D&D 5E What I'd Like To See Added to 5E - Weapon Comparison

Water Bob

Adventurer
As much as I like what I read about 5E, I'm sorry to see that the differences in weapons continued to be watered down.

Remember back in the 1E AD&D days? One of the attractive aspects of the dart was that it had a rate of fire of 3, meaning that you could make three attacks with the weapon in a single combat round. The dart only did 1d3 damage to S/M creatures, but if you hit all three times, the damage would add up. That's 3-9 points, skewing towards 4-5 points (because you're rolling 3 dice), with a high minimum damage throw. Your 1st level Magic User, with darts, could potentially do as much damage with his darts as the party's fighter with his longsword.

Of course, the mage would not hit as often as the fighter. And, if you recall, 1E AD&D also used modifiers for different types of armor. If the target was wearing AC 5 chain, then the longsword has an edge because it's +0 vs. AC 5. Darts are -2 vs. AC 5.

But, do you see what I'm getting at? In 1E AD&D, there were reasons to use weapons other than just, "Well, how much damage do they do? I want the weapon that does the most damage."

Take the hammer vs. the longsword. Why would any fighter ever use a hammer? The hammer does 1d4+1 vs. S/M creatures, where the longsword does 1d8. But, look at the Armor Class Adjustments for the hammer. Against most armor types, the hammer is going to hit more often than the longsword.

What do you think is the better weapon against a target in plate and using a shield (AC 2), the hammer or the longsword?

It's the hammer! The longsword is -2 to hit vs. AC 2 while there is no modifier with the hammer. So, would you rather hit more often (10% more often), doing 2-5 damage with the hammer, or would you rather hit less often and have the potential to do both more and less damage (2-5 for the hammer, 1-8 for the longsword).

See the trade off?

When you selected your weapons in 1E AD&D, you had to consider the enemies that you would likely fight. You didn't just go for the weapon that did the highest damage. You had to consider how often you would hit, as well.

I really miss that--the picking of the right tool for the job.

(And....I didn't even talk about the obvious...that weapons in 1E AD&D had TWO damage ratings: One for S/M targets, and one for Large targets. This gave the wielder even something else to consider. "How does the weapon perform against large targets?")







FLASH FORWARD TO AD&D 2E.

Here, there is still some differences to consider about weapons, but it's been watered down quite a bit. Now, instead of armor modifiers specific to a weapon, the modifier is tied to the basic damage a weapon does: Slash, Blunt, Pierce.

In AD&D 2E, the hammer (now called a warhammer), a blunt weapon, has no modifier against a foe wearing plate mail. The longsword (an edged weapon), however, is -3 vs. that same foe in plate mail.

This made for easier-to-use rules, I guess, because you didn't have a string of modifiers for every weapon against several AC types as you did in 1E AD&D (I never found them hard to use), but you lose a little something when comparing like weapons--like two edged weapons.

What was added in 2E AD&D, though, was a re-purposing of the Speed Factor. This sometimes used mechanic in 1E AD&D (it was used to break d6 initiative ties in 1E AD&D) became an every-combat-used mechanic in 2E AD&D as a weapon's Speed Factor directly influenced a character's initiative. The SF became a modifier to the character's initiative throw. So, if a character was using a wand (SF +3), a creature was using a breath weapon (SF +1), and a fighter was using his longsword (SF +5), with all other factors being equal, it was likely that the creature's breath weapon would happen first, followed by the wand, followed, lastly, by the swing of the longsword.

And, a weapon's SF (as well as the weapon's damage vs. Large targets) became the primary means to weigh the advantages of like weapons. For example, the battleaxe and the longsword both do 1d8 damage. Both are slashing weapons, so the armor modifier is the same for both weapons. The difference between the two is in what the weapon does against Larger foes (battleaxe does 1d8, longsword does 1d12), and also the weapon's Speed Factor (How quickly can the weapon be used--how bulky is it?). The battleaxe has a Speed Factor of +7, where the longsword has SF +5. Which means....the longsword is a much better weapon to use overall (faster, plus much more damage vs. Large).







FLASH FORWARD, AGAIN, TO D&D 3E

For all of the crunch used in the third edition of the game, all of this neat weapon comparison stuff was erased! Gone. No more!

The only real difference between weapons is...how much damage do they do? (And, of course, there's the class restrictions--or Feat restrictions--, but that has been true in each of the D&D editions).

Why would you ever use a dart under the 3E rules? Answer: You wouldn't! And, in no way can the 3E dart ever hope to rival the longsword (as it did in 1E AD&D, as I explained above).

Weapon selection in 3E D&D is based on class (what can I use?) and roleplaying (I think it would be neat for my barbarian to carry a battleaxe). But, many players are just going to default to the usable weapon with the highest damage.

Sure, you've got some basic comparisons, like one-handed vs. two-handed. And, maybe something special about a certain weapon (this one can be used to trip; that one can't). But, gone are the various weapon statistics that made weapon selection so interesting in the earlier editions (at least, from my point of view).

I don't want to say that there's no means of weapon comparison besides damage in the 3E game. There's a couple of factors: one-handed vs. two-handed, reach weapons, finesse weapons, Critical Threat Range.... But, as a whole, I don't think that 3E does near as good a job making differences in weapons as either 1E AD&D or 2E AD&D.







VARIANTS - THE HOPE FOR WEAPON SELECTION

So, what happens is, that weapon selection stats can be added again to the game through optional rules or variant rules. For example, the CONAN RPG (published by Mongoose) is based on the 3.5 d20 set of mechanics. But, in that game, armor does not make a person harder to hit as it does in standard D&D. Armor absorbs damage when a character is hit.

Weapons are graded with a new stat called Armor Piercing. This rates the weapon's ability to deliver damage to armored foes. The higher the AR rating, the easier it is to damage foes wearing armor.

For example, a cutlass is rated at AR 2. That's low. The weapon is not a good weapon to use against armored foes. Yet, the cutlass does 1d10 damage in this game.

Compare that to the warhammer. It only does 1d6 damage. But, it's Armor Piercing rating is AR 7. That's pretty good. The weapon will bash through most types of armor.

If your foe is wearing a mail shirt, would you rather do 1d10 -5 damage with the cutlass (hitting, but scoring 0 damage on half your hits, and 1-5 points of damage the other half of the time when you hit), or would you rather do 1d6 -2 damage with the war hammer (hitting, but scoring 0 damage a third of the time, and 1-4 points of damage two thirds of the time when you hit).

Obviously, the warhammer is the better weapon against that foe.

But, Pirates typically go up against seamen on other vessels--and those sailors are usually not armored or only lightly armored. Against a non-armored or lightly armored foe, the cutlass is the superior weapon. It's AR 2 rating is enough to do some good damage against lightly armored foes, and damage will average much higher than that of the warhammer.

So, in the Conan RPG, you've got a real, mechanical reason to see cutlasses often used by Pirates, and the warhammer will typically be seen only on large battlefields where knights in heavy armor fight to win the day.







WHAT I'D LIKE TO SEE IN 5E D&D

From what I've seen of 5E, weapons are rated very much as they were in 3E. That is to say that the neat weapon comparison stats like those in 1E and 2E AD&D have been watered down as they were in 3E D&D.

I'd like to see a Variant rule that will do for the game what the Conan RPG did for 3.5 D&D. I'm not saying that the Conan RPG should be copied. 1E and 2E AD&D show that there are many different ways to skin a goat. But, whatever it is, I'd like to see some weapon stats/rules that make the choice of weapon something more than just picking the weapon that does the most damage from the lot a character can choose from.

Am I the only one who would like to see this?
 

log in or register to remove this ad

cmad1977

Hero
I stopped reading after a couple sentences but did read the last question. I have two answers, one short and one long.

Short answer: yup!

Long answer: yuuuuuuup!!
 

Zelc

First Post
If you're worried about trap options among melee weapons, I once made a revised set of melee weapon stats to remove them. Granted, this doesn't address your specific concern, but it adds more differentiation among the weapons. If you use this, you should probably nerf Dueling or buff Great Weapon Fighting (I like the "reroll any damage die" option). The other problem is this considers 2d6 damage one step up from 1d12 damage when it's really only a half step up, since I think 1d6+1d8 is a bit clunky.

View attachment 67756

EDIT: How do I re-use a previously uploaded attachment in a new post and have the image display automatically inside the post?
 
Last edited:

Water Bob

Adventurer
I stopped reading after a couple sentences but did read the last question.

LOL. It was a bit of a lengthy opening post, but I wanted to remind people of the types of weapon decisions that they had to make when using other editions of D&D.

As much as I like what I read in 5E, I'm not keen on the watered down weapon stats. I want to see some type of mechanics that would allow me to pick the right tool for the job.

If you are guarding an Outpost at the edge of civilization from a group of marauding gnolls, and you were using the 2E AD&D rules, then you'd want to man your battlements with archers if you knew the gnolls typically wore leather armor. That's because Piercing weapons get a +2 to hit vs. Leather armor under the 2E AD&D rules.

But, if these gnolls typically wore chainmail, then you wouldn't want archers on your battlements. You'd want slingers. For sling bullets, the rate of fire is still 2 attacks per round, as with the bows, but arrows are +0 vs. Chain where as a sling bulllet is +2 vs. Chain.

I'm not advocating that those rules exactly be used in 5E, but I would like some type of rule (the Conan Rule above is a different method for achieving the same basic effect) that allows a player to pick the right tool for the job.

In other words, I'm not sure what rule would be right for 5E, but I'd like to see something implemented as a variant rule for GMs who, like me, would like to ponder the pros and cons of specific weapons.





EDIT: Another example from 2E AD&D

What's the difference in Splint Mail and Banded Mail (under the 2E AD&D system)? Both are AC 3, right?

Sure, but Banded Mail is best against Slashing weapons (-2), then against Blunt weapons (-1), then against Piercing weapons (+0).

Splint Mail, on the other hand, is best against Blunt weapons (-2), then against Piercing weapons (-1), and then against Slashing weapons (+0).

So, if you've got access to both types of armor, wear the banded if going up against orcs using blades, but wear the splint if fighting the goblins with their clubs.
 
Last edited:

bedir than

Full Moon Storyteller
Do you use speed factor initiative in your games? That gives a small advantage back to the faster weapons.

Like you, too look at the prevalence of greatsword and polearms and chuckle a bit since the weapon distribution among the trained is nothing like it is in either history or fantasy. Then there's the fact that polearms as used in reality (blocks of units) have no similarity in how they are used in the game.

I'm considering adding a dart/knife to the game at a d2 and able to throw two per attack and a range of 10/40. I haven't thought through what that would do to the game.
 

Water Bob

Adventurer
Do you use speed factor initiative in your games? That gives a small advantage back to the faster weapons.

I did with 2E AD&D.

I pretty much try to follow the rules particular to the game I'm running.

Currently, I run the Conan RPG (based on 3.5 d20), and although it doesn't have an initiative modifier for weapons, it does have a different mechanic that addresses the same issue with a different method.

In Conan melee, weapon size matters. So a two-handed great sword being used against a foe using a short sword means that the character with the great sword gets a +2 bonus to his Parry AC (because of the weapon length, he can defend himself better). And the short sword character gets a -2 penalty to his Parry AC.

In the Conan game, there are two basic Armor Classes: one for Dodge and one for Parry. The rule doesn't effect the Dodge AC. So, the player has to decide whether to use his Dodge AC or the Parry AC with the bonus/penalty.





Like you, too look at the prevalence of greatsword and polearms and chuckle a bit since the weapon distribution among the trained is nothing like it is in either history or fantasy. Then there's the fact that polearms as used in reality (blocks of units) have no similarity in how they are used in the game.

Not to turn this into a thread about the Conan RPG, but this is another reason I love the Conan rules. What you are talking about IS addressed in the Conan RPG.

Soldier is a character class in this game, and one of the benefits of the class is that they get an ability called Formation Combat. There are several options under Formation Combat for both infantry and cavalry, and each usually requires the character and two other Soldiers (for a total of 3, at the minimum) to take advantage of the benefit.

For example, three Soldiers, all with the Heavy Infantry type of Formation Combat get a +1 damage bonus with any melee weapon as long as they fight side-by-side and wear Medium or heavier armor.

Going a step further in the Formation Combat tree, the Soldiers can get Improved Heavy Infantry which gives them a +2 bonus to damage (and a +2 Parry AC bonus if using a shield).

If you give all three of the Soldiers Reach weapons, they start to become a formidable force: Reach weapons typically do heavy damage, there the benefit of the 10' reach, it's easy to have multiple attacks against a single foe (all three could attack one foe if using a Reach weapon), thus they gain the Multiple Opponent benefit (+1 attack for one, +2 attack for another). Plus, some reach weapons are made for tripping (like Bills, with the hook), knocking a target prone. A prone character is -4 to hit while melee attacks against him are at +4 bonus, plus he draws a free attack (attack of opportunity) when he stands, so....knocking a foe down, poking him at +4 bonus with three Reach attacks while he is down, then getting another three attacks as he stands, all with the Multiple Opponent bonus, if pretty doggone powerful.

Put all this together, and you're talking about a phalanx to be feared.
 

redrick

First Post
Do you use speed factor initiative in your games? That gives a small advantage back to the faster weapons.

Like you, too look at the prevalence of greatsword and polearms and chuckle a bit since the weapon distribution among the trained is nothing like it is in either history or fantasy. Then there's the fact that polearms as used in reality (blocks of units) have no similarity in how they are used in the game.

I'm considering adding a dart/knife to the game at a d2 and able to throw two per attack and a range of 10/40. I haven't thought through what that would do to the game.

Yes, if you haven't looked "Speed Factor Initiative Variant" on page 270 in the DMG, check that out. Nothing new or surprising there, but it's all written up for 5e. You could easily replace their table of penalties and bonuses (heavy weapon, 2-handed weapon, light weapon), with specific values for each weapon on the equipment list. You can use the 2e tables for relative comparison. Under the 5e version, a "fast action" is +2 and a "very slow action" is -5. The nice thing about weapon speed factors is that they are a static bonus, so you can just note it on your character sheet for each weapon you have.

You could probably port the 1e weapon/armor bonuses and penalties straight over, though you might need to make some sort of tweak to keep things like spell attacks in line. (Adjust your baseline or similar.) This one seems like it would be less popular, because it requires specific comparisons for each instance of weapon and armor interaction. (I can remember that my monsters are AC 13, but I don't always remember which armor they're wearing, and I certainly wouldn't be able to keep track of all the various weapon bonuses and penalties for that type of armor. So, at least for me, I'd need to be referencing a chart taped to my DM screen more frequently.)

The Conan option might be a little more attractive, because you can just note the AR for the weapon and the DR for the armor (not sure if this variant completely ignores the attack roll and replaces it with damage reduction, or if you have a normal attack roll against AC and then a second damage reduction category.) So, on a hit, compare the AR for your character and the DR for your monster, without needing to reference a separate table.
 

bedir than

Full Moon Storyteller
Speed Factor Initiative is an optional rule in the 5th edition DMG. I suggest that if you play 5th you use this rule if you want more individual weapon flavor.

Yes, if you haven't looked "Speed Factor Initiative Variant" on page 270 in the DMG, check that out. Nothing new or surprising there, but it's all written up for 5e. You could easily replace their table of penalties and bonuses (heavy weapon, 2-handed weapon, light weapon), with specific values for each weapon on the equipment list. You can use the 2e tables for relative comparison. Under the 5e version, a "fast action" is +2 and a "very slow action" is -5. The nice thing about weapon speed factors is that they are a static bonus, so you can just note it on your character sheet for each weapon you have.

Most characters wind up using melee weapon, a ranged weapon, a cantrip and two-three combat spells. Quick notation of these and after a single session the player is used to it.

As a DM you can also grant a couple weapons a bit more variance.
 

thalmin

Retired game store owner
I would also like to see more differences between the weapons. What most of the aforementioned systems ignored or did poorly was weapon vs natural armory, which was important since most combats are typically against monsters. But the 1E system was too clunky, and the Conan system makes bigger changes to the basic mechanics of D&D. I haven't found th right (for me) balance, thus so far have not made this change to my game.
 

Water Bob

Adventurer
Yes, if you haven't looked "Speed Factor Initiative Variant" on page 270 in the DMG, check that out.

That sounds interesting. I don't have the DMG yet.




(I can remember that my monsters are AC 13, but I don't always remember which armor they're wearing, and I certainly wouldn't be able to keep track of all the various weapon bonuses and penalties for that type of armor. So, at least for me, I'd need to be referencing a chart taped to my DM screen more frequently.)

When I ran 1E and 2E AD&D, that was for the player to remember, not me as DM. All I had to remember was to ask the player, "What's your modifier against AC 4?"

As for creatures--they didn't use modifiers. So, that's easy for the DM. And humanoids, all I had to do was remember what armor my PCs wore and scratch down that modifier next to the stats in my notes or directly next to the stat block in the pre-printed adventure.

I found it manageable and not too hard to use.





EDIT: With 2E AD&D

We simply kept more than on AC on the character's sheet. That way, you can forget about the modifiers and just have to know what type of weapon is being used against you: Slash, Blunt, or Pierce.

On the character's sheet, there would be:

AC X vs Blunt

AC Y vs Slash

AC Z vs Pierce





The Conan option might be a little more attractive, because you can just note the AR for the weapon and the DR for the armor (not sure if this variant completely ignores the attack roll and replaces it with damage reduction, or if you have a normal attack roll against AC and then a second damage reduction category.)


The Conan System works like this:

1. Make a standard d20 attack throw (mods, Critical Threat, etc) vs. Armor Class.

2. If a hit is made, compare Total Armor Piercing to Damage Reduction of the Armor. (Total Armor Piercing is the AR rating of the weapon plus STR mod.) If Total AR is equal to or greater than DR, then Damage Reduction for the armor is halved. Otherwise, the DR stands.



Example:

Pelitos, the Argossean Soldier, has STR 17 (+3 mod). And, Pelitos is using a broadsword (AP 3, 1d10 dmg) and a large shield. Thus, when Pelitos hits, his Total Armor Piercing score is AP 6.

Pelitos is fighting Shemite mercenary raiders that have made a lightning attack over the border. The Shemite is wearing a conical helm (+1 DR) and mail hauberk (DR 6). Thus, the Shemite's total Damage Reduction is DR 7.

When a hit is scored, we simply compare the two numbers. Pelitos' AP 6 vs. the Shemite's DR 7.

Pelitos needs a 7+ AP to penetrate. He doesn't. Thus, the damage from any successful attack that Pelitos makes is reduced by the Shemite's full Damage Reduction rating.

When Pelitos hits, he'll do weapon damage + STR mod - Damage Reduction. That's 1d10 + 3 - 7, or 1d10 -4 damage.

Simple.
 
Last edited:

Remove ads

Top