D&D (2024) Do you actually like weapon masteries?

[Bill Zebub]

I'm thoroughly perplexed by the weapon masteries thing. I don't feel like it adds anything of value to the game, other than slowing down combat. It feels like complexity for the sake making the game feel more complex...for the sake of complexity. Sure, it adds more decisions, but not interesting decisions.

And it's also just so arbitrary. Sure, giant hammers might be good for knocking people down, but in most cases the mechanic associated with a given weapon could just as easily apply to almost any other weapon. (And, in fact, they will, since Fighters can arbitrarily assign any mastery to any weapon.)

Do you like it? Why?

 

[mellored]

Yes. It let's the fighter do something beyond just damage.

Though we should still have a simple damage increase options for those who want simple. And Flex is garbage. But that is fixable.

 

[OldSchoolGamerGirl]

I'm thoroughly perplexed by the weapon masteries thing. I don't feel like it adds anything of value to the game, other than slowing down combat. It feels like complexity for the sake making the game feel more complex...for the sake of complexity. Sure, it adds more decisions, but not interesting decisions.

I am going to be weird but both agree and disagree at the same time.

if the goal is speed of combat and easy class this is a fail
if the goal is to give the fighter cool choices every round like a caster has this is a fail

HOWEVER as a first step middle ground it is pretty good. I think instead of giving the masteries to weapons, you should give them to fighters (and maybe at later levels others) and let them apply them to weapons round by round.
You would then need to create greater masteries for higher levels

And it's also just so arbitrary. Sure, giant hammers might be good for knocking people down, but in most cases the mechanic associated with a given weapon could just as easily apply to almost any other weapon. (And, in fact, they will, since Fighters can arbitrarily assign any mastery to any weapon.)

Do you like it? Why?

 

[Bill Zebub]

Yes. It let's the fighter do something beyond just damage.

Ok, but to what extent is it "doing" something? It's not a choice you make during combat. Even the non-damaging ones don't come with any trade-offs, not even using your bonus action. So every turn, every attack, you just add an extra step.

And in most cases I would say its not even a choice you make outside of combat: you are probably going to use the best magical weapon you own, and get whatever passive benefit comes with it. Right? Or am I wrong?

 

[Bill Zebub]

I am going to be weird but both agree and disagree at the same time.

if the goal is speed of combat and easy class this is a fail
if the goal is to give the fighter cool choices every round like a caster has this is a fail

Agreed.

HOWEVER as a first step middle ground it is pretty good. I think instead of giving the masteries to weapons, you should give them to fighters (and maybe at later levels others) and let them apply them to weapons round by round.
You would then need to create greater masteries for higher levels

This may be apocryphal...if it is I don't want to know, so have never done any research to confirm it...but soon after the Soviet Union disintegrated I heard a quote, I think from the president of Bulgaria, that translated to:
"A year ago we stood at the brink of a chasm. But we have taken a great leap forward."

 

[Reef]

The choice comes from the fact that Fighters can swap out options as they level (and add more than one, so they can choose each attack).

The bonus itself is just an added benefit for martial classes to give than an extra bit of oomph. It also goes a ways towards helping differentiate weapons, so it’s not all-rapiers-all-the-time (for example).

 

[mellored]

Ok, but to what extent is it "doing" something? It's not a choice you make during combat.

Sure it is.
When a druid cast spiked growth, you can swap weapons to push them into it.
If your blind, switch to a graze weapon.

 

[Vaalingrade]

I like the concept, but I'd like to see what it'd look like if it were allowed to use both halves of the ass for fighters.

 

[Neonchameleon]

Ok, but to what extent is it "doing" something? It's not a choice you make during combat. Even the non-damaging ones don't come with any trade-offs, not even using your bonus action. So every turn, every attack, you just add an extra step.

And in most cases I would say its not even a choice you make outside of combat: you are probably going to use the best magical weapon you own, and get whatever passive benefit comes with it. Right? Or am I wrong?

This is why I think that the L7 and L13 fighter mastery abilities should be brought down to L1 and probably dump fighting style. You get two choices - and Push is frequently a very meaningful choice. And fighters get more than one choice.

I don't think masteries belong on barbarians. Barbarians should be the simple "just hit it" class.

 

[Bill Zebub]

This is why I think that the L7 and L13 fighter mastery abilities should be brought down to L1 and probably dump fighting style. You get two choices - and Push is frequently a very meaningful choice. And fighters get more than one choice.

I don't think masteries belong on barbarians. Barbarians should be the simple "just hit it" class.

I mean, just ditch the whole weapon masteries thing and give Fighters an ability:

Evocative Name: When you do damage with a weapon, as a bonus action you can choose one of...

Then make a list of the cool features.