D&D 5E Dear 5e design team: Please research earlier editions

[Hussar]

What's wrong with all weapons doing the same damage? Or, certain weapon groups doing the same damage?

It's boring? All weapons do d6 damage? Pretty much means that picking any weapon for your character is flavor only. No actual tactical or strategic thinking whatsoever.

No thanks.

 

[billd91]

It's boring? All weapons do d6 damage? Pretty much means that picking any weapon for your character is flavor only. No actual tactical or strategic thinking whatsoever.

No thanks.

I think some people find that attractive. The choice becomes an affectation or a signature rather than an optimized tool. Though the simulationist in me cries at the idea, I can see its attraction and feel its pull.

 

[Hussar]

I can see the attraction in the simplicity of it. But, how would you ever balance the game that way? One group uses all D6 damage, meaning that their damage for the group is pretty much fixed on a round by round basis. The next group uses variable weapon damage, which would also presumably include means for increasing that damage over and above the higher damage weapons.

Wouldn't you need two sets of monster stats?

 

[BobTheNob]

I wasnt aware that early D&D had this rule. I must admit I have often wondered what it would be like if damage was using d6's only and to emulate "more damage" you just put on more d6's. Like make a 1h attack a d6 and a two handed a 2d6. If nothing else just to get rid of 4/6 of the dice we must maintain, there is something nice about d20=toHit/porbability d6=damage/effect.

Keep in mind to achieve "actual tactical or strategic thinking" you can differentiate weapons on their virtue, like the way swords got a +3 instead of a +2 in 4e, or that feat to give heavy blades the bonus to defence vs AOP, or polearms giving reach e.t.c.

I accept that different dice are the existing convention for modelling and dont propose any change away from, but I have never for a second thought that damage alone is the only things that should define a weapon....THAT is what boring is.

 

[billd91]

I can see the attraction in the simplicity of it. But, how would you ever balance the game that way? One group uses all D6 damage, meaning that their damage for the group is pretty much fixed on a round by round basis. The next group uses variable weapon damage, which would also presumably include means for increasing that damage over and above the higher damage weapons.

Wouldn't you need two sets of monster stats?

Not really. Compare with most other weapons PCs use and assume the bonus damage that PCs do is the same whether using 1d6s for everything or a hodge podge of other dice. The long sword's 1d8 averages only +1 per roll compared to the 1d6. The 1e/2e two-handed sword's d10 gives us at most +4. That's not exactly a huge difference that we need two sets of monster stats for.

 

[Hussar]

That's not the entire story though Bill91. A two handed sword does d10 vs medium creatures, but 3d6 vs larger than mansized. That's one of the big draws for the weapon - it's slow as heck, needs lots of room, but you're going to really ruin someone's day when you hit them with it.

3e and 4e both have d12 weapons. And there were a number of 2dx and dx+y weapons in AD&D as well.

Personally, if they're going to go that route, I'd rather see it go all the way and eject HP entirely in favor of something like Savage World's damage system.

 

[TimA]

I just dont know where the OP's assumption comes from, to assume that the designers havent done their homework.

Here is the thing. Its their job, they do this for a living. That means their livelihoods are based on their success. When Im in that position, I do everything in my power to ensure a quality result. My kids depend on me doing so.

How many here design games for a living? I dont. Im interested in if the OP does.

Why do so many assume that they are in a position to give such sage advice?

yes but if your working at WoTC your livelihood depends on random chance. Not talent or performance.

Every christmas half the staff gets the axe. Good sales, bad sales, so-so sales. Doesnt seem to matter. At the end of the year you've only got a 50% chance of being employed there come next spring break.

So why would they try hard to do a good job when all it does is get them attention thats more likely to put their head on the block then the drone who just kept his head down and wrote copy?

WoTC's entire corporate culture disincentive's passion and hard work.

as to the "few broken combinations" methinks some people need to visit a char-op board more often.........

 

[billd91]

That's not the entire story though Bill91. A two handed sword does d10 vs medium creatures, but 3d6 vs larger than mansized. That's one of the big draws for the weapon - it's slow as heck, needs lots of room, but you're going to really ruin someone's day when you hit them with it.

3e and 4e both have d12 weapons. And there were a number of 2dx and dx+y weapons in AD&D as well.

So do away with large damage, again, not a big deal since it was a distinction that made little simulative sense anyway and was, in fact, dispensed with in 3e.

The d12 weapon isn't all that much different from the d10. The d10 can be expected to average 2 points higher per roll than the d6, the d12 generally 3 points. None of those are game breakers. The same set of stats for the monsters can be used with either group - all d6s or varying weapon dice.

 

[BobTheNob]

yes but if your working at WoTC your livelihood depends on random chance. Not talent or performance.

Every christmas half the staff gets the axe. Good sales, bad sales, so-so sales. Doesnt seem to matter. At the end of the year you've only got a 50% chance of being employed there come next spring break.

So why would they try hard to do a good job when all it does is get them attention thats more likely to put their head on the block then the drone who just kept his head down and wrote copy?

WoTC's entire corporate culture disincentive's passion and hard work.

Really? Its that bad at WOTC?

I just didnt know! Now I really AM impressed with what they manage to achieve!

as to the "few broken combinations" methinks some people need to visit a char-op board more often.........

Your right, if I ever want to know what is wrong with a system or the wrong way to treat a system, char op boards are the first place to go. If ANYONE has a sense of what needs to be fixed, its the guys that exploit it.

 

[TimA]

Really? Its that bad at WOTC?.

Google their list of annual layoffs sometime. They've fired their developmental heads every year for almost 10 years now. And every year a bunch of writers get the axe too.

Seriously google it. You have more job security as a paraplegic track star then you do as a WoTC writer.

I just didnt know! Now I really AM impressed with what they manage to achieve!.

Theres an obvious response to this but it would probably be considered edition warring.

Your right, if I ever want to know what is wrong with a system or the wrong way to treat a system, char op boards are the first place to go. If ANYONE has a sense of what needs to be fixed, its the guys that exploit it.

Yes exactly. Just like you hire hackers to see if your computer security is good or you pack a car with crash test dummies and slam it into a wall to see if it can take an impact.