D&D 5E Making weapon choice matter

Raith5 said:

For me this kind of kind of thought is primarily about making the fighter (and other martial characters) more tactically interesting. I am not particularly interested in realism. I would rather link to to a class ability than a property of weapons. I just think that fighting styles for fighters and maneuvers should be more linked to weapons. In the right hands, a war hammers should push the target back 5 or 10 feet, swords should be able to parry, two handed weapons cleave, etc

Click to expand...

Wouldn't this be answered by the 'Mastery' feats from UA? Fell Handed, Blade Mastery, etc. They're specifically designed to showcase specialty effects from various weapon classes, and Fighters get the most feat opportunities in the game. Taken together (the UA feats + GWM + PAM + Sharpshooter + Crossbow Expert), you have a pretty significant field of weapon abilities already. Not too hard to build a few more for things you feel have been forgotten.

I also prefer less.

1-handed = 1d8
2-handed = 2d8

Finesse = d6
Reach = d6
Finess + Reach = d4

And go..

[MENTION=6798775]Ath-kethin[/MENTION] and [MENTION=79926]ART![/MENTION]

I started a thread about that exact same idea a little while back. It received mixed responses, but in the end I dropped it because I was headed in the direction of re-writing the entire game. Anyways, here is the link to that thread. Maybe there is something there that you will find interesting.

http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?590882-5e-Weapon-Damage-Option&highlight=Damage

ro said:

In my other thread, What if you had to learn to use weapons?, I presented an idea for requiring characters to level up to get access to better weapons. One objection to this idea is that, ordinarily, any random NPC can wield any weapon, and making 1st level characters only able to use daggers is silly.

What are other ways that we can make weapon choice interesting and substantial?

There are issues with weapons as they are now.
Other than not having proficiency in a weapon, which is easily overcome, why would a character proficient in many want to switch?
Notably, d10 melee weapons are rarely used, although they do have the reach property.
Also, versatile weapons are rarely used, because they aren't really that versatile. (It's difficult to switch back and forth from using a shield.)
Why use a shortbow rather than a longbow?
Why ever use a sling?
Why not use the most damaging crossbow you can get?
etc.

Now, there are power issues with two-weapon fighting. This is fixed by removing the bonus action for the second attack and making it the second half of the main attack.

Here are some other ideas:
d12/2d6 weapons could give -1 attack or -5 speed.
d4 weapons could give +1 attack or +5 speed.
Versatile weapons could have the following rule:

Versatile Weapons

While wielding a versatile weapon and a shield, you may choose to make a two-handed attacked, with your shield hand helping the attack. However, when you do so, you do not gain the shield's benefit to your AC until the start of your next turn.
​

Click to expand...

Ah, so you're not asking about character creation, you're asking why –in the heat of combat– someone would change weapons?

I find that folks who've encountered HEMA or other European martial arts or simply studied a lot about medieval European warfare often want D&D to differentiate weapons more...daggers to stab through helmet slits and horseman's maces, and that sort of thing. Of course a DM can wing it with (dis)advantage, but D&D, with its level of abstraction, is rarely satisfying when it comes to gritty details.

Personally, I wonder if the way to make this situation more satisfying is NOT changing the weapon rules, and INSTEAD changing the fighter class.

scaramouche said:

Wouldn't this be answered by the 'Mastery' feats from UA? Fell Handed, Blade Mastery, etc. They're specifically designed to showcase specialty effects from various weapon classes, and Fighters get the most feat opportunities in the game. Taken together (the UA feats + GWM + PAM + Sharpshooter + Crossbow Expert), you have a pretty significant field of weapon abilities already. Not too hard to build a few more for things you feel have been forgotten.

Click to expand...

I will look into this. We dont use UA in my main game. Thanks.

[MENTION=6890747]ro[/MENTION] Oh please, a small weapon is slower than a long large weapon. You do not attack first, because you have to get into reach before you can attack. It is also slower in absolute weapon speed, compare the speed of the halberd blade swung hands at the blunt end and try to reproduce that velocity with your dagger stab.

Please no bs like 2e initiative and weapon speed factor anymore, it slows unnecessarily actual play at the table for including a wrong perception of actual combat physics with an additional dice roll and its modifiers.

Narrate your actions in combat if the to hit vs armor class plus the occasional saving throw is to shallow for your taste.

Besides if you give weapons a Speed, then you have to give spells a speed also, then you can play 2nd ed wiith its rules instead of 5th, best try that just for the fun of it and you see what i mean.

( 2 e example: Rothgar has a +1 Two handed sword and has 2 skills in two handed fightinganda dexterity of 16 so his sword has Speed factor 9 -1 for the plus of the weapon and also he gests a -3 for his skill and a -2 for the dex, means a total of 3.
Of course roll 10 and add that so you see which Segment rothgar is attacking.
Rothgar midcombat sees a Skeleton and takes out his mace instead....)

ro said:

Other than not having proficiency in a weapon, which is easily overcome, why would a character proficient in many want to switch?

Click to expand...

Not including the obvious shift between a melee and a ranged weapon, there are some but not many reasons why a character would want to switch occasionally:

- max damage (from a two-handed weapon) VS having a hand free for other purposes (a shield, a torch); for example my games tend to be dungeon-heavy so almost always someone has to carry a source of light, but it's not always the same character

- slashing VS piercing VS bludgeoning because some monsters (not many) are more vulnerable to a specific type of damage: if you are fighting skeletons, it pays off to switch to a staff or mace

- a thrown weapon is sometimes a reasonable choice if you want to be ready for either a melee or ranged attack

- random magic weapons found as treasure, as soon as you have more than one you might want to switch to change what effects you can use

ro said:

Why use a shortbow rather than a longbow?

Click to expand...

The shortbow is mainly meant for small characters and classes not proficient in martial weapons, although the latter also don't normally have multiple attacks and thus are better off using a light crossbow... I guess this leaves the shortbow a weapon of choice only for halflings or gnome warrior-types of level 5+.

ro said:

Why ever use a sling?

Click to expand...

It's the only simple one-handed ammunition weapon.

ro said:

Why not use the most damaging crossbow you can get?

Click to expand...

Not everyone has proficiency.

You cannot leave proficiency out of the picture or you would miss the main point: not all weapons are equally good. You are supposed to use the best weapon for the situation or chosen tactic. Just because you can use a kitchen spoon as a weapon doesn't mean there should always be a reason to choose doing so.

If everyone in the party has martial weapons proficiency, then there is no reason to purposefully use slings and daggers, just like there is no reason to just throw rocks and swing twigs when you have a better choice.

And by the way, getting more weapon proficiency is not at all easy, since they require either feats or multiclassing, two expensive character options that not even every DM allows.

shidaku said:

I proposed a system in the other thread that rewards choosing a specific weapon, instead of punishes for simply having a class feature fighters have always had. It even gets them past needing to use magic weapons, or at least always having to look for the "better weapon" as they level up.

I think rewarding weapon specialization with interesting features would be a great way to go, instead of simply punishing the fighter for existing in a non-reality-based-system.

Click to expand...

I really like that favored weapon idea. I'm going to try to think on it a bit.

Quickleaf said:

Ah, so you're not asking about character creation, you're asking why –in the heat of combat– someone would change weapons?

I find that folks who've encountered HEMA or other European martial arts or simply studied a lot about medieval European warfare often want D&D to differentiate weapons more...daggers to stab through helmet slits and horseman's maces, and that sort of thing. Of course a DM can wing it with (dis)advantage, but D&D, with its level of abstraction, is rarely satisfying when it comes to gritty details.

Click to expand...

Quite frankly I don't think that 5e is granular enough to represent the conditions that specific weapons might be chosen over other weapons in most cases. The weapons table encompasses almost all weapons somewhere in its categories, and I don't feel than additional entries are generally needed.
If people want to go back to having a weapons-vs-armour type table and similar madness, then that strikes me as ideal homebrew or DMsGuild material.

Personally, I wonder if the way to make this situation more satisfying is NOT changing the weapon rules, and INSTEAD changing the fighter class.

Click to expand...

That's pretty close to my view and that of the design team I think: Rather than making a weapon with the capability to disarm or whatever, they grant the capability to disarm to the character themselves, whatever weapon they are using.
Or whatever, whether through class, feat, or general combat option.
(Although I wouldn't mind seeing the general combat options being expanded a bit more.)

Cap'n Kobold said:

That's pretty close to my view and that of the design team I think: Rather than making a weapon with the capability to disarm or whatever, they grant the capability to disarm to the character themselves, whatever weapon they are using.
Or whatever, whether through class, feat, or general combat option.
(Although I wouldn't mind seeing the general combat options being expanded a bit more.)

Click to expand...

Doesn't the Battle Master already do this with superiority dice and it's maneuvers? Or are you thinking that all fighters / melee types should have these options? If you go the latter route, how does that then affect the Battle Master?