Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="steeldragons" data-source="post: 5849186" data-attributes="member: 92511">I think the &quot;right&quot; of it (insofar as opinions can be &quot;right&quot;) is...Options.I would like to see specialization and generalization possible.I think the best way of doing this might be to go back to proficiencies. Use 1 slot for these weapons, 2 slots for these more rare/complex weapons, double that to &quot;specialize&quot; in any of them. Fighters, obviously, and fighter sub-classes, arguably, would get the most weapon proficiency slots. Sure other classes are proficient in whatever weapons they choose, but specializing or being &quot;as good&quot; with a broader range of weapons is the purview of the Fighter.Maybe I want to play the spearman or the axeman. Yeah, I'll have another blade or a bow to go with it, but they won't do the damage that my trusty X can. Maybe I want to be a &quot;swordsman&quot; or 'duelist&quot;, unparallelled in the realms for my skill with a longsword or rapier (or khopesh or falchion or broad sword or...). Maybe I want to be a &quot;master-at-arms&quot; who can pick up a battle axe or a short sword or whip out my crossbow (or a broken chair leg or a serving tray or fireplace poker) and kick butt with any of them.Options are the key...and giving those choices to the player, imo, is most easily done with minimal muss n' fuss by offering the Fighter (and potentially Fighter sub-classes) the most proficiency slots/points (and the quickest/most gained as they level) to be applied as desired.Things like Weapon Speeds or Reach and Bonuses/penalties v. certain armors, etc...Special &quot;Feats/Skills/Stances/Themes&quot; can all, as mentioned already, add various optional levels of complexity to the game as desired. And I do believe they ought to be included in the DMG as possibilities. But they shouldn't be necessary for the Fighter to be awesome.--Steel &quot;Can I 'set' my spear?&quot; Dragons</blockquote>

[QUOTE="steeldragons, post: 5849186, member: 92511"] I think the "right" of it (insofar as opinions can be "right") is...Options. I would like to see specialization and generalization possible. I think the best way of doing this might be to go back to proficiencies. Use 1 slot for these weapons, 2 slots for these more rare/complex weapons, double that to "specialize" in any of them. Fighters, obviously, and fighter sub-classes, arguably, would get the most weapon proficiency slots. Sure other classes are proficient in whatever weapons they choose, but specializing or being "as good" with a broader range of weapons is the purview of the Fighter. Maybe I want to play the spearman or the axeman. Yeah, I'll have another blade or a bow to go with it, but they won't do the damage that my trusty X can. Maybe I want to be a "swordsman" or 'duelist", unparallelled in the realms for my skill with a longsword or rapier (or khopesh or falchion or broad sword or...). Maybe I want to be a "master-at-arms" who can pick up a battle axe or a short sword or whip out my crossbow (or a broken chair leg or a serving tray or fireplace poker) and kick butt with any of them. Options are the key...and giving those choices to the player, imo, is most easily done with minimal muss n' fuss by offering the Fighter (and potentially Fighter sub-classes) the most proficiency slots/points (and the quickest/most gained as they level) to be applied as desired. Things like Weapon Speeds or Reach and Bonuses/penalties v. certain armors, etc...Special "Feats/Skills/Stances/Themes" can all, as mentioned already, add various [I]optional[/I] levels of complexity to the game as desired. And I do believe they ought to be included in the DMG as possibilities. But they shouldn't be necessary for the Fighter to be awesome. --Steel "Can I 'set' my spear?" Dragons [/QUOTE]

Verification