Weapons as special effects

[GoodKingJayIII]

At first I thought this was overly complicated and almost brushed it off. But I was so intrigued by the idea I came back and reread it. Man is it cool. I really like what you've done, and I'll be trying to simplify it so I have something for future use. Well done.

 

[brento766]

hmmm

great idea but what about double weapons? would that be a quality because with a double you get to treat the off hand as a light.

 

[DanMcS]

Here are my concerns: I haven't run over the mechanics too much, though they seem excellently well done. I am concerned by the fact that you base these abilities strictly on fighter level, though. That creates a lot of conflict in my mind. First off, I play AU, not 3.X, so there's not even a fighter to consider. I hate to think that, say, a mageblade is restricted from taking this. I'd prefer to see something along the lines of a BAB requirement, with fighters getting these for free at relevant levels. That way if Wally Wizard really wants to be a bad-aspirin with his q-staff, he can take Improved at level 12, when he has +6 bab. If Mikey the Mageblade wants to, he can add it, but he's not as good as the straight fighter, since he's getting magic enhancements.

Combat proficiency and Improved CP are general feats, and list only BAB as a prerequisite. The two upper-tier feats (Greater CP & Weapon Mastery) are fighter-specific, like Greater Weapon Focus/Specialization. That was completely intentional, because I don't think there is enough incentive to stick with fighter past level 10 or 12. You've filled up your list of necessary feats for your style by then, and almost everyone goes into a prestige class because the upper levels of fighter don't provide anything new. There should be a bit of a reward for sticking with it. Actually, I think all classes should have a reward at level 20 that you can get for sticking with it all the way through. I'll have to ponder that more deeply.

Anyway, in a variant which doesn't have the fighter class, it would be easy to ignore the "fighter 10" or "fighter 15" prereqs and just use BAB, you're right.

There's also the concern that under this system, you would give up a chunk by taking a PrC. Flavorfully, moving to the Weapon Master PrC shouldn't make you *less* effective with a weapon than a warrior. And unless you're willing to revamp every PrC out there, it would be easier to look at the above BAB type requirements....

Isn't the weapon master a class dedicated to one weapon? He would lose access to the top tiers of the proficiency feat chain, in return for greater prowess with a single weapon.

In any case, yes, I think that's the way prestige classes work; you give up some abilities (spell progression, turning, whatever) in return for others.

 

[DanMcS]

great idea but what about double weapons? would that be a quality because with a double you get to treat the off hand as a light.

I'm unsure. They're such bizzaro weapons that it's wierd to come up with a general rule for them. In one of the earlier examples (jackie chan with a ladder) I just described him using it as a double weapon without any penalty.

Double isn't a quality that is applied by the wielder, it's inherent to the physical shape of the weapon, the same as heavy and light. A double weapon is a weapon which typically looks like two one-handed weapons joined together, and one end counts as light.

Here's what I think. Say you have a double sword. Both ends are the size of a one-handed slashing sword for you, and you have Combat Proficiency, so they would normally do 1d8 20/x3 or some variant thereof. One end counts as light, so (assuming appropriate feats) he can make one attack with each end, both at -2 to-hit. No quality necessary.

This makes double weapons viable with just one feat, combat proficiency, but you also need two-weapon fighting to be any good, you can't use a shield, and you aren't getting the regular two-handed bonus to damage because it's not really a heavy weapon. I don't think that's too out of whack.

Hmm. You know, you could use nearly any big weapon as a double weapon; pommel and blade for a greatsword, axe-head and pole for a halberd, similarly for other polearms. I'll have to think about this more, too.

 

[woodelf]

Well, we tried this system out in last week's game, and it seems like it's gonna work. Though it needs some polish (unsurprisingly).

First, some general thoughts:

• The system as written unnecessarily screws smaller characters, IMHO. I'm using AU for the ruleset, so there are standard PC races ranging from Tiny to Large, and the double-whammy (if i've read it right) of scaling for both a smaller weapon and a smaller wielder is a real killer.
  
• I really like the concept of exotic weapon templates that AU uses--not just exotic-because-it's-weird, but exotic because it's special.
  
• I wish it better integrated with unarmed damage for monks/oathsworn. BUt, then, those are kinda funky mechanics to begin with, and at least they, like this system, allow the warrior a fair bit of customizability to their attacks.
  
• I start to wonder how many other things should be yanked out of feats and into general options, in response to this.
  
• What about armor? While i have a little more trouble wrapping my brain around armor changing its effectiveness from round to round, it only seems "fair".
  
• Projectile should just be a descriptor, not a quality, like slashing is--since it can't be altered, and doesn't trade off for damage, there's no point in labeling it a quality.
  

On these points, in order:

• I think simply scaling for weapon size will be sufficient, and the fact that smaller characters use smaller weapons will be more than enough of o penalty/adjustment.
  
• My gut reaction is to have the various weapon templates add to the weapon by either automatically giving a quality (much like light, heavy, and projectile do already) above and beyond what the wielder imparts, and which can't be swapped out for other things, or giving access to qualities that you can't otherwise utilize, but you still have to "pay" for them, just like you would any other quality.
  
• Probably just leave the unarmed stuff alone, as a separate system--inelegent, but efficient.
  
• It starts to really change the feel of things, and perhaps become a balance issue, if i were to allow all the "flexibility" feats without actually taking the feat--things like Combat Expertise (trading attack for defense), or trading damage for attack. Not sure i want to go there just yet. Plus, these things, as tradeoffs, would probably have to be implemented differently than the current qualities, which're clearly good things. Only feat i'm almost certainly gonna ditch is Weapon Finesse. As long as i'm going this far in revamping how weapons behave, it's time to make the switch to Light weapons automatically use Dex for attacks, Heavy automatically use Str, and i haven't reached a conclusion on the middle ground.
  
• One thought that comes to mind is inspired by the articulated armor of AU, which gives you a better AC adjustment if you have the exotic armor prof, because you learn to shift the pieces to better block blows. So, perhaps a skilled user can trade off between AC, armor-check penalty/spell failure, and max dex? Dunno where this thought is leading me. Should it be limited more by class of armor, or by user skill? Is a cloak all the armor you need if you're a skilled swordsman--you can whip it around and block just as effectively as a full tin can would protect an unskilled user? Conversely, is there enough skill involved in wearing that tin can that the unskilled user is no more protected than when they're wearing a studded leather coat (because they don't effectively utilize its flutings, leave joints exposed, etc.)?
  

Also, some thoughts on further qualities. I'm not sure where to slot all of these, but here goes:
Combat Proficiency:

• Blocking: When fighting defensively, increase AC bonus by +1, or on total defense increase AC bonus by +2.
  
• Cavalry: When used in a charge, this weapon does double damage on a successful hit.
  
• Flexible: The weapon is very flexible, like a whip or chain, or even a very thin sword, allowing you to ignore shield bonuses to AC.
  

Improved Combat Proficiency:

• Double strike (heavy required): You use the other end of a two-handed weapon to get in a secondary attack. Both attacks suffer a -4 penalty, and the secondary attack suffers a -4 unless the character has ambidexterity.
  
• Bashing (bludgeoning/slashing): You use the mass of the weapon to overcome armor, ignoring up to 5 pts of armor or natural armor bonus on your target.
  
• Dazing: The target must make a Fort save, DC=damage, or be dazed for one round.
  
• Entangling: The weapon entangles the target, preventing any action except escaping the entangling, as if grappled. [n.b.: need to work on the mechanics of this one.]
  
• Skewering (piercing): you can drive the weapon home in a target, leaving it embedded. With a successful opposed strength check, you can keep the target from moving, unless she wishes to un-skewer herself, which causes additional damage equal to the initial strike. You can choose to release your hold on the weapon, allowing the target to remove it without additional damage, as a full-round action.
  

Greater Combat Proficiency:

• Wounding: the target takes an additional 1hp damage/round until she takes a full-round action to bind up the wound (Heal DC 15), or is healed magically.
  
• Returning (projectile, thrown): The weapon returns to you after thrown/fired, whether the hit is successful or not. (end of same action? 5 init counts later? before next action? next round?)
  
• Stunning: The target must make a Fort save, DC=damage, or be stunned for one round.
  
• Paralyzing: By striking at vital points, you can temporarily paralyze an opponent. This attack does no normal damage, but the target must make a Fort save against a DC equal to the total damage the attack would have done, or be paralyzed for one round.
  
• Demoralizing: You strike such an awesome blow that the target suffers subdual damage equal to, and in addition to, the regular damage, as they lose heart in the battle.
  

Combat Mastery:

• Bypass armor: you can ignore all bonuses from armor or shield (including magical bonuses), but not natural armor or force effects.
  
• Incapacitating: Target must make a Fort save, DC=damage, or be knocked unconscious.
  
• Crippling: attack does an additional 1d3 temporary dex damage. [Or should this just be 1pt of ability damage?]
  
• Seeking (projectile): ignores concealment.
  
• Dancing (melee only): You can use your weapon with such skill that it is as if you need not even touch it. You may attack with a weapon for one round after you cease holding/touching the weapon. Re-grabbing a weapon that has just been dancing, but has not yet fallen to the ground, is a free action. [Yes, you could keep, say, 4 longswords in play this way, by drawing two, "dancing" them as you draw two more, and switching back and forth each round.]
  

Oh, on weapon templates:

• Dire: Adds +2 damage, requires exotic[heavy] weapon proficiency. A dire weapon is covered in extra spikes and blades. It gives user access to Bloody, Skewering (even if not piercing), and Wounding qualities, regardless of skill level. Cannot use for subdual damage, or take the Flexible, Entangling, Demoralizing, or Touch qualities.
  
• Devanian: Requires the exotic[agile] weapon proficiency. Weapon is treated as one size category smaller for purposes of wielding (so a Medium person can use a Medium Devanian weapon as a light weapon, or a Large Devanian weapon one-handed). Cannot take the Blocking, Cavalry, Bashing, or Knock-back qualities, but can take the Double-strike quality if its size is large enough, even if it is being wielded one-handed.
  
• Articulated: Requires the exotic[agile] weapon proficiency. The weapon has joints or flexible portions that enable the user to adjust the weapon's shape and capabilities to better suit the situation. An articulated weapon can take one more quality at any given time than is usual for the wielder's skill level, and gives access to the Reach, Disarming, Tripping, Parrying, Defensive, Fast, and Bypass Armor qualities at one level lower of proficiency than usual. An articulated weapon, despite it's reconfigurability, cannot be flexible enough to take the Flexible or Entangling qualities.
  

So, what do you think? Sorry, no more-concrete thoughts on armor types or use qualities.

And, in case it's not obvious, i'm with DanMcS that "double" isn't all that special--i'd say anything that's at least one size larger than the wielder can be used as a double weapon, and i added a quality for exactly that.

 

[woodelf]

Oh, and i'd suggest that some of the qualities be limited based on weapon type:

• Settable: wielder size or larger, piercing or slashing
  
• Penetrating: piercing or slashing
  
• Bloody: piercing or slashing
  
• Knock-back: slashing or bludgeoning
  

 

[DanMcS]

[*]The system as written unnecessarily screws smaller characters, IMHO. I'm using AU for the ruleset, so there are standard PC races ranging from Tiny to Large, and the double-whammy (if i've read it right) of scaling for both a smaller weapon and a smaller wielder is a real killer.

I didn't mean to double-whammy small characters, so if you read it that way, I wrote it poorly. A small character using a one-handed weapon should be one step below a medium character using a one-handed weapon, not two (but I can see how you'd think that, since a one-handed weapon for a small guy is smaller than a one-handed weapon for a medium guy). Weapon size doesn't actually count, though, only whether it is light, one-handed, or heavy for the wielder.

Projectile as a descriptor, yeah, you're right, I hadn't completely thought all that through when I wrote that originally.

One thought that comes to mind is inspired by the articulated armor of AU, which gives you a better AC adjustment if you have the exotic armor prof, because you learn to shift the pieces to better block blows. So, perhaps a skilled user can trade off between AC, armor-check penalty/spell failure, and max dex? Dunno where this thought is leading me. Should it be limited more by class of armor, or by user skill? Is a cloak all the armor you need if you're a skilled swordsman--you can whip it around and block just as effectively as a full tin can would protect an unskilled user? Conversely, is there enough skill involved in wearing that tin can that the unskilled user is no more protected than when they're wearing a studded leather coat (because they don't effectively utilize its flutings, leave joints exposed, etc.)?

There are good thoughts here about armor.

I need to go through your post more fully, which won't happen until later, but thanks for the notes.

 

[BarkingDeathSquirrel]

At first I shrugged off this system, even more so when someone mentioned crazy anime weapons (don't get me wrong, anime is all fine and dandy, I quite enjoy it, just not all the quirky weapons and stuff)... However, then I stopped and thought about it: This is like a perfect system for making crazy steampunk weapons!

I'm thinking of implementing this into my steampunk campaign (if I ever get done designing it ), but with a seperation between innate weapon abilities and abilities that can be gained through creative use or skill. IE: A Returning weapon would be likely a lower level if the ability was innate (a boomarang), and a much higher one if the player wants to add it as a skill-based quality, ie: a fighter of such skill that he throws his dagger in such a way that it returns to him). The damage and the like would remain the same, however.

Good work, I must say!

*salutes

Edit: Oh... what about the weight of weapons? As in for carrying them around? How would you handle that in this system?

 

[Impeesa]

A thought on unarmed damage: Perhaps make unarmed damage a step below Light, as it is now, and just have monks gain a special +1 damage step when fighting unarmed at every level their unarmed damage would normally increase. Or something to that effect.

--Impeesa--

 

[SSquirrel]

Edit: Oh... what about the weight of weapons? As in for carrying them around? How would you handle that in this system?

I would say weapon weights are still based as they are in the PHB now. Items that aren't given weights in the PHB *big sticks, ladders, franklin stove pipes, etc* could be house ruled by the DM.

Hagen