D&D 5E 5e with PF2 Elements

[rmcoen]

Everyone's talking (well, were talking, 5 months ago) about the Action Economy. I came to the thread to look into changing up Proficiency - skills and weapons. I don't like that every Cleric is Perceptive, every Wizard is better at Religion than the cleric and better at Nature than the druid or Barbarian, and every Sorcerer and Warlock is a better leader/liar/intimidator than the fighter or cleric.

I also wanted to make weapon proficiencies "slightly more realistic"; why is my wizard as skilled with crossbows as the rogue or fighter (proficiency bonus + reasonable dex)? Why is the fighter, who has been swinging a sword for 15 levels, just as good with a trident when he picks it up?

So my thought was to look at PF2 proficiency - a Wizard might be "+4" on Religion, and can name all the pantheon faster than the cleric, but he is Untrained, where the Cleric who is trained (and only +2.. or maybe even +1 due to 8 INT!) is slow to recall, but can describe the wedding rituals in each major god's ceremony book because he is Trained.

Likewise with weapons, I was thinking you are Proficient with only 1 weapon from your suite of options (base), adding full proficiency. You are "Familiar" with all the others (no mod); with anything else, "Untrained" (-2... Disadvantage seems too much!!). warlike classes might be Proficient with more weapons - say, 4 for the Fighter - but still only Familiar with "all (other) simple and marital weapons". You could upgrade Familiar to Proficient with (game time), I'm thinking.

Another similar thought proposed elsewhere was to make weapon classes -- crushing, slashing, piercing, polearms, etc., so someone who knows how to swing a mace also knows how to swing a club, a warhammer, and even a broadsword (primarily a swung weapon, despite being edged). Not sure how to make that work as well.

Thoughts?

 

[rmcoen]

Everyone's talking (well, were talking, 5 months ago) about the Action Economy. I came to the thread to look into changing up Proficiency - skills and weapons. I don't like that every Cleric is Perceptive, every Wizard is better at Religion than the cleric and better at Nature than the druid or Barbarian, and every Sorcerer and Warlock is a better leader/liar/intimidator than the fighter or cleric.

I also wanted to make weapon proficiencies "slightly more realistic"; why is my wizard as skilled with crossbows as the rogue or fighter (proficiency bonus + reasonable dex)? Why is the fighter, who has been swinging a sword for 15 levels, just as good with a trident when he picks it up?

So my thought was to look at PF2 proficiency - a Wizard might be "+4" on Religion, and can name all the pantheon faster than the cleric, but he is Untrained, where the Cleric who is trained (and only +2.. or maybe even +1 due to 8 INT!) is slow to recall, but can describe the wedding rituals in each major god's ceremony book because he is Trained.

Likewise with weapons, I was thinking you are Proficient with only 1 weapon from your suite of options (base), adding full proficiency. You are "Familiar" with all the others (no mod); with anything else, "Untrained" (-2... Disadvantage seems too much!!). warlike classes might be Proficient with more weapons - say, 4 for the Fighter - but still only Familiar with "all (other) simple and marital weapons". You could upgrade Familiar to Proficient with (game time), I'm thinking.

Another similar thought proposed elsewhere was to make weapon classes -- crushing, slashing, piercing, polearms, etc., so someone who knows how to swing a mace also knows how to swing a club, a warhammer, and even a broadsword (primarily a swung weapon, despite being edged). Not sure how to make that work as well.

Thoughts?

 

[jmartkdr2]

Everyone's talking (well, were talking, 5 months ago) about the Action Economy. I came to the thread to look into changing up Proficiency - skills and weapons. I don't like that every Cleric is Perceptive, every Wizard is better at Religion than the cleric and better at Nature than the druid or Barbarian, and every Sorcerer and Warlock is a better leader/liar/intimidator than the fighter or cleric.

I also wanted to make weapon proficiencies "slightly more realistic"; why is my wizard as skilled with crossbows as the rogue or fighter (proficiency bonus + reasonable dex)? Why is the fighter, who has been swinging a sword for 15 levels, just as good with a trident when he picks it up?

So my thought was to look at PF2 proficiency - a Wizard might be "+4" on Religion, and can name all the pantheon faster than the cleric, but he is Untrained, where the Cleric who is trained (and only +2.. or maybe even +1 due to 8 INT!) is slow to recall, but can describe the wedding rituals in each major god's ceremony book because he is Trained.

Likewise with weapons, I was thinking you are Proficient with only 1 weapon from your suite of options (base), adding full proficiency. You are "Familiar" with all the others (no mod); with anything else, "Untrained" (-2... Disadvantage seems too much!!). warlike classes might be Proficient with more weapons - say, 4 for the Fighter - but still only Familiar with "all (other) simple and marital weapons". You could upgrade Familiar to Proficient with (game time), I'm thinking.

Another similar thought proposed elsewhere was to make weapon classes -- crushing, slashing, piercing, polearms, etc., so someone who knows how to swing a mace also knows how to swing a club, a warhammer, and even a broadsword (primarily a swung weapon, despite being edged). Not sure how to make that work as well.

Thoughts?

There's definitely room to add a lot of detail to proficiency, especially for skills. One simpler answer would be to go with 4 levels of proficiency (basic, proficient, ?, expert) and track that to the proficiency bonus: 1/2x, 1x, 1.5x and 2x. If you let anyone go up to expert, you'll need to throw bards and rogues a bone since they lose out on a special feature.

I would be careful about limiting full weapon proficiency, though. Some fighters switch weapons quite a lot and many more will at least want the option - sometimes reach is useful, other times not so much, and ypu definitely want ranged options. I would be very careful with changing weapon proficiency.