D&D (2024) New One D&D Weapons Table Shows 'Mastery' Traits

The weapons table from the upcoming Unearthed Arcana playtest for One D&D has made its way onto the internet via Indestructoboy on Twitter, and reveals some new mechanics. The mastery traits include Nick, Slow, Puncture, Flex, Cleave, Topple, Graze, and Push. These traits are accessible by the warrior classes.

 

[Minigiant]

My above thoughts lead me to a question, why has so much effort over the last half century been put into stopping Fighter improvements? Subconscious revenge against jocks? The need for magic to be more powerful? A blind focus on the everyman, thus ignoring the legendary and mythical?

Change in popular media

The people of the older editions based their fantasy story warriors using Gimli, Wesley, and Conan as their warriors.
The people of the newer editions based their fantasy warriors of Jedi, Soul Reapers, and video game characters.

 

[Eubani]

Change in popular media

The people of the older editions based their fantasy story warriors using Gimli, Wesley, and Conan as their warriors.
The people of the newer editions based their fantasy warriors of Jedi, Soul Reapers, and video game characters.

Previous generations had access to many mythical warriors that carried out feats of insane effect. They had heroes from Various holy texts, Greek mythology, Norse mythology and sagas and so on. I still think it is more of a personal short sightedness than media availability. I mean in most cases they have to actively ignore or change what HP are to get to their positions.

 

[EthanSental]

Well we have level up 5e…I don’t remember if DoaM was tested but it did it didn’t make it, if it wasn’t tested or make it to the test stage, there was a reason. Now we have kobold press and cubicle 7 version of 5e….let’s see if they include something like it cause if not, it’s not as wanted as some seem to think in this thread.

We could ask Russ or Mike if they did so I hope they chime in if they are reading the thread.

 

[Eubani]

Well we have level up 5e…I don’t remember if DoaM was tested but it did it didn’t make it, if it wasn’t tested or make it to the test stage, there was a reason. Now we have kobold press and cubicle 7 version of 5e….let’s see if they include something like it cause if not, it’s not as wanted as some seem to think in this thread.

We could ask Russ or Mike if they did so I hope they chime in if they are reading the thread.

It is not just about Damage on a miss, it is about the resistance put forward when Fighters get improvements.

 

[Minigiant]

Previous generations had access to many mythical warriors that carried out feats of insane effect. They had heroes from Various holy texts, Greek mythology, Norse mythology and sagas and so on. I still think it is more of a personal short sightedness than media availability. I mean in most cases they have to actively ignore or change what HP are to get to their positions.

That's what they choose as their basis.

The older generations choose their warrior classes to be based on "more normal" folk. The mythical, religious, and legendary heroes were equal to monster manual entries. The best you got in specialiness was Aragorn as the "Special Bloodline of Kings" by rolling crazy stats.
The newer generation had no qualms with their PCs being all "super special oddities with special power" from day one.
Basically, you could not be Hercules at an old school table unless you rolls crazy high and the DM is making an excuse for why your fighter has 18 Str, 16 Dex and 17 Con at level 1.
At a new school table, playing Hercules is the norm.
At the mid school table, it's "well Zeus did get with a lot of ladies."

So for "Your Strength and Mastery is Herculean. Even when you miss it hurts or requires great effort to dodge" to be allowed, you have be allowed to be Hercules, Skanda, or Thor.

 

[Eubani]

That's what they choose as their basis.

The older generations choose their warrior classes to be based on "more normal" folk. The mythical, religious, and legendary heroes were equal to monster manual entries. The best you got in specialiness was Aragorn as the "Special Bloodline of Kings" by rolling crazy stats.
The newer generation had no qualms with their PCs being all "super special oddities with special power" from day one.
Basically, you could not be Hercules at an old school table unless you rolls crazy high and the DM is making an excuse for why your fighter has 18 Str, 16 Dex and 17 Con at level 1.
At a new school table, playing Hercules is the norm.
At the mid school table, it's "well Zeus did get with a lot of ladies."

So for "Your Strength and Mastery is Herculean. Even when you miss it hurts or requires great effort to dodge" to be allowed, you have be allowed to be Hercules, Skanda, or Thor.

THey certainly downgraded those heroes then.

 

[JohnSnow]

It is not just about Damage on a miss, it is about the resistance put forward when Fighters get improvements.

Be careful painting all the opposition with a single brush. I would love to see Fighters get improvements. But the swordsman in me (and yes, I actually train in and teach the subject) can't get on board with "damage on a miss." For me, there is no reason to have damage on a miss. I would, however, be totally okay with "carry-through damage" (where one attack levels 10 guys) or characters who get so strong/skilled with their weapons that they can produce shockwaves of force, or whatever.

Other people may have different objections for different reasons, but that's mine. I have thematic problems with some of high-level D&D, but Fighters who could pull off feats like Beowulf, Cu Chulainn or any one of a number of Greek Demigods is not one of them.

 

[Incenjucar]

Be careful painting all the opposition with a single brush. I would love to see Fighters get improvements. But the swordsman in me (and yes, I actually train in and teach the subject) can't get on board with "damage on a miss." For me, there is no reason to have damage on a miss. I would, however, be totally okay with "carry-through damage" (where one attack levels 10 guys) or characters who get so strong/skilled with their weapons that they can produce shockwaves of force, or whatever.

Other people may have different objections for different reasons, but that's mine. I have thematic problems with some of high-level D&D, but Fighters who could pull off feats like Beowulf, Cu Chulainn or any one of a number of Greek Demigods is not one of them.

Out of curiosity, do you use any of the weapons that are being assigned the DoaM option? A short sword and a zweihander are very different, etc.

 

[JohnSnow]

Out of curiosity, do you use any of the weapons that are being assigned the DoaM option? A short sword and a zweihander are very different, etc.

One of the weapons I fight with is an Italian greatsword, what some might call a spadone. It's over 5' in length.

So, yes.

It also used to belong to a friend of mine, and I've had the thing clock me in the head, which was not a miss. Praise memnon it's not kept sharp, or I'd have had my brains decorating the dirt.

 

[Incenjucar]

One of the weapons I fight with is an Italian greatsword, what some might call a spadone. It's over 5' in length.

So, yes.

It also used to belong to a friend of mine, and I've had the thing clock me in the head, which was not a miss. Praise memnon it's not kept sharp, or I'd have had my brains decorating the dirt.

In your experience, how does armor work versus such a weapon, compared to something smaller and thinner?