Disclaimer: This post includes a discussion about “Armor Class adjustments” and “Weapon speed factors” from previous editions of D&D, but this is not an argument for their inclusion in the next iteration of the game. Rather, it is a discussion of what I believe was a design shift from a choice of weapon diversification to weapon specialization, and what a "diversity of choices" for a fighter might add to the next iteration of D&D.
There has been a lot of discussion about the “Fighter” recently, and I’ve been thinking about the idea of weapon choice and what that means for the fighter. My primary question is this:
Should weapon choice be a significant factor in the “complexity” of the fighter?
My basic assumption for the next iteration of D&D is that the core rules should be streamlined, elegant and playable as written with the flexibility that, if people want to modularize their gaming experience, they can do so without causing the game to “break down.” So, assuming that the base for the fighter class is created in a simple yet elegant way, how can “Weapon choice” add to the complexity of the class for those who want that type of play?
In 1st edition, there were weapon speed factors (used to break initiative ties and determine if an attack “beat” a spell caster before a spell was cast) and Armor Class adjustments (rules for determining the effectiveness of a particular weapon versus a particular armor type). Although I felt neither of these concepts in the game were necessary for game balance or ease of play (in fact, often they made combat more complex than necessary), there was an aspect about these concepts that made weapon choice important, and by extension, it made being a fighter important since the fighter had access to a diversity of weapons, with each of those weapons having a particular benefit in use over the others in certain situations). My 1st edition fighter Dimitri had choices to make when charging into a group of thieves in leather armor, only to turn around and be faced with a black knight in plate mail. Would he continue fighting with a weapon that was effective against leather but less effective against plate, or would he change weapons, tactics, etc..?
For me, later editions seemed to move away from speed factors and AC adjustment in favor of things like proficiencies, feats, and powers – and by doing this it seemed the rationale behind weapon choice was not what weapon from a number of weapons is best in this particular situation, but rather, which weapon shall I specialize in for all (or at least most) situations.
For example, in 4e, while certain weapon groups had different effects (axes provided different benefits to fighters than two-handed swords, etc… depending on your build), power and feat choices had the propensity to encourage players to specialize in a particular weapon – to “double down” on axes through a series of feats that add more and more benefits to that particular weapon group. 3.0 and 3.5 worked in a similar fashion offering feats that gave the fighter additional bonuses to hit and damage with specific weapons. In each example there are exceptions, for example, a fighter can take specialization or expertise style feats for multiple groups, but then what happens is the same kind of bonus is applied over different weapon groups, which suggests that there are choices to be made, but what that really boiled down to was using precious resources (like feats in 3.5) in spreading out similar bonuses to multiple weapons (i.e. a static bonus to attack or damage).
Specializing in one weapon, or even one group of weapons, is a way to add complexity and level of fun for fighters, but I’m wondering what a concept that provides fighters with dynamic choices for what weapon to use in multiple situations might look like, and if that style of play would be interesting to players. By dynamic I mean that the choices the players make are not simply “do I get a +1 to hit against this creature with a sword, or a +2 damage against this creature with a bow,” but a variety of options. Maybe something like, “do I choose between an additional +4 to with my sword, or a chance to slow down the opponent with an arrow? Maybe, I should try for ongoing 5 with my axe…”
If this sounds intriguing, then how would it work? Would bonuses like this be included in the fighter’s class features, would they be feat options, would they be dependent on the use of the weapon against a particular foe? What do you think? How can the game accommodate a diversity of weapon choices for fighters in interesting, meaningful, and FUN ways?
There has been a lot of discussion about the “Fighter” recently, and I’ve been thinking about the idea of weapon choice and what that means for the fighter. My primary question is this:
Should weapon choice be a significant factor in the “complexity” of the fighter?
My basic assumption for the next iteration of D&D is that the core rules should be streamlined, elegant and playable as written with the flexibility that, if people want to modularize their gaming experience, they can do so without causing the game to “break down.” So, assuming that the base for the fighter class is created in a simple yet elegant way, how can “Weapon choice” add to the complexity of the class for those who want that type of play?
In 1st edition, there were weapon speed factors (used to break initiative ties and determine if an attack “beat” a spell caster before a spell was cast) and Armor Class adjustments (rules for determining the effectiveness of a particular weapon versus a particular armor type). Although I felt neither of these concepts in the game were necessary for game balance or ease of play (in fact, often they made combat more complex than necessary), there was an aspect about these concepts that made weapon choice important, and by extension, it made being a fighter important since the fighter had access to a diversity of weapons, with each of those weapons having a particular benefit in use over the others in certain situations). My 1st edition fighter Dimitri had choices to make when charging into a group of thieves in leather armor, only to turn around and be faced with a black knight in plate mail. Would he continue fighting with a weapon that was effective against leather but less effective against plate, or would he change weapons, tactics, etc..?
For me, later editions seemed to move away from speed factors and AC adjustment in favor of things like proficiencies, feats, and powers – and by doing this it seemed the rationale behind weapon choice was not what weapon from a number of weapons is best in this particular situation, but rather, which weapon shall I specialize in for all (or at least most) situations.
For example, in 4e, while certain weapon groups had different effects (axes provided different benefits to fighters than two-handed swords, etc… depending on your build), power and feat choices had the propensity to encourage players to specialize in a particular weapon – to “double down” on axes through a series of feats that add more and more benefits to that particular weapon group. 3.0 and 3.5 worked in a similar fashion offering feats that gave the fighter additional bonuses to hit and damage with specific weapons. In each example there are exceptions, for example, a fighter can take specialization or expertise style feats for multiple groups, but then what happens is the same kind of bonus is applied over different weapon groups, which suggests that there are choices to be made, but what that really boiled down to was using precious resources (like feats in 3.5) in spreading out similar bonuses to multiple weapons (i.e. a static bonus to attack or damage).
Specializing in one weapon, or even one group of weapons, is a way to add complexity and level of fun for fighters, but I’m wondering what a concept that provides fighters with dynamic choices for what weapon to use in multiple situations might look like, and if that style of play would be interesting to players. By dynamic I mean that the choices the players make are not simply “do I get a +1 to hit against this creature with a sword, or a +2 damage against this creature with a bow,” but a variety of options. Maybe something like, “do I choose between an additional +4 to with my sword, or a chance to slow down the opponent with an arrow? Maybe, I should try for ongoing 5 with my axe…”
If this sounds intriguing, then how would it work? Would bonuses like this be included in the fighter’s class features, would they be feat options, would they be dependent on the use of the weapon against a particular foe? What do you think? How can the game accommodate a diversity of weapon choices for fighters in interesting, meaningful, and FUN ways?
Last edited:
