D&D (2024) Do you actually like weapon masteries?

[OldSchoolGamerGirl]

I have a question - will players enjoy having their characters get constantly nicked, cleaved, slowed, vexed or toppled? Will all the AC 21+ characters feel cheated when they're getting constantly grazed on a miss by monsters? Cause if PCs are getting these toys, as a DM I'm going to want my NPCs and monsters to get them too (when thematically appropriate of course).

As a player I would be pissed if I were fighting a trained soldier and they didn't have the masteries... not every orc but that orc champion for sure. Not ever town guard, but that weapon master. Not every soldier should be a fighter stand in but there should be as many fighter stand ins as any other class.

 

[OldSchoolGamerGirl]

Nah. Let them do different things. Let them do cool things like smash the ground and make it crack or throw thier swords like boomerangs.

can I learn from them those moves if I befriend them?

 

[Micah Sweet]

can I learn from them those moves if I befriend them?

If the circumstances are right, yes, absolutely.

 

[Vaalingrade]

can I learn from them those moves if I befriend them?

In my game? Sure.

Officially? Probably never. A spell will probably let you do it though.

 

[Rainynights]

The only two mastery properties that would actually slow combat down any are cleave(make extra attacks that you wouldn't normally have been able to) and topple(target makes a save and gets knocked prone on fail). None of the others require additional rolls and would take all of half a second at most to apply in game

 

[jonathan1970]

You have not thought through how these interact with other rules enough. Yes, it often does depend on a trade off involving your bonus action, and it also involves a trade off in which weapon you use, and sometimes even which order you use your masteries, and if you use two weapon fighting. There are a ton of potential decision points in there. I strongly recommend you not read the document and make a judgement but instead make a 13th level Fighter using ALL the new rules (not just the new fighter rules) and test it in a combat and compare that to how the old fighter and weapons worked.

And I am saying that as someone who did just what you did. Read it, think it's pretty meh, and came to an initial conclusion. It took hearing a full build with all the new rules and a battle simulation and comparison to really see what was going on here and all the interactions involved. These are rules intended to be playtested. And I have been falling into that same trap of not playtesting the rules, just reading a new section in isolation. The further we get into this playtest, the harder it is to see how all the new rules interact with each other just by reading a section.

Interesting post. I'm curious as to what other sections of the Playtest Rules, beyond the Fighter rules, are relevant to testing out the Weapon Mastery concepts?

 

[rmcoen]

The only time in 5e I have ever seen Versatile get used in two multi-year campaigns is when the paladin (sword & board) got an Animated Shield. Now he could "board" while also doing a little more damage. (He loved his custom themed longsword, so upgrading to a two-hander wasn't something he wanted to do.)

 

[rmcoen]

I like the idea of the masteries; I like "right tool for the job" concept (which 5e is painfully missing), and I like fighters treating their weapons as tools. I think/agree the options are a bit unbalanced; auto-damage from Graze, for example, might make some boss fights significantly underwhelming, as the high-AC / low-hp combo of a glass cannon becomes irrelevant.

My campaign house rules already did a little of this, inflicting "level 1 cantrip" level effects when you hit by 10 or more with a weapon. The paladin's bludgeoning enchanted bokken knocks foes around (topple and push), while the battlemaster's rapier causes deep punctures (Sap? disadvantage on next attack). You don't need training, but you do have to get a good hit.

 

[Shardstone]

I like the idea of the masteries; I like "right tool for the job" concept (which 5e is painfully missing), and I like fighters treating their weapons as tools. I think/agree the options are a bit unbalanced; auto-damage from Graze, for example, might make some boss fights significantly underwhelming, as the high-AC / low-hp combo of a glass cannon becomes irrelevant.

My campaign house rules already did a little of this, inflicting "level 1 cantrip" level effects when you hit by 10 or more with a weapon. The paladin's bludgeoning enchanted bokken knocks foes around (topple and push), while the battlemaster's rapier causes deep punctures (Sap? disadvantage on next attack). You don't need training, but you do have to get a good hit.

I think graze's bonus damage is so small that it gives the player a feeling of impact without actually significantly swaying the fight.