Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="CleverNickName" data-source="post: 4208419" data-attributes="member: 50987">Wow.&nbsp; I disappear for 10 hours, and look what happened: a weapons article from WotC, followed by sixteen pages of commentary.&nbsp; I love the internets.&nbsp; <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />&nbsp; I've just spent the last half-hour reading this thread, and here are my thoughts.Weapon Categories: Mostly a vocabulary change; they moved a few weapons around but that's about it.&nbsp; I can take it or leave it.&nbsp; (+0)Weapon Groups: Where are the clubs?&nbsp; I suppose that they would be filed under the &quot;mace&quot; category, but that seems a little too generous.&nbsp; IMO, the category should be called &quot;club,&quot; and maces should be shoehorned into it instead...but whatever.&nbsp; (-1)Weapon Properties: Good idea...I like how one little word carries tons of information. (+1)Thrown Weapons:&nbsp; I really like the distinction between light and heavy thrown weapons.&nbsp; Well done. (+1)High Crit: I like this, too.&nbsp; Makes a lot more sense than high-level characters attempting to jack their crit range with feats and magic properties.&nbsp; I predict there will be tons of feats in the future which allow a character to make any weapon &quot;high crit.&quot;&nbsp;&nbsp; Sort of like the 4E answer to the Improved Critical feat. (+1)Load: I like this, too.&nbsp; It will revolutionize the way firearms will work in my 4E house rule. (+1)Off-Hand: You know what?&nbsp; I like the new TWF rules...I've always thought that dual-wielding weapons should give you tactical options, not free attacks.&nbsp; A rogue fighting with a longsword in one hand and a light crossbow in the other has the option to make ranged or melee attacks, for example.&nbsp; Now, I'm sure that many people will hate this rule, but it is rather easy to house-rule (just add a feat, for example.)&nbsp; (+2)Reach: I like it...mechanically sensible, with just the right amount of nerf.&nbsp; (+1)Small: I think this is an over-simplification.&nbsp; I like to think that halflings are industrious enough to create &quot;small-sized&quot; versions of anything that humans use, from tea cups to greatswords.&nbsp; So it looks like I will have to write a houserule for this...probably something along the lines of a uniform damage penalty for smaller versions of weapons, instead of creating a whole new dice range.&nbsp; (-1)Versatile: I'd rather see this bonus as &quot;+ 1/2 your Strength modifier&quot; instead of a flat &quot;+1,&quot; but it's not a deal-breaker for me.&nbsp; (+0)Proficiencies: I would have liked to see this as a skill....Weapon Training (Simple), Weapon Training (Military), etc.&nbsp; The more ranks you invest in these skills, the higher the bonus you get when using weapons in that category.&nbsp; Oh well.&nbsp; It's more fun this way, apparently. (-2)Overall opinion: Pretty good.&nbsp; There is plenty of stuff in here that I'll have to tweak and modify to suit my particular gaming style, but IMO the good outweighs the bad (+3).</blockquote>

[QUOTE="CleverNickName, post: 4208419, member: 50987"] Wow. I disappear for 10 hours, and look what happened: a weapons article from WotC, followed by sixteen pages of commentary. I love the internets. :) I've just spent the last half-hour reading this thread, and here are my thoughts. [U][B]Weapon Categories: [/B][/U] Mostly a vocabulary change; they moved a few weapons around but that's about it. I can take it or leave it. (+0) [U][B]Weapon Groups:[/B][/U] Where are the clubs? I suppose that they would be filed under the "mace" category, but that seems a little too generous. IMO, the category should be called "club," and maces should be shoehorned into it instead...but whatever. (-1) [U][B]Weapon Properties: [/B][/U] Good idea...I like how one little word carries tons of information. (+1) [U]Thrown Weapons:[/U] I really like the distinction between light and heavy thrown weapons. Well done. (+1) [U]High Crit:[/U] I like this, too. Makes a lot more sense than high-level characters attempting to jack their crit range with feats and magic properties. I predict there will be tons of feats in the future which allow a character to make any weapon "high crit." Sort of like the 4E answer to the Improved Critical feat. (+1) [U]Load:[/U] I like this, too. It will revolutionize the way firearms will work in my 4E house rule. (+1) [U]Off-Hand:[/U] You know what? I like the new TWF rules...I've always thought that dual-wielding weapons should give you tactical options, not free attacks. A rogue fighting with a longsword in one hand and a light crossbow in the other has the option to make ranged or melee attacks, for example. Now, I'm sure that many people will hate this rule, but it is rather easy to house-rule (just add a feat, for example.) (+2) [U]Reach:[/U] I like it...mechanically sensible, with just the right amount of nerf. (+1) [U]Small:[/U] I think this is an over-simplification. I like to think that halflings are industrious enough to create "small-sized" versions of anything that humans use, from tea cups to greatswords. So it looks like I will have to write a houserule for this...probably something along the lines of a uniform damage penalty for smaller versions of weapons, instead of creating a whole new dice range. (-1) [U]Versatile:[/U] I'd rather see this bonus as "+ 1/2 your Strength modifier" instead of a flat "+1," but it's not a deal-breaker for me. (+0) [U][B]Proficiencies:[/B][/U] I would have liked to see this as a skill....Weapon Training (Simple), Weapon Training (Military), etc. The more ranks you invest in these skills, the higher the bonus you get when using weapons in that category. Oh well. It's more fun this way, apparently. (-2) Overall opinion: Pretty good. There is plenty of stuff in here that I'll have to tweak and modify to suit my particular gaming style, but IMO the good outweighs the bad (+3). [/QUOTE]

Verification