Any thoughts on ditching weapon proficiencies?

[FoxWander]

I've been increasingly frustrated of late by being forced to take a feat in order to use a weapon that really fits a character concept. I recently wanted to build a swashbuckling mage, but a rapier is a "martial weapon" and thus unavailable without a feat. Even the classic idea of a Gandalf-like mage with a longsword runs into the same problem. So I've been thinking about ditching profs altogether except for some exotic weapon profs (double weapons, spiked chains and stuff still require special training). The basics of most weapons just aren't that difficult to learn. It's getting good with them that makes the difference, and in that the fighters are still gonna shine because of their higher BAB.

I think it'll help in two ways- first it puts all beginning characters on the same ground (fighters will still be better because of that BAB) which seems more how it should be, and second it will open the door to some more exotic character concepts (like one of those cool "mage with halberd" minis from Reaper ). What are your thoughts on this idea? Has anyone else tried it in their campaign? If so, what impact did it have?

 

[Nifft]

Consider taking a level of Fighter or Ranger (or even Paladin or Barbarian) before your first Wizard level. Then, after 5 Wizard levels, start taking the Eldrich Knight PrC. If you're serious about being a weapon-weilding Wizard, that's the PrC custom made for you.

d20 doesn't support the idea of being good at only one part of another class' schtick. Consider how much worse it would be if you asked to be a Fighter who happened to be able to cast a couple of Enchantments...

-- Nifft

 

[clark411]

The general assumption is that people who are good with them (ie have the profs) don't stumble around getting the -4 penalty to hit as they fight. A level 1 wizard CAN wield a rapier or longsword as if he's learned how to hold it and maybe swing it as much as anyone else, he just isn't good at it and thus suffers mechanically. This makes fine sense for a level 1 wizard who has spent so much time learning how to cast spells... he's hasn't had the time to devote his abilities to fighting.

I dunno, it seems much easier for a wizard to take one level of fighter or rogue than it is to totally rework all the classes around the concept that everyone should start equally in terms of their abilities to wield weapons. The whole point of the fighter class is their devotion to being the best at wielding the most- if I were a fighter, I'd be miffed by this house rule, and would switch to something else in lieu of the presence of all the fightizards and figh'nks and fighterogues and fighterics..

Apologies that my opinions weren't that constructive.. Trying to counter this.. alright- say chop out the need for the virtual weapon proficiency feats. What happens to all of those who lost them? Any sort of compensation?

 

[FoxWander]

True. I hadn't considered the fighter's feeling of having something taken away. How about this then- a "Martial Background" feat, available only at 1st level, that gave one access to a limited class of martial weapons, like axes, swords, polearms, etc. How do you think something like that could work? What would be the broad categories for the weapon groups?

And how about expanding the idea- if someone who took this feat later took a fighter class, or other class that gave proficiency with the weapons from the chosen group, the "Martial Background" would translate into Weapon Focus with one of the weapons from that group. (I hate the idea of feats getting "wasted" by a later class choice that totally negates it. ) What are people's thoughts on this idea?

Edit- Also what do you think of the idea of giving a character a free proficiency with a weapon if they stick it out with the non-prof penalty long enough? Putting up with a -4 penalty for a level shows some dedication that should be rewarded.

 

[Gothmog]

My solution to this problem was to ditch the class-based proficiencies alltogether. Instead, all characters receive 2 extra skill points per level to use in any way they want. Fighters receive a one-time bonus of 6 skill points at first level only to buy weapons with. If a character wants to learn a single weapon, he spends 1 point to learn it, or 3 if it is exotic. Alternately, I also group weapons into different categories, such as short blades, long blades, two-handed blades, one-handed axes, two-handed axes, crossbows, bows, one-handed crushing, flails, spears, polearms, etc. The cost to learn a whole group of weapons is generally equal to the number of weapons in the category -2, with a minimum of 2 points. I also added some new weapons to round out the groups. So far it has worked really well, the players are happy, and the classes are not so straightjacketed into pre-ordained monotony.

 

[Spatzimaus]

Keeping some sort of proficiency system is important. You don't want the "Tank Mage Syndrome", because it really takes something away from the fighter-types. If a Wizard wants to use weapons, he can take a level or two of a more mundane class.

The problem with a skill-based system (like Gothmog has) is that someone usually knows by level 1 what weapon types they want to use, and don't really change from that over their career. So, while a Fighter is proficient with ALL non-exotic weapons, he doesn't really need to pay for more than one or two types. So, giving all melee classes extra skill points to compensate just ends up making them stronger in the long run.

IMC, we reworked things a little bit, making it closer to the old AD&D system without messing around with proficiency levels. The short version:
1> Every weapon falls into one of eight categories: Bladed, Hafted, Blunt, Piercing, Projectile, Thrown, Ray, or Natural. A Martial Weapon Proficiency gives you proficiency with all weapons within the category.
Fighter-type classes (and Druid, but not Bard) get one category of their choice at CHARACTER level 1. If your first level wasn't one of these, you miss out.
Most fighter-type classes also get one SPECIFIC category at class level 1. Ranger gets Projectile, Paladin gets Bladed, Rogue gets Piercing, Fighter gets Any 1, that sort of thing. If you multiclass into or out of these classes, that's pretty much all you get.
Most of these classes also get one category (of their choice) every few class levels. Fighters get one at every odd level, the other full-BAB types (Paladin, Barbarian, Ranger) get one every 5 levels, and the 3/4-BAB types (Rogue, Bard, Psychic Warrior) get one every 6 levels.
Prestige Classes do something similar.

Anyway, you could stop here if you really wanted to. If your Wizard wants to use a sword, one Feat gets you all the slashing-type bladed weapons. I include the rest of the rules for completeness:

2> When you buy Weapon Focus, Specialization, etc., you pick a category and size. So, if you wanted to be good with a longsword, you'd buy Weapon Focus (Medium Bladed), which'd also give you the bonus for similar weapons (like a scimitar), but not greatswords or axes or anything.

(Double weapons have sizes and categories based on the stats of their weapon heads, so a quarterstaff counts as two Small Blunt weapons, even though the staff itself is Large. It's just two light maces stuck together, after all.)

3> Everyone is proficient with all light weapons. This replaces the whole "Simple weapon" thing. You don't really need this rule if you don't want it. It changes things a bit; everyone can now use a shortsword, but not a heavy crossbow.
Since all Natural attacks (including unarmed attacks and gauntlets) and all non-firearm Rays are light weapons, you don't usually need to pay for those categories in step 1.

4> All Exotic weapons are in one of the 8 categories listed in step 1, but each also has at least one Exotic category: Double, Heavy, Monk, Entangling, and so on. An EWP gives a specific benefit for all weapons in the exotic category (so one Feat lets you use both ends of all double weapons, assuming you also know their Martial categories from step 1). You can use these weapons without the EWP, but you don't get whatever benefit the EWP gives. There's no nonproficiency penalty for missing an EWP, except for a couple specific cases (Mercurial weapons, for example).

For example, the Bastard Sword is a Large Bladed weapon with EWP (Heavy Weapon). That EWP says it can be wielded as if it were one size smaller. If you buy that EWP (one Feat) it also lets you use other heavy weapons, like the Dwarven Waraxe, Katana, Fullblade, Elvish Thinblade, and so on.

 

[FoxWander]

Actually I've changed my mind- I still don't think the basics of how to use a weapon properly (weapon proficiency) is a feat level ability. Feats are rare and more powerful than something that just means "Oh, now I know the proper end to swing with a longsword." Since basic proficiency with a weapon is something anyone could pick up if they practiced for a week with someone, I think I'll allow people to spend skill points to learn a weapon (like learning languages) This seems a lot more realistic to me. I'll still keep the martial weapon feat but expand it to mean proficiency with all martial weapons- that is something that seems equal to a feat. If the wizard (cleric, thief, whatever) wants to spend his one feat just so he has a bigger weapon selection then I'd say he's paid the price to be "taking something away from fighters."

I'll even keep the idea of getting that skill point or feat back if you later take a level in fighter. Since you've already spent the time learning part of the fighter class, that means you can skip that part of "basic fighter school" and learn something new.

This seems like an easy and balanced way to handle it to me, but I'm sure some of you won't think so- or maybe I'm completely missing something. What do you see as the problems with this version of the idea?