D&D (2024) New One D&D Weapons Table Shows 'Mastery' Traits

The weapons table from the upcoming Unearthed Arcana playtest for One D&D has made its way onto the internet via Indestructoboy on Twitter, and reveals some new mechanics. The mastery traits include Nick, Slow, Puncture, Flex, Cleave, Topple, Graze, and Push. These traits are accessible by the warrior classes.

 

[JohnSnow]

I 100% agree and I think it's not an uncommon opinion, but I also don't think it will happen any time whilst WotC is in charge of D&D (even though they came close to it with 4E, they still never made it happen for the out-of-combat spells).

I know, and it's funny, because it solves so many problems that they keep having to come up with band-aids for. You want a character in a story to stay dead? The caster failed their spellcasting check on "Raise Dead." Only one attempt per corpse, sorry.

 

[CleverNickName]

Odd. The question I'm asking myself is, why do you have such a massive hang-up about damage on a miss property for weapons? Believe it or not, character options aren't always about trying to fix problems. Sometimes it's simply about adding spice, variety, and flavor to play.

I wouldn't call it a "massive hang-up," I just won't use it. I'll house-rule it away if I can, or stay with 5E if I can't. (shrug) Either way, I'm still gonna be rolling d20s and slaying dragons for years to come.

 

[CleverNickName]

They are trying to make weapons have differences...so that it makes weapon choice meaningful in the ruleset (versus just in the narrative).

I can get behind this idea. If I were on the design team, I'd suggest giving hammers a chance to stagger their opponent or knock them off balance or something. I'll leave some feedback in the survey; maybe it'll stick.

 

[JohnSnow]

Odd. The question I'm asking myself is, why do you have such a massive hang-up about damage on a miss property for weapons? Believe it or not, character options aren't always about trying to fix problems. Sometimes it's simply about adding spice, variety, and flavor to play.

I mean, I wasn't the target of this question, but I'll offer my answer.

"Damage on a miss" interacts poorly with the abstract nature of hit points, something where we already struggle to provide flavorful narration, rather than turning it into a metagame conversation about rules mechanics: "His AC is 17, so your warhammer fails to connect." "I have Mastery, so I get to do my strength bonus in damage even on a miss - mine's 17, so he takes 3 points of damage."

It's drastically over-complicating an already abstract system that barely makes enough sense to narrate as it is. We certainly don't need to make it worse.

 

[Charlaquin]

Hmmm - I'd already kinda baked this in to my assumptions, given that in 5e a 1 always misses.

No it doesn’t. They tested such a rule in the first of the 1D&D playtest packets, but it hasn’t shown back up since then.

 

[Incenjucar]

A lot of it is a lingering language problem. In D&D, a hit means "a solid hit" and a miss means "not a solid hit", but the usage doesn't reflect that.

 

[JiffyPopTart]

Sure. Let's say hammer does d8 damage. If I hit and roll '8' on the die, I did full damage. If I hit and roll less then '8' I did partial damage (grazed). If I miss I did no damage and the target is unharmed by that blow.

If you miss....did your character

A: Physically fail to touch the opponent with his weapon.

or

B: Maybe did touch them but not well enough to matter?

If you believe A, then why did your opponent dodge better because they wore full plate?

If you believe B, then why exactly can't you move the bar for "well enough to matter"?

 

[Charlaquin]

I can get behind this idea. If I were on the design team, I'd suggest giving hammers a chance to stagger their opponent or knock them off balance or something. I'll leave some feedback in the survey; maybe it'll stick.

Well, topple, push, and slow are all masteries that show up on this list, so I think WotC’s on the same page with you there.

 

[Vaalingrade]

As a fresh new direction for the discussion: can Heavy just be deleted and burn eternally in hell, please?

 

[JohnSnow]

No it doesn’t. They tested such a rule in the first of the 1D&D playtest packets, but it hasn’t shown back up since then.

Incorrect.

"Rolling 1 or 20
"Sometime fate blesses or curses a combatant, causing the novice to hit and the veteran to miss.
"If the d20 roll for an attack is a 20, the attack hits regardless of any modifiers or the target's AC. In addition, the attack is a critical hit, as explained later in this chapter.
"If the d20 roll for an attack is a 1, the attack misses regardless of any modifiers or the target's AC."

(Player's Handbook, 2014, p. 194)

It may have been changed since, but it went to print with that rule.