what would you want to see in a revised Weapon Chart?

rgoodbb · Feb 2, 2019

Ath-kethin said:
My solution to the weapon table issue was to remove it. Not the issue, the weapon table.

The idea I floated was having the damage a character does with their weapon be equal to the character's Hit Die. So no matter what weapon a barbarian wields, it does 1d12 damage. No matter what weapon a sorcerer wields, it does 1d6 damage. Etc.

This allows more interesting character visuals (a knife-wielding fighter, for example) and makes them all viable. A barbarian or fighter just knows how to hurt something better than a wizard does, regardless of the tool they are using.

Caveat: my campaigns do not use multiclassing, but I don't see why it would cause an issue to use the highest Hit Die of your classes. Also, nobody in my campaigns ever took stuff like Polearm Master so I can't speak for issues those feats might cause.

But the idea was very popular in my groups and worked well for us.

I like this idea, but my electro-katana-vorpal-spiked-chain wielding sorcerer certainly does not!

WhosDaDungeonMaster · Feb 2, 2019

Yunru said:
I've quite often thought about stripping martial proficiencies from All to a set number, but in the end decided that it wouldn't make much difference, as PC's aren't likely to use more than one or two different weapons anyhow.

Supposedly that was one of the reasons they added Weapon Specialization in UA back in 1E. Fighters had so many weapon proficiencies, but since most used two primary weapons (one melee, one ranged typically) and a tertiary weapon (a back-up melee normally), players were using their Weapon Proficiencies for weapons they rarely, if ever, used. But by adding Weapon Specialization it added a greater purpose to Weapon Proficiency slots.

In my 5E game, no one has used more than three weapons, and the majority have only used two: again one melee and one ranged. 5E's oversimplified Simple and Martial proficiencies really don't accomplish much IMO. It could have just as easily been a choose of two or three weapons for each character from the list provided in each class, with perhaps Fighters gaining something more. Also, you can still use any weapon, but don't get your Proficiency Bonus if you lack proficiency. How often does that happen now, honestly? I have yet to see it although I am sure there are rare occasions from time-to-time.

Xeviat · Feb 2, 2019

James Grover said:
Supposedly that was one of the reasons they added Weapon Specialization in UA back in 1E. Fighters had so many weapon proficiencies, but since most used two primary weapons (one melee, one ranged typically) and a tertiary weapon (a back-up melee normally), players were using their Weapon Proficiencies for weapons they rarely, if ever, used. But by adding Weapon Specialization it added a greater purpose to Weapon Proficiency slots.

In my 5E game, no one has used more than three weapons, and the majority have only used two: again one melee and one ranged. 5E's oversimplified Simple and Martial proficiencies really don't accomplish much IMO. It could have just as easily been a choose of two or three weapons for each character from the list provided in each class, with perhaps Fighters gaining something more. Also, you can still use any weapon, but don't get your Proficiency Bonus if you lack proficiency. How often does that happen now, honestly? I have yet to see it although I am sure there are rare occasions from time-to-time.

Since proficiency bonus scales with level, rather than being a flat bonus like in 4E, I imagine as you get higher and higher levels the odds of someone making a non-proficient attack go lower and lower.

what would you want to see in a revised Weapon Chart?

rgoodbb

Adventurer

WhosDaDungeonMaster

Guest

Xeviat

Hero

Similar Threads

AD6_gamerati_skyscraper

Recent & Upcoming Releases