D&D (2024) With Weapon Mastery likely making it in, do you want optional exotic weapons and exotic weapon masteries?

[Minigiant]

I’d prefer some specific weapon masteries for a class / subclass. I am not interested in exotic weapons

Wouldn't a exotic weapon mastery subclass require exotic weapons?

 

[mellored]

why do you think that? i don't see a good or engaging enough reason why only specifically, say, barbarians or sorcerers could learn to weild some specific weapon, or only one subset of clerics or rangers

If it cost more resources (i.e. your subclass) than you can do more funky with it.

You can't give the cleric a multi-hit Chakram just for free. It would need to be balanced with all the current weapons.

But as a subclass. You can bounce it all over the place.

 

[mellored]

Wouldn't a exotic weapon mastery subclass require exotic weapons?

Yes. But the same as spiked armor. It's the same as the basic stuff unless you have training.

I.e.
Chakram: 1d4 Piercing Finesse, Light, Thrown (Range 20/60) Nick 1 lb. 20 GP
*same as a dagger, but cost 10x more gold.

Then you get the bounce with the sub-class.

 

[Minigiant]

If it cost more resources (i.e. your subclass) than you can do more funky with it.

You can't give the cleric a multi-hit Chakram just for free. It would need to be balanced with all the current weapons.

But as a subclass. You can bounce it all over the place.

Clerics don't get weapon mastery.

 

[DEFCON 1]

I don't see the need for exotic weapons. Invariably they end up not being any better than regular weapons mechanically because of the costs it requires to be able to use them. An Exotic Weapon requires a feat to use? Well, that exotic weapon's base stats better then be on par with the mechanics you can get when you combine a 2-Handed Weapon and Great Weapon Master or Polearm Master, otherwise you are paying a hefty price just to say you are using a goofy-looking weapon (which you could do otherwise just by taking a normal weapon and saying that it's that goofy weapon.) I have yet to see why it's worth it to have them in the game.

 

[Vael]

Well, two ideas for the Chakram, specifically.

1. This is a more in-depth system, but BG3 added encounter powers to weapons.
2. Using only what we have in 5e UA: I'd make a Chakram only Mastery and returning property (which, yes, I'd apply to the Boomerang) to make something like:

Ranged Weapon
Chakram, 2d4 slashing, finesse, light, returning, thrown (30/60), Chakram Special, 1lb. 25gp
Returning: This weapon returns to the wielder after being thrown.
Chakram Special Mastery:
Prerequisite: Chakram only
If you roll the same result for both damage dice, you can target another creature within 15ft of the target and make another attack against it. No creature can be hit more than once with this attack.

 

[CreamCloud0]

If it cost more resources (i.e. your subclass) than you can do more funky with it.

You can't give the cleric a multi-hit Chakram just for free. It would need to be balanced with all the current weapons.

But as a subclass. You can bounce it all over the place.

yeah but i feel like it wouldn't really be the weapon that's doing all that stuff would it? it'd just be 'here's a subclass that can only use one specific weapon because that's what they were designed around' or 'here's a niche weapon that's only really good with the one class that's designed to use actually it', or both at the same time.

i don't need exotic weapons to be super op with a laundry list of abilities tied to them but just have enough unique mechanics/properties on each to provide a distinct playstyle with it, and you'd be working with (in my preferred implementation at least) a feat's worth of power budget,

the ability to give a rogue, a ranger and a cleric the same exotic chakram and it gels into all their respective fighting styles differently.

 

[mellored]

An Exotic Weapon requires a feat to use? Well, that exotic weapon's base stats better then be on par with the mechanics you can get when you combine a 2-Handed Weapon and Great Weapon Master or Polearm Master, otherwise you are paying a hefty price just to say you are using a goofy-looking weapon

Exactly.

You need to have the weapon do something funky to make it worth adding to the game. And those extra abilities need to cost you.

Feat or subclass would work. Though I'm subclass would be better and let you can do even more stuff.

And we can still have feats to boost basic weapons. No need to make new weapons for most of these ideas.
I.e.
Whip master: counts as light weapon, can grapple.
Hammer master: slam the ground and make a shock wave.
Dagger Master: can bounce, returns when you hit something.

 

[mellored]

yeah but i feel like it wouldn't really be the weapon that's doing all that stuff would it?

If there was a superior weapon that didn't take special training to use, then why would anyone be using a short sword?

I mean, who would use a longbow if an AR-15 can be picked up at Walmart?

Let the character be the one who specializes in something.

just have enough unique mechanics/properties on each to provide a distinct playstyle with it, and you'd be working with (in my preferred implementation at least) a feat's worth of power budget,

We don't need more weapons to have more weapon feats.

 

[tetrasodium]

Well that is the point.

By making Exotic weapons use Mastery AND not in the default style game, you can make the masteries for Exotic weapons as complex or zany as you want.

If the DM doesn't want bouncing Xena chakrams, don't drop them in shops and dungeons. But those who do can have a playtested quick guide on how to use them.

Maybe not understanding something, but I'm not the only one who seems to be pointing it out. Wotc has shown less than zero willingness or even interest in adding crunch. Without the crunch having EWPs is just the same as 5e's overpowered imbalanced elements that justify their impact by dumping it on the gm as not so optional "optional" elements or they are mechanically identical things that dump a bunch of rule zero fluff on the gm with an expectation for the gm to carry them instead of supporting themselves mechanically.