Dwarf power-ups: Good or bad?

[I'm A Banana]

Or maybe if most people incorporate it, it's not nearly as horribly broken as it may seem at first?

We'll see just how many people are desperate to play a dwarf next fall...just like no matter how many people whine about the Cleric being overpowered, I still don't see them overwhelming a game and ruining the fun for everyone else.

So I guess if the majority of experiences end up saying it's not horribly broken, perhaps it's just not horribly broken.

I'm going to reserve judgement until play-day, but so far, I don't see everyone jumping at the chance to play a dwarf because of these buffs. They may be slightly more common than they are now (which is pretty rare), but they won't be the Elves of 3e, not by a long shot.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

It sounds like you're basically just saying all dwarves should have been proficiency with the waraxe. Now THAT would have been broken. Dwarven rogues and wizards being able to wield a one-handed weapon that's superior to what half-orc barbarians, elven rangers, human fighters, etc. receive proficicency with.

It sounds like you basically don't know the existing rules for the dwarven waraxe.

What I said was that all dwarves should be given a free martial weapon proficiency in the dwarven waraxe.

A martial weapon proficiency in the dwarven waraxe allows the weapon to be used two-handed, as stated in the existing, unchanged, 3.0 weapon description.

If this is indeed the "superior" weapon then I'd expect we wouldn't be having this discussion today-- because all those barbarians, rangers, and human fighters would be using the war-axe two handed, instead of using two handed swords, which is far and away the favored weapon as the game now stands.

So, to reiterate, yeah, I can live with dwarven wizards and rogues getting a free Martial WP that allows them to use the dwarven waraxe TWO HANDED. I still don't see that as being a very desirable strategy for them, beyond the lowest levels-- but then, I think low-level dwarves SHOULD rely on the old dwarven stand-by. I WANT the 1st level dwarven wizard in the party to whip out his dwarven waraxe in a moment of desperation-- NOT a dagger, NOT a staff-- because that's the weapon that he grew up using and should be most familiar with.

It's a flavor thing.


Wulf

 

[Felon]

A martial weapon proficiency in the dwarven waraxe allows the weapon to be used two-handed, as stated in the existing, unchanged, 3.0 weapon description.

OK, I guess I can see where you were coming from there, though it seems more sensible IMO to just give them martial weapon proficiency with the battleaxe, which is the "entry-level" martial version of the waraxe. That would mirror the pointy-ears' longsword proficiency.

If this is indeed the "superior" weapon then I'd expect we wouldn't be having this discussion today-- because all those barbarians, rangers, and human fighters would be using the war-axe two handed, instead of using two handed swords, which is far and away the favored weapon as the game now stands.

Are you just basing that statement off of personal experience, or do you have a broader source of info? I've seen 3e characters come and go, and while the greatsword is a popular "off-the-rack" choice, I have seen plenty of other weapon choices that run the gamut of the D&D arsenal. Exotic weapons, costing a feat, are obviously only going to appeal to characters that are going after a certain fighting style (in the waraxe's case that's mainly sword-and-shield or 2-weapon-fighting).

Until you give the proficiency away for free, of course, in which case its d10 damage now patently outshines other traditional dwarven weapons like battleaxes and warhammers. They've been effectively rendered obsolete, and while that's not earthshattering, a little flavor as well as a little balance has been thrown away for no apparent gain.

I'm surprised and disappointed that this exotic-to-martial racial weapon familiarity actually survived WotC's playteting. It's one of those ideas that superficially seem to make a great deal of sense, but a little tooling around shows all the little deficiencies that weren't apparent initially. It ulitmately just gives powergamers an extra feat that they really should have to burn to gain access to an advanced weapon.

 

[krunchyfrogg]

The only thing that stinks about any particular race getting powered up is that more people will want to play that race because of the bonuses.

That being said, I'm happy with the changes to dwarves. They've always been my favorite race to play, and the changes make sense!

 

[DWARF]

The way I ran it in my campaigns from the second day I had my PHB.

The following races have the following weapons as martial weapons, not exotic.
Dwarf: Dwarven Waraxe and Urgosh
Gnome: Gnome Hook-Hammer
Half-Orc: Orc-Double-Bladed-Axe thing
Halfling: Kukri, or whatever that bent knife is called.
Human: Bastard sword (yes, longswords IMC are mostly elven weapons)

Then the following races have the following weapons as simple weapons, not exotic.
Half-Orc: Battleaxe
Halfling: Sap
Gnome: Pick, light
Elves: Longsword

Is it balanced? I don't care. I prefer things being realistic and fun. Yes, this means you will see Elven wizards with Longswords and Half-Orc clerics with Battle axes. But I prefer that to them not doing what they should because they'd rather spend the feats somewhere else...

 

[Felon]

The way I ran it in my campaigns from the second day I had my PHB.

The following races have the following weapons as martial weapons, not exotic.
Dwarf: Dwarven Waraxe and Urgosh
Gnome: Gnome Hook-Hammer
Half-Orc: Orc-Double-Bladed-Axe thing
Halfling: Kukri, or whatever that bent knife is called.
Human: Bastard sword (yes, longswords IMC are mostly elven weapons)

Then the following races have the following weapons as simple weapons, not exotic.
Half-Orc: Battleaxe
Halfling: Sap
Gnome: Pick, light
Elves: Longsword

Is it balanced? I don't care. I prefer things being realistic and fun. Yes, this means you will see Elven wizards with Longswords and Half-Orc clerics with Battle axes. But I prefer that to them not doing what they should because they'd rather spend the feats somewhere else...

Since you spread the proficiencies around to pretty much all of the races (half-elves aren't mentioned, and elves apparently got the exotic shaft), then at a glance it actually looks pretty darn well-balanced. You did better than it sounds like WotC is doing.

But as far as realism goes, that concept of "cultural osmosis" where a character's choice of race bestows innate martial proficiency with exotic weapons isn't terribly realistic. Everyone warrior born in feudal Japan--a very militant culture--wasn't infused with proficiency at wielding a katana, just because they might be more familiar with what they look like than a native of Africa or Europe. Likewise, I don't see every single person in a given culture, from baker to scullery maid to hairdresser to street bum--being infused from childhood with the ability to wield a battleaxe or longsword.

And as for fun, I don't see how racial WF enhances the fun of the game, as its whole purpose seems to promote cookie-cutting. In fact, giving people access to a weapon that's supposed to cost a feat goes a long way towards making other fighting styles not worth the effort.

DWARF, from what I've read of your posts you seem predisposed towards poo-pooing balance concepts as if they were a detriment to fun. Ideally, balance promotes fun by ensuring that variety of options are equally viable. Players shouldn't have to choose between fun and effectiveness.

 

[DWARF]

True, not everyone in feudal japan knew how to us a Katana.

What I'm trying to do is simulate the fact that for Dwarves, it wouldn't be any harder for them to learn to weild a Waraxe, as it would for them to learn to weild any other martial weapon.

And then, for Elves, it wouldn't be any harder for them to learn a longsword as it would for them to learn to use a club.

And yes, I dislike the "balance, balance, balance" mentality that most people get into. That's because the most fun I've had in games were ones where things weren't balanced. The best character I've ever played was a level 1 thief (it was 2E) goblin named Throm. This was in a party with a level 5 human cleric, a minotaur, a level 3 human fighter and a level 2 elven bard.

Was it balanced? No. But was it fun? Most definitely.
And that's the way I look at things. Say a group of level 3 characters ran across and befriended a Minotaur. Am I, the DM going to go "Nope, he's too powerful and unbalancing. Try being his friend later." No way, if they work it, they get it.

The trick is enjoying the Roleplaying more than the Rollplaying. I have players that I can trust will think more about "how would my character react", instead of "OMFG, that's SO unbalacing. No fair!!!"

In fact, the campaign I've been running for a while has a wonderfully fun, and wholly unbalancing element. Dwarves get 3 levels of fighter, Elves 4 of Wizard, Halflings 2 of Rogue, Gnomes 2 of Illusionist, Hal-Orcs 1 of Barbarian, Half-Elves 1 of Bard. This does not mean all my Elves start as level 5 characters. This means that as a level 1 whatever they are, they get 4 levels of wizard for free. It may sound crazy to some, but my players love it.

 

[DWARF]

Oh yeah, wizards are also freakishly powerful, as they should be. They get twice as many spells per day.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

But as far as realism goes, that concept of "cultural osmosis" where your race bestows innate martial proficiency with exotic weapons isn't terribly realistic. I don't see every single person in a given culture, from baker to scullery maid to hairdresser to street bum--being infused from childhood with the ability to wield a battleaxe or longsword.

That's a good point, but it overlooks one of the assumptions about the D&D world, and in particular the "splinter" races like dwarves, half-orcs, elves. That assumption being that the world is a dangerous place, that war is a way of life, and yes, even the dwarven scullery maids know which end of the axe is the unfriendly bit.

Wulf

 

[Endur]

Dwarven Bonuses

The Dwarven Bonuses sound interesting, but I don't think they overpower the dwarves.

1) Weapon Familiarity with Urgrosh and Dwarven Waraxe. Ok it saves a dwarf PC a feat if he wants to use one of these weapons. The Urgrosh, as a double weapon, is going to require bunches of feats to wield, so I don't have a problem with a dwarf spending one less feat. The Waraxe is a bit more powerful, but still I don't see a major problem.

Every real powerful magic dwarf weapon I have seen is either a warhammer, a battleaxe, or a greataxe, so when push comes to shove, at high level the dwarf is going to end up using a warhammer, battleaxe, or greataxe, and not one of the exotic weapons.

2) Stability: Does anybody know for sure that this is a dwarf ability? If it is, it would be cool and it makes sense.

3) Enhancement Movement: Every other game system I know of gives dwaves this ability already. In the hobbit, Dain's troops force marched in armor and wasn't slowed down at all by their armor or their large packs full of supplies. This is a useful enhancement. As a dwarf player, I am constantly outdistanced by everyone else in the party.

Dwarven characters are tough fighters, but there is a reason why many power-gamer Barbarians prefer to play a Half-Orc. When maximum damage is the goal, the half orc allows you to generate greater damage.

The dwarf, on the other hand, should be more survivable.

At least, that's what I tell myself when my stationary dwarven defender watches a Half-Orc Barbarian/Tribal Protector wild fight and great cleave through a swarm of tribal enemies.