[Grim Tales] Weapon Proficiencies

[Trodax]

I have a question concerning the bonus feats you get from your class at character creation (Weapon, Armour and Shield Proficiencies). Am I interpreting things correctly in that you only get these feats at level 1, and not when multiclassing? So a Smart Hero multiclassing to Strong Hero would not then get Martial Weapon Proficiency?

Doesn't this mean that anyone who ever want's to be able to use more than one Martial weapon really has to start out with Strong Hero at level 1? Or else, he would have to buy the Martial Weapon Proficiency feat multiple times.

This seems a little harsh to me, or am I missing something?

 

[HeapThaumaturgist]

I have a question concerning the bonus feats you get from your class at character creation (Weapon, Armour and Shield Proficiencies). Am I interpreting things correctly in that you only get these feats at level 1, and not when multiclassing? So a Smart Hero multiclassing to Strong Hero would not then get Martial Weapon Proficiency?

Doesn't this mean that anyone who ever want's to be able to use more than one Martial weapon really has to start out with Strong Hero at level 1? Or else, he would have to buy the Martial Weapon Proficiency feat multiple times.

This seems a little harsh to me, or am I missing something?

Nope. And it is a little harsh. Doing it the other way (where they get all of those feats for free) would be a little too good. Then you'd never see a game set in a melee culture without every single character having at least one level of strong with Melee Smash, regardless of what their concept was going to be.

Here's a few solutions I've thought of.

1) Give everyone a free martial weapon prof upon entering Strong, but not the whole package. I've offered this to one of my players but his PC is still running around with a rather nice sword taking the -4 penalties.

2) Turn "Martial Weapon Proficiency" into "Martial Group Proficiency". This is my favorite. All of the classes that get a melee prof get, instead, a group. You can group them by "Swords, Axes, Bows" or, my favorite, group them by region. Pick out 1-2 melee weapons, a ranged weapon or two, and a light weapon or two that really express the flavor of a local culture and give them that. Strong is then much less powerful in that department. They can pick up any common weapon regardless of where they are and swing it with proficiency, but in their home region the Tough hero has almost the same ability with weaponry. Just not with armor. I'd still say give those without any martial weapon profs only a single martial weapon going into Strong, though.

3) Include a single "martial" weapon in all of the Simple Weapon Prof groups when they're taken. This is okay for fantasy type games, and will keep people from running to Strong hoping for a decent weapon.

(I do 1 and 2 in my game currently. We also have flintlock firearms and I allowed people to trade Martial Weapons Prof in for Firearms or an Armor Prof in for Firearms.)

--fje

 

[Angel Tarragon]

Heap is right.

 

[Trodax]

Nope. And it is a little harsh. Doing it the other way (where they get all of those feats for free) would be a little too good. Then you'd never see a game set in a melee culture without every single character having at least one level of strong with Melee Smash, regardless of what their concept was going to be.

I sort of feel like this could happen with the rules as written also; in a melee culture every single character will start out as level 1 Strong, regardless of concept. Sure, you might loose out on some skill points, hp or core skills by starting as Strong, but Martial Weapon Proficiency (all) is pretty sweet.

Here's a few solutions I've thought of.

1) Give everyone a free martial weapon prof upon entering Strong, but not the whole package. I've offered this to one of my players but his PC is still running around with a rather nice sword taking the -4 penalties.

2) Turn "Martial Weapon Proficiency" into "Martial Group Proficiency". This is my favorite. All of the classes that get a melee prof get, instead, a group. You can group them by "Swords, Axes, Bows" or, my favorite, group them by region. Pick out 1-2 melee weapons, a ranged weapon or two, and a light weapon or two that really express the flavor of a local culture and give them that. Strong is then much less powerful in that department. They can pick up any common weapon regardless of where they are and swing it with proficiency, but in their home region the Tough hero has almost the same ability with weaponry. Just not with armor. I'd still say give those without any martial weapon profs only a single martial weapon going into Strong, though.

3) Include a single "martial" weapon in all of the Simple Weapon Prof groups when they're taken. This is okay for fantasy type games, and will keep people from running to Strong hoping for a decent weapon.

(I do 1 and 2 in my game currently. We also have flintlock firearms and I allowed people to trade Martial Weapons Prof in for Firearms or an Armor Prof in for Firearms.)

--fje

Thats some good ideas, thanks!
A version of your #3, which could be appropriate for some types of campaigns, would be to just say that everyone gets to start with Martial Weapon Proficiency (basically just skipping the Simple/Martial distinction).

Another way to go would be to change the feat so that it always covers all Martial weapons; anyone could then buy Martial Weapon Proficiency (all) as a regular feat. Hmmm, I might like that one myself. I'll have to think about it.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

Hey, here's a crazy idea: Use a Simple weapon.

And don't expect to learn a warrior's trade without investing in it.

 

[Maester Luwin]

You could also use the weapon groups idea from Unearthed Arcana (which is easily adapted to Grim Tales) then no one starts out with all martial weapons. You could group the weapons as Heap suggested. This has worked out well in my campaign! Thanks Maester Luwin

 

[Trodax]

Hey, here's a crazy idea: Use a Simple weapon.

And don't expect to learn a warrior's trade without investing in it.

Sure, I can agree with that. What I don't like is that this investment basically has to be done at first level (or you'll have to spend a feat each time you want to learn a new weapon). I just think it makes certain concepts harder to do.

For example, the rugged barbarian (Tough Hero) who wanders out of his homeland and goes on to cut a bloody swath across the continent as a mercenary (*cough* Conan *cough*). Or the young reckless noble (Charismatic Hero) who gets his act together when his homeland is invaded and eventually becomes a great warrior and general. In both of these cases, it would probably have been more strategic to start out as Strong Hero, and then multiclass.

I guess this boils down to one facet of d20 in general that I'm not that keen on; the need to be strategic when designing your character. With experienced players its not a problem, but when your players are new to the system I think its nice to be able to just let them pick a class that fits their concept, and not have to steer them so much with stuff like "ahhh, you don't want to do that,´cause that'll come back and bite you in the ass in a couple of levels".

Basically, what I'm saying is that I don't really like that there is such a big difference between a Strong lvl1/Tough lvl1 and a Tough lvl1/Strong lvl1 character.

To avoid sounding like a whining b**ch, I'll add that, all in all, I think Grim Tales looks like a real sweet collection of rules.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

Sure, I can agree with that. What I don't like is that this investment basically has to be done at first level (or you'll have to spend a feat each time you want to learn a new weapon).

Think of 1st level as part of your background. You've spent a lot of time training to separate yourself from the ordinaries and get to that point.

I guess this boils down to one facet of d20 in general that I'm not that keen on; the need to be strategic when designing your character.

Well, then, stop it. And I don't see how it's any better to try to "pre-design" your character for things you might someday want to do-- like swing a longsword. If your character, through play, learns to do it, great. If not, don't take Strong 1 just in case you someday might need to wield every kind of martial weapon under the sun.

In the meantime, GT gives you plenty of feats. Spend one.

Basically, what I'm saying is that I don't really like that there is such a big difference between a Strong lvl1/Tough lvl1 and a Tough lvl1/Strong lvl1 character.

That's a totally different (and much more reasonable!) objection than this perceived "need" to wield all martial weapons and wear every kind of armor.

But really, in practice, most folks don't need more than one type of armor and one martial weapon, especially low-magic GT characters.

 

[GlassJaw]

In GT, the weapon and armor proficiencies are actually *gasp* useful (unlike 3ed). I've played and run some one-shots and I've found that spending a feat to learn a weapon is hardly a drawback. Wulf is right - you have a lot of feats at your disposal. On paper it might seem like a limitation but in actual play, the impact is minimal.

 

[Trodax]

In GT, the weapon and armor proficiencies are actually *gasp* useful (unlike 3ed). I've played and run some one-shots and I've found that spending a feat to learn a weapon is hardly a drawback. Wulf is right - you have a lot of feats at your disposal. On paper it might seem like a limitation but in actual play, the impact is minimal.

Hmm, maybe you're right. I'm probably a bit stuck in the mindset that proficiencies should be free and spending a feat on one is wasting a feat. Which is kind of silly I guess :\

And you do get a lot of feats in GT.

I still think its sort of harsh that you for example have to spend two feats to be able to use a decent sword and a bow though... But maybe its not that big of a deal as I first thought.