Community

I think the classes and their weapon proficiencies make up a nice framework for what stereotypical members of that class should be proficient with.  However, PCs (while being based off archetypes) probably shouldn't be stereotypes.  I've proposed before that we let every PC have one free melee and one free ranged weapon proficiency (in addition to their class proficiencies) so that each character can have proficiency in weapons that are iconic to that one character.

I know that some have mentioned the exotic weapons as a reason not to allow people to just pick and choose.  Naturally, my answer to that is that exotic weapons shouldn't be mechanically better than normal martial weapons.  You use an exotic weapon, like a boomerang or an african throwing knife (see the sblock) because they're cool and fit into both the world and your character concept, not because you want better dpr.

Spoiler: Show

Feb 27, 2013 -- 1:03PM, CarlT wrote:

Regardless of what is or isn't being smoked, I'm really not sure where the OPs is going here.  But he tends to make cryptic posts anyway.

Regarding weapon proficiencies:

There is currently no way to gain a weapon proficiency in the game - but I assume there will eventually be feats to gain weapon proficiencies.   I'm hoping they are a bit more interesting than they have been in the past.  Something more like the current Polearm Training feat:  A feat that gives you proficiency in a group of related weapons, as well as a bonus with those weapons.

But I've never seen any of the proficiency feats in 4E as a feat tax.  Many people choose to take them, because they are useful.  But just because a feat is useful, that does not make it a tax.  It just makes it useful.

On the issue of dumping class-based proficiency:

As noted - they are an essential part of how the game is balanced.  I don't think (and don't want) that essential difference to go away.  On the other hand - in ages long past there was a Dragon Magazine article which proposed that rather than limit weapon by class, all classes should beallowed to use all weapons - they would just do less damage with them.  For example a fighter might do 1d8 with a longsword, a cleric 1d6 and a magic user 1d4. 

This could work and it makes some sense.

But it isn't a change I'd expect to see made (although someone could write a module for it.)


Carl

that makes sense till you condsider stregnth. if im a cleric with a 16 str should i do less damage with a mace than a fighter with a 12 str. maybe instead of doing seperate proficiencies they should go with bigger groupings but not huge ones like past editions so maybe short blades, long blades, mechanicle and non mechanicle ranged ect that way people arent stuck picking long sword and still get hit with a penalty using bastard swords

Feb 27, 2013 -- 1:25PM, MechaPilot wrote:

weapon stuff

I sent an Q&A question about humnga munga/mambele/kpinga.

HEY DEVS, WHERE DA KPINGAS AT? SCREW DEM LAME KATANAS! I NEED A HUNGA MUNGA!

Feb 27, 2013 -- 5:31PM, justmike1976 wrote:

that makes sense till you condsider stregnth. if im a cleric with a 16 str should i do less damage with a mace than a fighter with a 12 str.

It is precisely the case in the current packet that a fighter with 12 Str does more (FAR more at higher levels) damage with a mace than a cleric with 16 str. Different die sizes for weapons by class is simply taking part of what's represented by the MDD and MDB and shifting into the weapon's die. (Also, as MechaPilot notes, unless the difference in weapon die size is huge, the Str bonus will overwhelm it anyway.)