D&D 5E All weapons doing d6?

[Charlaquin]

That's not right. 13th Age gives each class their own weapons table (in practice the damage die size is pretty consistent between weapon types), and weapons deal 1 die of damage per character level plus ability modifier.

I was simplifying for the sake of the discussion, but yes, this is more accurate.

 

[Fenris-77]

I was simplifying for the sake of the discussion, but yes, this is more accurate.

Heaven forfend you make a correct but generalized declarative statement. Consider yourself chastened.

 

[Shiroiken]

A good weapon is supposed to be a big deal, in a world where not everyone has one. One of the big marks against Gamma World 7E is that there's no reason to care about having a nice sword when you can pick up a fence post and it's exactly as effective.

This is actually why the first supplement of the game (OD&D) got rid of it. Players were using iron spikes for their weapons, since it was the cheapest option. Buying a real weapon was just a waste of coin.

 

[Tonguez]

This is actually why the first supplement of the game (OD&D) got rid of it. Players were using iron spikes for their weapons, since it was the cheapest option. Buying a real weapon was just a waste of coin.

thats a myth as iron spikes arent weapons and so dont do d6 damage at all - only weapons do D6, at best an improvised weapon would do d3 or d4 if you’re generous.

 

[Bacon Bits]

I was simplifying for the sake of the discussion, but yes, this is more accurate.

Heaven forfend you make a correct but generalized declarative statement. Consider yourself chastened.

A longsword in 13th Age always uses d8s regardless of class. The same is true for all weapons. The die size never actually varies by class. The difference is whether you get no penalty to hit, a small penalty to hit, or a large penalty to hit. That's the only difference.

The designers could have assigned different damage dice by class with their design. They didn't actually do that. Instead it works like a pretty bog standard proficiency system. The armor system does grant different AC by class, but it's still mostly a bog standard proficiency system except that there are a few +1 and -1 adjustments on top of the attack penalties for armor you're not proficient with.

I'm not trying to be a jerk or pedantic. I'm just saying that the example is incorrect. I'm just trying to be clear so if others in the thread are looking for that sort of system, then 13th Age is not where they should be looking.

 

[Quickleaf]

So way back in the earliest runs of D&D all weapons did d6 damage* as a dagger thrust to the vitals, a sword across the gut, or great club bashing a head all had the same ability to wound and kill. A goblin with a dagger was as much a threat as a orc with a great sword and it was the characters inherent attributes and ‘skill’ that determined combat effectiveness not damage dice. More importantly weapon choices wasnt determied by damage output but rather be based on character concept - a quick dagger fighter, a mighty swordsman, a cautious halberdier.

So has anyone tried to reintroduce this system? I think its even more viable now that 5e has an advantage/disadvantage system (eg polearms get range advantage, daggers get a advantage when using dex)

If you're mentioning the Chainmail or 1975 Greyhawk rules, I'm pretty sure those differentiated weapons according to the opponent's armor. There were extensive weapon vs. armor charts back then... I believe the earliest incarnation was called the "Man-to-Man Melee Table." So instead of differentiating weapons by damage, they differentiated them by certain weapon being able to more easily hit against certain armor types. For example, maces were better at hitting plate armor, while piercing/slashing weapons generally were worse at hitting the better the armor.

So there were very clear distinctions drawn between weapons mechanically.

If you attempted to implement universal damage in 5e (where there is no weapon vs. armor chart) then you'd be left with having to answer the question: what does distinguish these weapons from each other?

 

[Eubani]

I imagine this idea is whole heartedly supported by the Spellcaster Supremacy Association.

 

[Hriston]

So way back in the earliest runs of D&D all weapons did d6 damage* as a dagger thrust to the vitals, a sword across the gut, or great club bashing a head all had the same ability to wound and kill. A goblin with a dagger was as much a threat as a orc with a great sword and it was the characters inherent attributes and ‘skill’ that determined combat effectiveness not damage dice. More importantly weapon choices wasnt determied by damage output but rather be based on character concept - a quick dagger fighter, a mighty swordsman, a cautious halberdier.

So has anyone tried to reintroduce this system? I think its even more viable now that 5e has an advantage/disadvantage system (eg polearms get range advantage, daggers get a advantage when using dex)

First, what's with the asterisk after the word damage? I don't see what it refers to.

If you're going to do this, you should also make all hit dice d6, but since this thread is posted in a forum for an edition of (Advanced)D&D, I think the die size you want is d8.

 

[Tonguez]

If you're mentioning the Chainmail or 1975 Greyhawk rules, I'm pretty sure those differentiated weapons according to the opponent's armor. There were extensive weapon vs. armor charts back then... I believe the earliest incarnation was called the "Man-to-Man Melee Table." So instead of differentiating weapons by damage, they differentiated them by certain weapon being able to more easily hit against certain armor types. For example, maces were better at hitting plate armor, while piercing/slashing weapons generally were worse at hitting the better the armor.

So there were very clear distinctions drawn between weapons mechanically.

If you attempted to implement universal damage in 5e (where there is no weapon vs. armor chart) then you'd be left with having to answer the question: what does distinguish these weapons from each other?

All weapons doing D6 was the RAW up until Basic Masters rule set - use of variable dice was an optional rule that lots of people used.

if all damage is standardized then weapons are distinguished by Player style - ie whether the PC wants weapon that is ranged, finesse (Dex), reach or two handed. I’ve also got no issue with tagging weapons for blunt/slash/pierce effects too

First, what's with the asterisk after the word damage? I don't see what it refers to.

If you're going to do this, you should also make all hit dice d6, but since this thread is posted in a forum for an edition of (Advanced)D&D, I think the die size you want is d8.

ah yeah, the asterisk was to remind me that its D6 with modifiers, but then I didnt actually go into what the modifiers were.

and yes HD being d6 would probably work out better too, though I dont think d8 would be an issue either if the damage modifiers and PC abilities keep pace

 

[jmartkdr2]

A longsword in 13th Age always uses d8s regardless of class. The same is true for all weapons. The die size never actually varies by class. The difference is whether you get no penalty to hit, a small penalty to hit, or a large penalty to hit. That's the only difference.

The designers could have assigned different damage dice by class with their design. They didn't actually do that. Instead it works like a pretty bog standard proficiency system. The armor system does grant different AC by class, but it's still mostly a bog standard proficiency system except that there are a few +1 and -1 adjustments on top of the attack penalties for armor you're not proficient with.

I'm not trying to be a jerk or pedantic. I'm just saying that the example is incorrect. I'm just trying to be clear so if others in the thread are looking for that sort of system, then 13th Age is not where they should be looking.

Rogues using daggers do d8s, everyone else does d4. Rogue – 13th Age SRD

If you're going to argue the example for the sake of being pedantic, at least check your source.