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.

 

[Remathilis]

The Nemean Lion pelt is literally invulnerable. It wasn't an AC boost. It was an invulnerable magic item that made Hercules immune to physical damage while wearing it.

So your position is "Gygax lied sometimes, so that doesn't matter"? And it wasn't just "Gygax said Conan was a Fighter/Thief", he made an official stat block for Conan that was a Fighter/Thief multiclass.

According to the only official D&D sources, Conan is not a Barbarian. And I highly doubt that Hercules would be, either.

When Conan was statted, there was no barbarian class yet. The AD&D barbarian came after the Conan modules. Even moreso, the 1e barbarian resembles little the 3e and later take on the class. You can't use Gygax's version of his stats as definitive since when they are done, D&D was a completely different system.

 

[Minigiant]

Yes, they said this year's ago, Mearls went into some detail on the Happy Fun Hoir ~2018: it's a simplification the spreadsheets they use for building products. They couldn't put an interactive multi-sheet Excel file on a book, so they cooked up a quick and dirty estimate version. Sounds like in 10 years they've figured out a better way to get aomeething like their playtest spreadsheet tools into a book form.

An interactive spreadsheet isn't needed. A few people have created simple charts and guidebooks for creating monsters.

The DMG rules aren't a quick and dirty method. They are straight up wrong.

Some designers don't play 5e like the community. And some of the designers like Mearls play with a TON of houserule and homebrew that aren't in the book.

Like I said before, Masteries is a good start. But it's too tame.

If 0neD&D is supposed to be the final edition or even last 10 more years, there needs to be more levels of mastery or more fantastical versions of mastery available as feats.

There is no point of revising 5e for it to still not work past level 12.

 

[Incenjucar]

An interactive spreadsheet isn't needed. A few people have created simple charts and guidebooks for creating monsters.

The DMG rules aren't a quick and dirty method. They are straight up wrong.

Some designers don't play 5e like the community. And some of the designers like Mearls play with a TON of houserule and homebrew that aren't in the book.

Like I said before, Masteries is a good start. But it's too tame.

If 0neD&D is supposed to be the final edition or even last 10 more years, there needs to be more levels of mastery or more fantastical versions of mastery available as feats.

There is no point of revising 5e for it to still not work past level 12.

Ironically, this is also what Gygax did, which caused a lot of the more ridiculous parts of the TSR-era editions.

 

[Parmandur]

An interactive spreadsheet isn't needed. A few people have created simple charts and guidebooks for creating monsters.

The DMG rules aren't a quick and dirty method. They are straight up wrong.

Some designers don't play 5e like the community. And some of the designers like Mearls play with a TON of houserule and homebrew that aren't in the book.

Like I said before, Masteries is a good start. But it's too tame.

If 0neD&D is supposed to be the final edition or even last 10 more years, there needs to be more levels of mastery or more fantastical versions of mastery available as feats.

There is no point of revising 5e for it to still not work past level 12.

Actually, people who have worked to reverse engineer the numbers find that the DMG method mostly gives the same results as in the MM or the Mosnter supplements, juat not always. Because the DMG guidelines are an approximation for a complex spreadsheet algorithm. Now, theybare working on getting a better tool in the next Core. That's neither really here nor there: they knew in 2014 that the DMG solution was rough, but they couldn't change that in mere errata. They've been open about this for years.

How do "most players" play, and what's your methodology for determining that...?

 

[Minigiant]

How do "most players" play, and what's your methodology for determining that...?

Observation of 5e media.

5e social media, 5e forum posts, 5e reddit posts,, 5e Youtube, and 5e Twitch all display a type of play a lot more superheroic than the base PHB and DMG. Even OS and OSR media states that 5e players play different from the core assumptions of their books

The only time youever hear or read of people playing straight 5e is with:

1. Small Children
2. New Players
3. Players who aren't bothered to learn rules.

Even the D&D movie and CR cartoon are more action heroic than that PHB examples.

 

[Parmandur]

Observation of 5e media.

5e social media, 5e forum posts, 5e reddit posts,, 5e Youtube, and 5e Twitch all display a type of play a lot more superheroic than the base PHB and DMG. Even OS and OSR media states that 5e players play different from the core assumptions of their books

The only time youever hear or read of people playing straight 5e is with:

1. Small Children
2. New Players
3. Players who aren't bothered to learn rules.

Even the D&D movie and CR cartoon are more action heroic than that PHB examples.

...?

Heroic is the base assumption outlined in the DMG...?

 

[Minigiant]

...?

Heroic is the base assumption outlined in the DMG...?

My point is that no one plays baseline D&D except "noobs" and "babies". Not even the designers. 5e was designed for DM to insert a ton of houserules in it. This is why the designers didn't care too much that the DMG CR guidelines were off.

Houserules and homebrew were always designed to fill the gap and tailor 5e to the group. Most 5e groups were a bit more superheroic and narrative than base 5e and added their homebrew to it.

However once you make a high quality, deep calculating VTT, you can't add in houserules. So if OneD&D is going in the VTT, they either need to add the houserules to the base system OR as clickable add ons.

In simple terms, 5e was built like AD&D 2e with 3e style PCs. But a huge chunk, if not majority, of the 5e player and DM base use TOM and TOB like houserules. So a AD&D 2e Mastery system will likely not be enough and is too tame for them. So it won't be a good idea to stop there if WOTC is inserting it into 5.5e and their VTT

 

[Minigiant]

duplicate

 

[Parmandur]

My point is that no one plays baseline D&D except "noobs" and "babies". Not even the designers. 5e was designed for DM to insert a ton of houserules in it. This is why the designers didn't care too much that the DMG CR guidelines were off.

Houserules and homebrew were always designed to fill the gap and tailor 5e to the group. Most 5e groups were a bit more superheroic and narrative than base 5e and added their homebrew to it.

However once you make a high quality, deep calculating VTT, you can't add in houserules. So if OneD&D is going in the VTT, they either need to add the houserules to the base system OR as clickable add ons.

In simple terms, 5e was built like AD&D 2e with 3e style PCs. But a huge chunk, if not majority, of the 5e player and DM base use TOM and TOB like houserules. So a AD&D 2e Mastery system will likely not be enough and is too tame for them. So it won't be a good idea to stop there if WOTC is inserting it into 5.5e and their VTT

You may not have been paying attention to the presentation on the VTT: it doesn't enforce rules, precisely to allow DM fiat and houserules to be the norm.

 

[tetrasodium]

My point is that no one plays baseline D&D except "noobs" and "babies". Not even the designers. 5e was designed for DM to insert a ton of houserules in it. This is why the designers didn't care too much that the DMG CR guidelines were off.

Houserules and homebrew were always designed to fill the gap and tailor 5e to the group. Most 5e groups were a bit more superheroic and narrative than base 5e and added their homebrew to it.

However once you make a high quality, deep calculating VTT, you can't add in houserules. So if OneD&D is going in the VTT, they either need to add the houserules to the base system OR as clickable add ons.

In simple terms, 5e was built like AD&D 2e with 3e style PCs. But a huge chunk, if not majority, of the 5e player and DM base use TOM and TOB like houserules. So a AD&D 2e Mastery system will likely not be enough and is too tame for them. So it won't be a good idea to stop there if WOTC is inserting it into 5.5e and their VTT

There is also the shifting views of houserules over the last twenty or thirty years though. Some probably due to computer games & an acceleration from wotc's own AL rules on it/"well you can do whatever you want with your own homebrew game, but officially..." type statements from wotcstaff. The GM has shifted from someone to work with over towards the meat computer that damed well better run the game strict Rules As Written except for rule zero. The tolerance for the GM making up stuff or changing rules has fallen significantly while they were relegated to "just do your job [run the game. Make sure everyone else has fun. Make sure it's the fun any given player wants... Just do [your/their] job" type pressures.

The adversarial GM is talked about all the time & simply denying a player rule zero or actually enforcing the rules when a player wants to bend them is now a good way to get accused of it for even the slightest whiff of conflict/adversarial. Adversarial players who minimize the GM's ability to insert houserules & such just get a pass though unless it's an extreme & possibly jaw dropping display. Fifth edition didn't prime the players to accept all the homebrew it expects.