fighters, paladins, barbarians, and rangers, what has always annoyed me

[Corlon]

In all the fantasy stories, how many weapons do people use, probably four at most (knife, bow, sword, and somethin else), whereas in DND, the barbarian, fighter, ranger, and paladin get proficiency with ALL martial weapons. I might be able to see the fighter practicing with these weapons at one time or another, and that weapon focus/specialization shows how he specializes, but they don't add that much.
And for a barbarian, please, where is he going to learn to use a rapier??

I'm trying to find a way to fix this, seeing as how these classes can just pick up almost any weapon and start fighting with it!

I'm not saying let them specialize in just ONE, how about just limiting which weapons they are proficient with and mabye giving them free weapon focus or something.

comments?

 

[Crothian]

I agree. I divided the martial weapons into 7 catagories. THe fighter can use them all, the other three classes can only use three groups. Each group is a feat to learn.

 

[Gator]

I'm more a fan of giving them a set number of weapons in the martial category to choose from and everything else they're not proficient in.

 

[med stud]

I agree. I divided the martial weapons into 7 catagories. THe fighter can use them all, the other three classes can only use three groups. Each group is a feat to learn.

I like this idea! Do you have any feats based on it, except for proficiency? Or any items and so?

 

[Crothian]

I like this idea! Do you have any feats based on it, except for proficiency? Or any items and so?

Not really, this is what I use:

The feat “Martial Weapons” is now divided into the following Categories: Axes, Hammers/Picks, Lances, Swords, Flails, Pole arms, and Bows. Fighters know all of them, Barbarians, Paladins, and Rangers may choose 3 of them. Each category may be chosen with a feat. Axes: Throwing axe, hand axe, battle axe, great axe, dwarven waraxe (wielded as a Large weapon), halberd. Hammers/Picks: Light hammer, warhammer, light pick, heavy pick, greatclub, sap. Lances: Light lance, heavy lance. Swords: Short sword, long sword, rapier, scimitar, falchion, great sword, bastard sword (wielded as a Large weapon). Flails: Light flail, heavy flail. Polearms: Glaive, guisarme, ranseur, longspear, halberd, scythe. Bows: Short and long regular and composite bows

 

[Celebrim]

Ewww... I like that. Shiny.

 

[CCamfield]

I'm sure they made this change for 3e to make the game simpler - you don't have to track weapon proficiencies, and I can't imagine many non-fighter types will spend multiple feats on weapons.

Another "softer" option would be just to impose an "unfamiliarity penalty" on weapons a character wouldn't reasonably have used before, like a barbarian trying to use a rapier.

 

[hong]

In all the fantasy stories, how many weapons do people use, probably four at most (knife, bow, sword, and somethin else), whereas in DND, the barbarian, fighter, ranger, and paladin get proficiency with ALL martial weapons.

... and in all the games I've been in, they've only ever USED three or four at most.

 

[Nifft]

It's happened in a game I play in that the best equipment is stuff we would never have thought to take proficiency points in.

People who put every Feat they could into Short Swords were captured, and suddenly found themselves unarmed in a field of dead goblins, who had been armed with Halfspears. What do you do? Pick up a Halfspear and fight until you get your equipment back!

It probably depends on the DM, but from where I'm sitting, warriors who can fight with any weapon make players more secure. Sure, if you find a flaming *foo* when you're Focused in *bar* you won't get your +1 to-hit, but you'll still be effective in combat.

-- Nifft

 

[Jeph]

I like Crothian's idea, but I'd suggest that Fighters get 6 ourt of 7, Rangers, Paladins, and Barbarians get 4, Clerics get 2, and the Bard, Druid and Rogue get 1.