Let's talk about Exotic Weapons

[Varianor Abroad]

The problem is that usually an Exotic weapon ends up just being the same as a normal weapon but doing slightly more damage - not even enough to merit the feat, in most cases.

I respectfully disagree with the above assumption. If you are paying for a weapon that increases its die type without a size increase, that's worth a feat. At least if you're a combat character. A feat that increases a weapon's damage by +2 (such as dire weapons in Monte Cook's Arcana Evolved) is one that you get to use every time that you hit, just like Weapon Focus. AE exotic weapons frequently increase the die type and either the crit multiplier or the crit range, so they are definitely worth it.

That said, I agree that the whip, et al could use simpler, more fun rules for play. However, if they became too effective then everyone would use them. So a modification or two would be in order. Feat chains to increase their effectives are also good.

 

[Tetsubo]

Something like this: Weapon knacks?

I just read that thread and bookmarked it...

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

I like Exotic weapons, personally.

That they usually cost a Feat to use does not dissuade me from using them, either, if I think it fits the PC concept.

I'm currently designing 2 PCs for Dallas Gameday, one with a Greatspear, the other using twin Dire Picks.

My Indiana Jones based PC uses his whip TWF style with a light pick or hammer

In 3.0, I had a Ranger using an oversized kukri as his off-hand weapon.

 

[RangerWickett]

E.N. Publishing produced the E.N. Arsenal series. Sadly that page doesn't include my favorite, E.N. Arsenal - Whips.

(Okay, my favorite is Chainmail Bikinis, but whips are my favorite serious entry.)

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

Exotic weapons seem to come in a few categories:

1) Rare/Hard-to-Use. Examples include bolas, nets and other weapons that often require you to be "non-standard" or "generally unoptimized" to use. Spiked chains fall into this category, but also #3 because they can be powerful enough without weakening your character too much.

2) Goofy/Lame. The kama is a Japanese sickle. Sure it looks different from a European sickle, but there's no reason it should do more damage (in fact, it doesn't, which is why it shouldn't be exotic) or otherwise act any differently from a European sickle in combat. If you're not a monk it's a complete waste of a feat. If you are a monk, it's a complete waste of space and/or whatever you paid for it. Also includes things like Mercurial Greatswords that might be worth it mechanically but seriously harms the flavor of a serious campaign.

3) Cool/Useful. Bastard swords and dwarven waraxes fall into this category. Dwarven waraxes are cool enough that non-dwarves sometimes use them. Spiked chains fall into this category. I think the elven thinblade does as well, but I don't remember its exact stats.

4) Racial, such as thri-kreen or kender weapons. Often not overpowered (we hope not, anyway) and are only exotic because other races don't use them.

My current PC is a thri-kreen ranger who uses two exotic weapons; but they're only exotic to "keep them out of the hands of humanoids". The chatkcha (for this campaign) is a small throwing weapon that does 1d6 damage (-4 to hit if used as a melee weapon) that automatically returns when missed (if thrown by a kreen) and the gythka is more worthy of the name exotic (like a two-bladed sword, but instead of a better threat range can be thrown like a spear). In this campaign thri-kreen are automatically proficient with the chatkcha and the gythka is treated as martial by thri-kreen.

There's no point of a non-kreen taking the chatkcha; it's a waste of a feat and non-kreen have to make Dex checks to catch it upon returning. It definitely falls under #4.

Otherwise I've never used anything more exotic than a bastard sword.

 

[Kae'Yoss]

The biggest problem I see with exotic weapons is that they mixed up two sets of criteria there: Some are exotic (and require a feat even if you're a fighter) because they're stronger than a comparable martial weapon (e.g. an elven thinblade is like a rapier, but with d8 instead of d8), which is okay. But others are exotic weapons just because they're rare and, well, exotic. Even though they're weaker than other exotic weapons (often they're similar to simple weapons), they become exotic weapons because they're supposed to be less common.


I like the idea about weapon knacks, or streamlining the system so that the weapon's "power level" determines its weapon category (they could rename the categories so that they're a better fit).


Anyway, I did see my share of exotic weapons, sometimes as ornamentation, sometimes put to good use:

Hand crossbow (mostly drow characters, who just have to have one of these)
Spiked chain (a tactical fighter who disarmed and tripped the heck out of his enemies)
Elven lightblade (I played a noble star elf, and we blatantly ripped of a samurai's daisho for the noble star elf caste, so my elf carried ornamental blades, one lightblade and one thinblade. The DM even gave me free proficiency with those, but that was probably mainly because the character was a sorcerer who didn't intend to use them, anyway)
Elven thinblade (see above; also, we allowed bladesingers to use those as their blade, and one bladesinger character used it)
Elven courtblade (my drow swordsage, we considered it the drow swordsages' katana and I was allowed to use shadowhand manoeuvres with that weapon. Also, one or two other characters used courtblades)
Greathammer (my dwarven cleric. Wanted a big bad hammer that hit like hell)
Dwarven waraxe (dwarven fighter who had weapon familiarity for it)
Katana (a couple of rokugani characters who used it one-handed for some reason or other)
Whip (a paladin of Sune I played in a play by post game that never really took off)
Shuriken (a ninja character. They just got to have shuriken, or it wouldn't be the same)

 

[avigor]

I basically agree with Tetsubo, although I could see a monk order having a fighting style that's incompatible with western sickles but works with japanese sickles or vice versa; if nothing else, they might have different balance or handling characteristics. So, sometimes very similar, but slightly different, weapons might be different in specific circumstances, although most people wouldn't see any difference, and therefore proficiency in one should be proficiency in the other. A spiked chain would also be somewhat different than a dire flail: a solid shaft with two chains dangling off the ends compared to a single chain; you could probably use both if you're trained in one, but you might have familiarity issues if you switch.

Thus, I'd say that weapons that you just aren't familiar with by culture, racial background, or simple lack of exposure should at least take a time period of familiarization (you have to practice with it for 3 hours a day for a week to gain the benefits of the appropriate feats with it). This way, weapon focus (rapier) would work with elven thinblades and vice versa. The two handed martial/one handed exotic would still require exotic training for one-handed use, although a western style bastard sword might handle differently than an eastern style bastard sword, as above. Racial weapons that are designed for different hands should definitely require the feat, because most people have humanoid hands and have to learn how to use weapons designed for different hands.

 

[Jhaelen]

What's the state of the union with exotic weapons in your campaign? Ever seen a PC use a bola? Any house rules crop up to make training in exotic weapons more advantageous?

Sorry, no bolas.
But othwise they're used regularly. The party's main fighter is a lasher fighting with two whip-daggers. The dwarven barbarian uses a dwarven waraxe (the player's previous character used a bastard sword). And another player is considering a double-weapon for his next character.

One thing I do to encourage using exotic weapons is introducing weapons of legacy. These are typically so good they're definitely worth getting a feat just to use them. Please note, though, that I've houseruled the associated costs for WoL. IMC they just cost a (large) amount of xp and gold - no silly penalties!

 

[Li Shenron]

The biggest problem I see with exotic weapons is that they mixed up two sets of criteria there: Some are exotic (and require a feat even if you're a fighter) because they're stronger than a comparable martial weapon (e.g. an elven thinblade is like a rapier, but with d8 instead of d8), which is okay. But others are exotic weapons just because they're rare and, well, exotic. Even though they're weaker than other exotic weapons (often they're similar to simple weapons), they become exotic weapons because they're supposed to be less common.

I agree but I've never seen it too much as a problem. Most players hate to "spend" something on a thing that doesn't return a straight benefit, and that is certainly true with some EP... but it's not a big deal to me because I still use them for NPCs and monsters, who notoriously don't complain

I add that we always treated non-conventional weapons as exotic. E.g., in our (IIRC) very first 3ed campaign one character took EWP (Torch) so that he would be able to be the torch-bearer in dungeons and use it as an off-hand weapon too (real reason was that he'd just seen previews/trailers of LotR movie).

 

[AFGNCAAP]

It seems to me that, unless the weapon has a particular appeal to a player (like a bastard sword or katana) or the character gets free use of the weapon (like rogues with hand crossbows, monks with nunchaku, or dwarves with dwarven waraxes), then exotic weapons wind up sitting by the wayside in most campaigns I've played in.

Some weapons like the repeating crossbow are nifty, but the same feat spot that would be necessary to use it can be taken up by Rapid Reload instead (which is far more beneficial to any character able to use a simple weapon category crossbow).

And, since many one-handed weapons can be used with 2 hands to gain a 1.5 damage bonus from Strength, weapons like a bastard sword, maul, dwarven waraxe, or the like are a matter of choice for the player (basically, if they feel the slightly bigger damage die & the feat is really worth it). And, if a character is going to exclusively use a weapon two-handed, then options like the greatsword, greataxe, and other such weapons often get selected instead.

Double weapons really aren't used that much in campaigns I play in. Many ranger PCs I've seen use 2 individual weapons rather than a double weapon. And, the rarity of obtaining magical versions of some of those weapons (esp. in some premade modules) doesn't encourage many players to get those weapons. Or if they do appear, its usually either a weapon that no one's proficient with (due to the lack of exotic weapon feats with any character or lack of the proper exotic weapon feat to use it). And, on top of that, players creating higher level characters often shy away from those weapons due to the expense necessary to enchant both ends of those weapons.

Now, I think exotic weapons should still be around, even in 4E. However, I think some weapons need to be demoted from exotic to martial, or promoted from martial to exotic. I also think that there should be some more borderline martial/exotic weapons (like the bastard sword) that provide additional benefits when an exotic weapon proficiency is used with them. For example:

• Rapiers and scimitars are exotic weapons that can be used as one-handed martial weapons normally, but use of an Exotic Weapon Proficiency feat allows them to be used as a light weapon or Weapon Finesse-applicable (so weapons like the cutlass and Chinese broadsword/dao can be classified with the scimitar).
• Composite bows are exotic weapons that grant better damage (a die step up), slightly better range than normal bows, and can be improved to allow for Strength bonuses to damage.
• Reach polearms like the glaive, ranseur, and guisarme can be used to attempt special attacks (disarm, trip, dismount, etc.), as well as use of the Short Haft feat/manuever.