Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="James Gasik" data-source="post: 8628141" data-attributes="member: 6877472"><a href="https://www.enworld.org/goto/post?id=8519501" target="_blank">Snarf Zagyg said:</a>Possible Topics for DiscussionA. Do you prefer variable weapon damage or static weapon damage?B. Would we be so uncaring about cutting trees down if they could scream? Maybe, if they screamed all the time, and for no good reason?C. Would you like a system that made variable weapon damage dependent on the wielder, and not the weapon?A. I never gave it much thought, although there was an instance when I did.  A thousand years ago, I looked at the 1e Monk Class, and I thought it strange that they did a set amount of "open hand damage" based on level that was irrespective of what moves you were using.Then I realized, that was potentially a strength of the class!  You could describe whatever kind of martials arts style or maneuver you wished, and the difference in effectiveness was the damage you rolled!  Roll high? It's a powerful haymaker or a Sho-Ryu-Ken or what have you.  Roll low?  It's a glancing blow (something D&D has never really modeled well).In a system where everyone rolls the same die, and the difference in weapons is irrelevant, the strength is that you decide what weapon or fighting style your character uses, and how effective your choice isn't based on an equipment chart.How many of us looked at a weapon on an equipment list and said "that's wrong, this weapon would be much better/worse based on (whatever experience or source I draw opinions from)!"Be it arguments about crossbows to katanas (oh no, I said the word!) gamers have argued about this from the dawn of time.How many cool character concepts (like a whip wielding warrior based on Simon Belmont?) have died a thousand deaths due to whips being terrible?How many characters use a weapon not because it's what they want to use, ideally, but because it is the "best" weapon?A gamist version of D&D that lets you play whatever you want and not have the rules get in the way could be a lot of fun (for some people).B.  Treants exist, therefore, obviously not.C. As stated in A, I can see the merits to such a system, and I think it would be great as an option for D&D.  Most players love rolling dice too much for this to become a standard rule, I fear.From here on out, you can play a master of all weapons, for whom anything is deadly in their hands, from a sword, to a carved wooden oar, to a boa feather, what the Fighter class probably should be!You wouldn't need to worry about limiting certain weapons to certain classes- want to play a Monk that uses a greatsword or a Rogue that wields brass knuckles?  Go for it!Want to use a weapon that isn't in the game (such as 5e's often put-upon and anemic weapon list)?  Who cares, it's all the same for your character anyways!So if the option existed, I'd want to at least try it out, because my inner roleplayer can do whatever he thinks is cool and not be bound by "sorry, there's no room for an expert boomerang wielder in this game/edition and the rules shouldn't be expected to let you do it".</blockquote>

Verification