Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="nonsi256" data-source="post: 5034213" data-attributes="member: 86164">>> There are arguments that could be made that weapon length and  >> weildiness should be taken into account, too.        Wieldiness is exactly what I was thinking about when I assigned weapon speed. A Dagger seems inferior to a sword to the untrained eye. But in the hands of an expert (notice that what you and I would call “expert”, 3e calls “proficient”), it can be just as useful in denying an opportunity to initiate an attack. >> I did think for a long while about a houserule that had weapon  >> damage based upon character class and level, instead of the   >> weapon, itself.Damage would scale in a similar manner to how the   >> SRD monk's open hand        This one’s already covered by the RAW: Weapon Spec, Power Attack, Leap Attack, Shock Trooper, Headless Charge, TW-Rend etc. I find the Monk’s unarmed damage progression to be quite distasteful and uninspiring. The designers would have us believe that the base damage of an unarmed attack could overshadow the base damage of a great axe or a dire maul. There are countless of means of elegantly increasing damage (see what I did with the Monk), but as far as base damage goes… give me a break. I’d like to see even the most devastating martial artist even tickle a bull elephant (I know, I know, “D&D is a game”, but one of its more appealing aspects is that the “physics” part is kept as reliable as possible). >> The current system is any character can make a single attack with   >> any weapon with which they are proficient without penalty.   >> Iterative attacksare made at a penalty that applies to both attacks.   >> Note, a character can only have a total of two attacks per round    >> without featsof other specialcircumstances that could grant more >> than 2 attacks per round.  Given feats are such a rare commodity, are you sure you’d want to go that way? There are already way too many aspects that require feats but should actually be available feat-free. Making the players pay even more is really cruel in my eyes.   In addition, a choice that every martial character would make is not really a choice.        And let’s not forget the absurdity called "Combat Reflexes" that allows you to have more attacks out of turn than what you’d get in-turn. >> I'm considering whether or not to make feats available to reduce   >> these penaltiesAgain – a choice which is not really a choice. >> and/or whether or not to decrease these penalties as higher BAB is        >> achieved.  This would practically make these penalties meaningless , if you think about it. </blockquote>

Verification