D&D 5E All weapons doing d6?

[jaelis]

I'd make two handed weapons be 2d6 to raise the average to 7. So dual-wielding and great-weapon fighting would be the same and be differentiated by fighting styles.

I had the same thought. Still think the gap between 1H and 2H would be a bit low, assuming shields are still +2 AC. If they are +1 it would make sense.

Two-weapon style: deal Dex/Str mod damage on a miss OR (variant) gain +1 to hit while dual-wielding. Both represent the fact that attacking with more weapons increases the odds of dealing at least some damage on your turn.

Heavy weapon style: deal Str mod on a miss OR +1 to hit with heavy melee weapons (pick the one you didnt give to TWFS). In this case, it represent the fact that is way harder to totally resist a hit (even partial) from a huge-a** weapon.

There are those (and I thought well-represented among the OSR community) who quite dislike damage-on-a-miss mechanics. I don't mind it but I think full ability mod on a miss might be a bit too much.

 

[Fenris-77]

Giving heavy weapons exploding d6's for damage would be cool. Maybe a little strong, but cool. I love exploding die pools.

 

[jaelis]

Also just to say... for those who feel that 5e doesn't offer enough differentiation between weapons, the feat system is a great place to add that back in. That way people who like the complexity can take advantage of it, but those who don't can keep things simple.

 

[Tales and Chronicles]

I had the same thought. Still think the gap between 1H and 2H would be a bit low, assuming shields are still +2 AC. If they are +1 it would make sense.


There are those (and I thought well-represented among the OSR community) who quite dislike damage-on-a-miss mechanics. I don't mind it but I think full ability mod on a miss might be a bit too much.

Then I'd go with:
TWFS: +1 to hit with melee weapon while dual-wielding.
GWFS: Reroll 1-2s on the damage roll ( or just +2 damage, if we want simpler)

 

[wingsandsword]

So would there ever be a reason why you would choose a scimitar over a long sword or a Mace over a Morning Star? should the weapon part just be part lof drawing your character profile ...

Scimitar has a better critical threat range (18-20) instead of the 19-20 critical threat range of a longsword. If you're optimizing for better critical hits, like the Improved Critical feat and the Keen enchantment, that can become a pretty clear advantage.

Morningstar does bludgeoning AND piercing damage, and is 2 lbs lighter (and 4 gp less for a basic one, which might matter at character creation). Doing piercing damage helps when facing an enemy that might have X/piercing damage reduction, the lighter weight matters if the DM is strict about encumberance, and the lower cost matters at character creation when spending your starting gold.

 

[jaelis]

Scimitar has a better critical threat range (18-20) instead of the 19-20 critical threat range of a longsword. If you're optimizing for better critical hits, like the Improved Critical feat and the Keen enchantment, that can become a pretty clear advantage.

Morningstar does bludgeoning AND piercing damage, and is 2 lbs lighter (and 4 gp less for a basic one, which might matter at character creation). Doing piercing damage helps when facing an enemy that might have X/piercing damage reduction, the lighter weight matters if the DM is strict about encumberance, and the lower cost matters at character creation when spending your starting gold.

Just to note, these are the 3e stats you're talking about. 3e had I think the most weapon differentiation of any dnd edition. (Unless you actually used the AD&D weapon vs armor tables.)

 

[jgsugden]

I used to run a very complex combat system with weapon speeds, damage resistance versus armor type, limits on how much strength could be added to the damage by weapon type, etc... It was very detailed and added a lot of realism to the game - to a point. It was beloved by some, hated by others. In the end, I decided it was just easier to give up on the 'realism' and use the rules designed by WotC. They're there for balance reasons and work. Why fix something that is not broken?

 

[Blackmoor_Film]

Exactly!

It's 1d6 for everything.

I run 3 LBBs D&D.

I do massive dungeon crawls in the traditional way. No minis. Just verbal and imagination.

If all you look at is the damage value, you won't understand how OD&D is designed for abstraction and elegance. I did a big analysis of how OD&D works on our blog. Links to previous articles are included in the 4th blog post.

Feeling One's Way into How OD&D Works - 4

I wrote this blog post some time ago. Due to time pressure with working on film things I set it aside. When I returned to doing this series I could not find this article anymore. I had forgotten to...

www.secretsofblackmoor.com

 

[Magister Ludorum]

Dungeon World does it too and it works really well. There are tags on the weapons that differentiate them.

It’s not like the weapons in D&D lend themselves to people picking all different weapons (every rogue everywhere using rapier). Making them all the same damage would add more diversity and make narrative play more interesting.

I always find this statement funny. I play or GM in 10+ games on a rotating basis. Every party has a rogue, and not a single one of them uses a rapier. An extra 2 hp maximum and 1 hp average isn't that big of a deal. Most of the rogues use daggers, short swords or (interestingly enough) whips.

I guess everyone's experience is different.

 

[Shiroiken]

Okay.

Do you have a source- I didn't see you point it out. I truly enjoy researching these sorts of things, and I've never encountered that (the iron spike story) before. I'd like to see where it came from!

1. Mike Monard (also known as "Old Geezer") was one of the OG players; he played in the original Greyhawk and the original Isle of the Ape with Ernie , Kaye, Kuntz, and Arendt.

2. It's on a different forum, but you can google the text and find the source.

PS- Anyone hear from him recently? Haven't seen him posting on any forums in a while?

I'd have to search, but IIRC it was from an old Dragon article (possibly Strategic Review). While I never played OD&D, I liked reading up on the early days. This is why I LOVE Rob's posts here!