Folding proficiency into weapon speed

[Kzach]

I've been thinking a lot about 5e because of all the ******* who keep creating threads about it. One of the problems I see in the current system is that optimisation creates too great a gap between the haves and have nots. So I keep thinking on ways in which to reduce the optimisation gap and a big culprit as I see it is the proficiency attack bonus.

With bonuses to hit being such a major factor in 4e, I honestly believe that the system would benefit from reducing the amount of bonuses available, and this includes the disparity caused by proficiency.

On top of all this, there is also the problem of weapons vs. implements.

But of course, you still want there to be a benefit for proficiency and you want to maintain the variety in weaponry choices that the proficiency bonus helps differentiate.

So, to that end I thought that proficiency bonuses could be simply changed to be weapon speed instead, ie. the bonus is now an initiative bonus. Or, even better, reverse the bonuses so that 'fast' weapons have a LOWER number and slow weapons have a higher number. Now make it a PENALTY to initiative.

Now, consider that this would be in a revised system that would accommodate such a change into the balance of it, so any quirks brought about by taking away the attack bonus would be rectified and are thus not a valid criticism against this system.

No need to change implements as they don't require being wielded like a weapon does and so don't need to have a speed bonus or penalty applied to them.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Do you intend to have all weapons of the same size/handedness deal the same damage? Because I don't think you can balance initiative bonuses vs damage dice.

 

[MrBeens]

I've been thinking a lot about 5e because of all the ******* who keep creating threads about it. One of the problems I see in the current system is that optimisation creates too great a gap between the haves and have nots. So I keep thinking on ways in which to reduce the optimisation gap and a big culprit as I see it is the proficiency attack bonus.

With bonuses to hit being such a major factor in 4e, I honestly believe that the system would benefit from reducing the amount of bonuses available, and this includes the disparity caused by proficiency.

On top of all this, there is also the problem of weapons vs. implements.

But of course, you still want there to be a benefit for proficiency and you want to maintain the variety in weaponry choices that the proficiency bonus helps differentiate.

So, to that end I thought that proficiency bonuses could be simply changed to be weapon speed instead, ie. the bonus is now an initiative bonus. Or, even better, reverse the bonuses so that 'fast' weapons have a LOWER number and slow weapons have a higher number. Now make it a PENALTY to initiative.

Now, consider that this would be in a revised system that would accommodate such a change into the balance of it, so any quirks brought about by taking away the attack bonus would be rectified and are thus not a valid criticism against this system.

No need to change implements as they don't require being wielded like a weapon does and so don't need to have a speed bonus or penalty applied to them.

Initiative only matters on the first round though, after that it is meaningless.
Regardless of that, in the current system there is +2 or +3 proficiency weapons - I'm not sure I really understand what the problem it is you are trying to solve here?

 

[Kzach]

Initiative only matters on the first round though, after that it is meaningless.

If that were true, then there would be only one round. Think about it.

Regardless of that, in the current system there is +2 or +3 proficiency weapons - I'm not sure I really understand what the problem it is you are trying to solve here?

Ok, I'll explain it to you.

I've been thinking a lot about 5e because of all the ******* who keep creating threads about it. One of the problems I see in the current system is that optimisation creates too great a gap between the haves and have nots. So I keep thinking on ways in which to reduce the optimisation gap and a big culprit as I see it is the proficiency attack bonus.

With bonuses to hit being such a major factor in 4e, I honestly believe that the system would benefit from reducing the amount of bonuses available, and this includes the disparity caused by proficiency.

On top of all this, there is also the problem of weapons vs. implements.

But of course, you still want there to be a benefit for proficiency and you want to maintain the variety in weaponry choices that the proficiency bonus helps differentiate.

So, to that end I thought that proficiency bonuses could be simply changed to be weapon speed instead, ie. the bonus is now an initiative bonus. Or, even better, reverse the bonuses so that 'fast' weapons have a LOWER number and slow weapons have a higher number. Now make it a PENALTY to initiative.

Now, consider that this would be in a revised system that would accommodate such a change into the balance of it, so any quirks brought about by taking away the attack bonus would be rectified and are thus not a valid criticism against this system.

No need to change implements as they don't require being wielded like a weapon does and so don't need to have a speed bonus or penalty applied to them.

 

[keterys]

Too easy to switch around weapons, or not have them out at the start of combat.

 

[the Jester]

Hmm.

Well, if I thought that the proficiency bonus was the culprit of the problem you are looking at, I don't think I'd approach the fix the way you are. You're adding a hard-to-balance system with probably far-reaching implications in the system as well as taking out a system that has its implications worked out throughout the system (in monster defenses, etc).

I would instead reduce bonuses- either eliminate or reduce by 1 the bonus proficiency provides and/or reduce the bonus for high ability scores, along with an across-the-board reduction of monster ACs.

 

[MrBeens]

If that were true, then there would be only one round. Think about it.

Your initiative modifier only comes into play on the first round of combat. After the first time everyone has gone it it just a circular round of actions one after another.

Ok, I'll explain it to you.

I've been thinking a lot about 5e because of all the ******* who keep creating threads about it. One of the problems I see in the current system is that optimisation creates too great a gap between the haves and have nots. So I keep thinking on ways in which to reduce the optimisation gap and a big culprit as I see it is the proficiency attack bonus.

With bonuses to hit being such a major factor in 4e, I honestly believe that the system would benefit from reducing the amount of bonuses available, and this includes the disparity caused by proficiency.

On top of all this, there is also the problem of weapons vs. implements.

But of course, you still want there to be a benefit for proficiency and you want to maintain the variety in weaponry choices that the proficiency bonus helps differentiate.

So, to that end I thought that proficiency bonuses could be simply changed to be weapon speed instead, ie. the bonus is now an initiative bonus. Or, even better, reverse the bonuses so that 'fast' weapons have a LOWER number and slow weapons have a higher number. Now make it a PENALTY to initiative.

Now, consider that this would be in a revised system that would accommodate such a change into the balance of it, so any quirks brought about by taking away the attack bonus would be rectified and are thus not a valid criticism against this system.

No need to change implements as they don't require being wielded like a weapon does and so don't need to have a speed bonus or penalty applied to them.

OK, all you have done here is repost your original post word for word. Reposting it isn't going to help me understand the problem you have with the difference between +2 prof weapons and +3 prof weapons.
Of all the things to be concerned about with the way you can optimise a character, choosing between a hammer and a sword is not a problem.

 

[Kzach]

Attacking the people replying to your discussion is neither civil nor helpful. Keep the discussion on the discussion, and not the people making it.