D&D (2024) Not loving weapon mastery with beginners

[mellored]

Spells are far more complicated in terms of the decision-making process, but you can bypass the decision-making delays by informing the new player which spell(s) would work best, and then spells are quicker.

You can delay the decision-making of weapon mastery by just choosing a weapon too.

 

[Belen]

The point is they still have spells that add complexity to the game beyond just attacking, so the question is what makes weapon mastery more difficult.

A lot of people chose lower complexity martial classes because they did not want a ton of choices. It was also much easier to teach newer players using simpler classes.

There are always more martial classes than casters in just about any game I have run or seen. This means you will get far more mastery effects per round than spells.

I detest how they implemented masteries. I will end up granting a bonus feat or just developing some always “on” effects to replace them if I ever move to 2024.

 

[Uni-the-Unicorn!]

Spells are more complicated than weapon mastery in terms of character creation and level up, but generally less complicated during play and execution IME.

I’m guessing you don’t play with new players often (which the OP is taking about). IME, new players take forever to learn what spells do and to pick the spell they want to use.

In our game with 4 out of 5 PCs adding weapon masteries we didn’t notice much change in game speed, but we are not new players either.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

I’m guessing you don’t play with new players often (which the OP is taking about). IME, new players take forever to learn what spells do and to pick the spell they want to use.

In our game with 4 out of 5 PCs adding weapon masteries we didn’t notice much change in game speed, but we are not new players either.

I am looking forward to the first fight in our school club. We will see how that goes.

 

[Zardnaar]

I’m guessing you don’t play with new players often (which the OP is taking about). IME, new players take forever to learn what spells do and to pick the spell they want to use.

In our game with 4 out of 5 PCs adding weapon masteries we didn’t notice much change in game speed, but we are not new players either.

I've been playing with new players last few weeks.

Smart one last night asked for help at level 3 with a fighter. Wife broke down the numbers for her battlemaster vs Champion.

Then I was asked what maneuvers were good. And thats a fighter with 2 pages of stuff to read.

 

[ezo]

Does the attack roll not constitute “a strength save or something” in your view?

No. To me the attack roll is a binary thing: you "hit" or you "miss".

A lot of Cantrips do damage and apply some secondary effect on a hit with a spellcasting attack - Ray of Frost, for example, is functionally just a light crossbow with the Slow mastery unlocked.

True, and I have never been a fan of those, either. I don't like auto-riders for anything. But that is my preference.

 

[Charlaquin]

A lot of people chose lower complexity martial classes because they did not want a ton of choices. It was also much easier to teach newer players using simpler classes.

No weapon mastery requires you to make additional choices, except I guess Cleave, which can sometimes give you an extra attack, and then you’d have to choose which target to attack? But martials already got multiple attacks anyway, and if for whatever reason you don’t ever want to make more attacks then you normally get per round, just pick a weapon with any other mastery. A player who just wants to push the “attack nearest enemy” button every round can just pick their favorite weapon, choose it for their Mastery, and not ever have to make another choice. A player who wants lots of choices can take masteries with different weapons and choose which one to use round by round. The complexity is opt-in.

I detest how they implemented masteries. I will end up granting a bonus feat or just developing some always “on” effects to replace them if I ever move to 2024.

Masteries are aready always on. Like, don’t get me wrong, if you want to implement a homebrew alternative to weapon masteries, more power to you! Just saying, you’d be replacing one always-on thing with another.

 

[Charlaquin]

I’m guessing you don’t play with new players often (which the OP is taking about). IME, new players take forever to learn what spells do and to pick the spell they want to use.

They certainly do, but… well, that’s nothing new for 5e. 5e can be a tough game for first-timers, no way around that. I don’t think that should prevent players from having the option to play martials that get to do more on their turns than just hit point damage.

 

[TiQuinn]

A lot of people chose lower complexity martial classes because they did not want a ton of choices. It was also much easier to teach newer players using simpler classes.

I’ve seen new players stumble a bit with rogues and monks.

There are always more martial classes than casters in just about any game I have run or seen. This means you will get far more mastery effects per round than spells.

Okay, that hasn’t been my experience in 5e.

 

[ART!]

So, to clarify, this specific new thing that was added substantially slows the game down for beginners, and slightly slows the game down for veterans.

I am also accounting for things like sneak attack, and pets, and rage, and smite, and so on. Assuming a 2014 baseline, weapon mastery makes the game slower, and much more than I expected for new players, specifically.

I feel the same way about weapon properties. I like the idea of them, but in practice I find them to be stumbling blocks. They not only add decision-points and tactical analysis for the player, but some of them create an extra thing for the DM to remember or track.

It’s a new thing that makes martials more interesting to play. Would you begrudge one player pretties because it slows the game when added to the ones the other players get?

It gets faster as you play.

This has not been my experience.