational' assessment of this property. It allows players to throw spears, longspears, and tridents when they previously could not, albeit with disadvantage. That's pretty handy, especially considering that multiple 'disadvantage' conditions don't stack. (Throwing spears between their normal and maximum range also grants disadvantage.)
When it comes to granting a reaction attack versus charging opponents, I think the 'Ready an Action' rule covers that mechanic best.
Staff: Gain reach by taking disadvantage on any attack using the extra 5 feet.
again, the bow, the spear. Staves should get a bunch of little things like "can count as two one handed weapons for the purposes of two weapon fighting feats". Staves are cheap, and right now, very sexy as a 1d8 finese weapon. They don't need a lot to make them better.
The ability to use a quarterstaff as a two-handed weapon isn't a bad idea, although I imagine that becoming an individualized weapon property in future play-test packages.
Unarmed: Can make two unarmed attacks while keeping both hands empty. Can also make two attacks when wielding one-handed improvised weapons.
only as a part of two weapon fighting, so it keeps the half damage. Unarmed should be something that is improved directly by specialty or class (monk).
This is an excellent point. Both attacks should be halved in keeping with two-weapon fighting. I will make this change immediately.
With those dagger numbers, I would be tempted to go duelist fighter. (4th ed made me a huge fan of strong damage before the dice ever hit the table)
On the spears, its not just "charging" foes, but the beasts I'm thinking about as well. When I think of the idea of battling a bear, or some other large creature that might be standing toe to toe with me, I think of the spear as that weapon I'm making little jabs with to keep the creature back so it doesn't rush in on me. The quick and possibly detering poke is what I was going for.
You can get around this by stating the extra bite of the weapon only applies to "main hand"...
That's not a bad idea, actually, and could be a good way to implement two weapon fighting. In fact, I'd go one further, and say that the "extra bite" only works if you're only using one weapon.
This would allow for two-weapon fighting to work as normal (i.e. without penalties and what-have-you) but with single weapon style still being a viable alternative (disadvantage to attacks would still apply if you don't have the relevant ability/skill/whatever).
Crossbow: Can be used proficiently regardless of training with weapons.
Unfortunately, that would remove any reason for players 'not' to choose the highest damage-dealing crossbow. And if we exclude certain crossbows from the list, then it ceases to become a 'Weapon Property by Group'.
Good point. Maybe the heavy crossbow should take even longer to reload (blasphemy, I know, but that's part of the trade-off of having such a powerful weapon!) :
Light crossbow: takes a standard (or move) action to reload (meaning you can reload and shoot in the same turn as long as you don't move) Heavy crossbow: takes a whole turn to reload
Compared to bows, wed have:
Shortbow: can be reloaded as a free action (meaning you can shoot as many times as you have attacks per round) Longbow: can be reloaded as a free action, but only if you shoot using a full action (meaning you can shoot as many times as you want if you don't move, but if you do move you can only shoot once)
Everything expressed in this post is my opinion, and should be taken as such. I can not declare myself to be the supreme authority on all matters...even though I am right!
Good point. Maybe the heavy crossbow should take even longer to reload (blasphemy, I know, but that's part of the trade-off of having such a powerful weapon!) :
Light crossbow: takes a standard (or move) action to reload (meaning you can reload and shoot in the same turn as long as you don't move) Heavy crossbow: takes a whole turn to reload
I wouldn't mess with bows at all, but it does seem wonky that a heavy crossbow and hand crossbow take equally long to reload.
I would suggest an action and move for the heavy crossbow, an action for the light crossbow, and a move for the hand crossbow.
If such a change were implemented, then yes...
Crossbow: Can be used proficiently regardless of training with weapons.
...might be a more viable Weapon Property by Group.
That's not a bad idea, actually, and could be a good way to implement two weapon fighting. In fact, I'd go one further, and say that the "extra bite" only works if you're only using one weapon.
This would allow for two-weapon fighting to work as normal (i.e. without penalties and what-have-you) but with single weapon style still being a viable alternative (disadvantage to attacks would still apply if you don't have the relevant ability/skill/whatever).
On further reflection, I agree that the 'Weapon Properties by Group' should only work if the weilder is attacking with 'one weapon'.
Said differently, the Weapon Properties by Group don't apply when weapon damage is reduced.
This automatically excludes Two-Weapon Fighting (which halves both attacks), resistence (which halves certain attacks), and damage reduction (granted from being intoxicated), but doesn't diminish a combatant who wields a weapon and shield at the same time (but only attacks with one or the other).
)
