Weapon rebalance and reskinning

[JValeur]

Hello there!

I've attempted to rebalance and reskin the weapons of 5E. The purpose of this has been partially to simplify prices, weight and damage output, as well as minimizing 'bad' choices (weapons who do the same, but where one has a better damage die than the other, for example). I also wanted to make choices of weapon more deliberate - by creating distinctions between weapon, that would make one type of weapon better for one situation, and so forth. Lastly, I've added a slight drawback, in the name of realism, to the large, two-handed weapons.

Notice that swords, axes and maces/hammers are called simply that. Each of these categories cover many types. A small sword can be a shortsword, a scimitar, etc., while a large mace/hammer could be a maul, a morningstar, war hammer or so on.

Please read and critique - it would be greatly helpful: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1qkkrX1x2R_SWhxamdubklhTlk/view?usp=sharing

 

[bedir than]

I think the small axe and hammer should be simple weapons. They are the type of thing that a commoner would be likely to have around to train with and use.

The "massive critical" rule seems unwieldy in 5th edition. You're adding a die, or is it two?, to something that already has two dice rolls.

Pike special rule should probably apply to polearm as well. I think there is a way to simplify this and recognizes reach and uses the advantage mechanic. There's probably a way to include a rule about shield walls within that writing.

 

[JValeur]

I think the small axe and hammer should be simple weapons. They are the type of thing that a commoner would be likely to have around to train with and use.

Valid point. I'll consider that.

The "massive critical" rule seems unwieldy in 5th edition. You're adding a die, or is it two?, to something that already has two dice rolls.

I agree. Can you think of a replacement, that would make axes distinguishable? I struggled with this one.

Pike special rule should probably apply to polearm as well. I think there is a way to simplify this and recognizes reach and uses the advantage mechanic. There's probably a way to include a rule about shield walls within that writing.

Well, polearms, afaik, weren't typically used like pikes were. I could be wrong, however.

 

[bedir than]

On polearms being set to accept a charge. IIRC this is why many had a large spear point at the end of their pole. See the Swiss Guard's halberds for an example.

Massive Critical could be something like "double the ability score bonus" on a critical hit.

 

[JValeur]

On polearms being set to accept a charge. IIRC this is why many had a large spear point at the end of their pole. See the Swiss Guard's halberds for an example.

Massive Critical could be something like "double the ability score bonus" on a critical hit.

I see that. I'm not sure about making the change, however, since that'll upset balance, and I feel like that may just be some polearms.

I think the massive critical tweak you make, would make the weapon vastly superior to other weapons.

 

[bedir than]

Does that mean on your "massive crit" you don't double role the d4?

 

[JValeur]

No, that'd only apply once

 

[bedir than]

so with a d8 weapon and str 18 your system on crit would 2d8+d4+4 for an average of 15.5

Mind would be 2d8+8 for 17.

That's more, but not absurdly more and a lot quicker

 

[JValeur]

But it's an additional 5 damage at 20 strength, which is double as much, on a property I think is already very attractive for champions. I'd hate to have the axe be mandatory for any particular build. I'm thinking I might just have to find an alternative to massive critical.