Ditch Weapon And Armor Lists

[BobTheNob]

I'd like the "Master of All Weapons" thing to be the Fighter class' schtick, not all warriors or warrioroids (clerics of war gods, etc.).

Let the other warriors be as good as or better than Fighters at certain styles, yes, like raging Barbarians with greatswords, mauls & 2hd Axes, or Rangers with 2wf or ranged attacks, but let the Fighter be capable of adapting his modes of attack and defense to the situation at hand and be equally competent in all of them- truly the always dangerous man...

And I could see that as one of 2 main paths for the Fighter, the other one being one who is hypercompetent with one very small selection of weapons.

Im all for that. This thread evolved from standardizing damage to the fighter core competence, but its an interesting evolution. We spend so much forum space on just what the fighter is, and this has opened an interesting avenue.

If weapons were truely unique (rather than just a collection of different damage mechanics) in that they had diverse mechanics to define them, then the fighter can become an extension of that concept, somehow enhancing what the weapon does. Combine that with stances and you have a combatant who adapts to every fight with equal aplomb.

Now THAT is a fighter I like the sounds of.

 

[ExploderWizard]

And I could see that as one of 2 main paths for the Fighter, the other one being one who is hypercompetent with one very small selection of weapons.

So long as that hypercompetence is expressed in terms of expanded maneuvers and such. Raw hit and damage bonuses would just be weapon spec again, which was a fine idea until the challenge bar got raised and what was once hypercompetency became standard and thus required.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Hyper competence would have specialization as one ingredient in the recipe, but would also include expanded options, as you intimate. True masters of a few weapons, they simply do more with them than most others dream.

The Kensai would be the only next step beyond, heading from the mundane and extraordinary and into the truly mystical.

 

[Umbran]

I propose we ditch ponderous and unbalanced weapon and armor lists. We can revamp weapon speed and shields to balance a simple 'type based' weapon and armor system.

Speed denotes the bonus threshold at which the user gains another attack.

4 weapon types.
Light= d4 (speed= +4)
medium= d8 (speed= +5)
heavy= d10 (speed= +6)
2 handed melee= 3d4 (speed= +7)

Welcome to Old School Hack.

What it comes down to, for me, is this - very simple weapon-choices work for games that are otherwise simple. If the player's got a bazillion choices of powers, feats, and abilities, having the weapons be simple is a mismatch.

 

[The Human Target]

Ditto, but only in so far as it falls a bit shy of where I want it to go to.

If there was one thing that I hate its stupidly long weapon lists that contain 99% "why would I bother" options and a 1% short list of feasible options. When that happens, its a waste of page space and missed design potential.

I do stress missed design potential. As many have suggested, you could have weapons (and armor) bring unique mechanics to the game. So we stop trying to differentiate weapons by damage and speed, and try to differentiate on unique features.

So
Scimitars : Good against low armor opponents
Long Spear : Bonus when receiving a charge
Flail : Bonus Disarming, Bonus vs shields

...and so forth.

Make weapons distinct in what they can do, not just a damage roll.

Thats my big problem too, and my idea for making weapons generic but cool are similar to yours.