D&D (2024) Weapon and Armor categories and training in them. Do we still need them?

Well, difference is in larger HD, extra attack(s), fighting styles, attack riders, choice of feats, investment in STR/DEX.

And it will cut down on the cheese: 1st level fighter, then wizard X
not to mention a wizard with the same dex as the fighter has equal +1 hit at every level anyway
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Oh it wasn't made up, it was just something else interpreted merely from its appearance.

Edit: Oh hell, there goes my afternoon. So many interesting videos....

a man of culture.jpg
 


Andvari

Hero
I can’t remember which game, but there is one where you just do your class’ HD in damage regardless of weapon choice. So a wizard can wield a sword, but it does 1d6 damage, while a paladin using it does 1d10. Pretty simple.

At least until a player figures out a dagger does the same damage as the sword, but is easier to hide and can be thrown. But you could apply some generalized modifiers to balance weapons. -1 if throwable, -1 if small, +2 if two-handed etc.
 

Its an interesting idea. I'd be in favour of it being developed further.

I do have a few nitpicks about its actual application there however: (Falchions being a 2-handed weapon. The concept of Finesse being compatible with a 2-handed weapon in the first place. Needing to be stronger to wear plate than you do to wear chain mail. A suit of plate needing absolute peak human strength to wear effectively. Etc.)

:hmm:
 

The concept of Finesse being compatible with a 2-handed weapon in the first place.
...longswords. that's. that's longswords. two-handed finesse weapon. that's literally just a longsword.
but yeah i didn't even look at the strength requirements for the armors those are ridiculous lmao. 14 strength to wear a hauberk? i'd be surprised if someone with 12 strength couldn't wear plate without...halving their speed. sheesh.
 

CreamCloud0

One day, I hope to actually play DnD.
Personally I think too many classes get full martial proficiency, martial weapons would be so much more meaningful if classes that got any martial weapons only got say, four appropriate ones, then the few you did get would be more significant, (and a boon to the fighter being the only one to get full access)

Armour classification needs more nuance too but I don’t know what I’d do with that, maybe you could have a max ‘equip weight capacity’ between weapons, armour and shield so unless you’d maxed your strength score you’d have to compromise between the heaviest good armour (in your equipable category) and a light weapon (or vice-versa) or having both a medium weight armour and weapon
Edit: so suppose it works like your max weight capacity is 5+str, simple weapons range from 1-3 weight, martial 3-5, then armour is 1-5 for light, 2-6 for med and 3-7 for heavy, shields are 2
 
Last edited:

Honestly, if I wanted customizable weapon details, I'd play PF2. (Oh wait! I do!) If anything, DnD should go the way of 13th Age and make weapons and armor simpler and more re-fluff-able by just having the numbers assigned by class'

ie:
Paladin: AC = 14+prof
Weapons: 2-handed: 2d6+str (or 1d10+str for reach weapons)
1-handed: 1d8+str
ranged: 1d6
 

Horwath

Legend
Its an interesting idea. I'd be in favour of it being developed further.

I do have a few nitpicks about its actual application there however: (Falchions being a 2-handed weapon. The concept of Finesse being compatible with a 2-handed weapon in the first place. Needing to be stronger to wear plate than you do to wear chain mail. A suit of plate needing absolute peak human strength to wear effectively. Etc.)

:hmm:
those are put there for balance.

To give STR value over DEX.

So that for AC, you either invest in DEX or STR.

Also, falchion was just an example.
And, finesse weapons cannot be Heavy, so you are losing possibly 2 damage steps with 2Handed weapon.
d12 finesse 2Handed weapon vs. d8 finesse 1Handed weapon, seems about right.
 


Remove ads

AD6_gamerati_skyscraper

Remove ads

Recent & Upcoming Releases

Top