ConcreteBuddha
First Post
I think every dwarf should have Exotic Weapon Proficiency: Tankard of Ale.
-
NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.
Do you require Dwarves to spend an Exotic Weapon feat to use the Dwarven Waraxe?
- Thread starter johnsemlak
- Start date
In my RTOEE game I let one of the players have the Dwarven Axe as a martial proficiency. He wanted it for the theme of his dwarven fighter, and I didn't see any real big todoo about letting him have it. Plus I had just smeared his sorceror in one shot. 
It's been about 10 months of gaming since then and the dwarf fighter has done well through the levels. He's been accompanied by a dual wielding human fighter the entire time and both are equally nasty. The dwarf does more damage per blow, but the human gets an extra blow in there every round.
I can see the arguements against this, as it's a free feat (and it is) but I can honestly say that it has not caused anyone in my group to bat an eyelash.
So, for what it's worth, go ahead and let it happen in your game if it makes you and your player happy. That's what is important. I have seen nothing to imply that I have destroyed my game beyond all utility. None of the players have negative responses to it in my game, and none of their characters seem weaker for it.
If it's better for your game to say 'no', do it and move along. Rules say that this weapon should remain outside the standard list of weapons. If you want to rule 0 it, go for it, if not, don't worry about it.
It's been about 10 months of gaming since then and the dwarf fighter has done well through the levels. He's been accompanied by a dual wielding human fighter the entire time and both are equally nasty. The dwarf does more damage per blow, but the human gets an extra blow in there every round.
I can see the arguements against this, as it's a free feat (and it is) but I can honestly say that it has not caused anyone in my group to bat an eyelash.
So, for what it's worth, go ahead and let it happen in your game if it makes you and your player happy. That's what is important. I have seen nothing to imply that I have destroyed my game beyond all utility. None of the players have negative responses to it in my game, and none of their characters seem weaker for it.
If it's better for your game to say 'no', do it and move along. Rules say that this weapon should remain outside the standard list of weapons. If you want to rule 0 it, go for it, if not, don't worry about it.
dead_radish
Explorer
I have to agree with the people pointing out that every dwarven fighter _is_ proficient in the Dwarven War Axe. They just can't use it one handed. Most Samurai used katana two-handed. Very few (those that spent the feat) used it one-handed. And they had to train specially to use it.
Hell, if you really want it this way, require all dwarves to spend their bonus fighter feat on Dwarven war axe. It's rude, but then all dwarven fighters can use it. I'd bet that they would quickly stop using it.
Now there is a difference with Halfling skiprocks - most halflings are horrible at using them. I'd let all halflings throw them normally, only those with the feat get the bounces. But that's another issue.
Hell, if you really want it this way, require all dwarves to spend their bonus fighter feat on Dwarven war axe. It's rude, but then all dwarven fighters can use it. I'd bet that they would quickly stop using it.
Now there is a difference with Halfling skiprocks - most halflings are horrible at using them. I'd let all halflings throw them normally, only those with the feat get the bounces. But that's another issue.
Similar Threads
