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.

 

[EthanSental]

if/when DoaM UA comes put and we try it I can see my table/players going like this…

Rogue goes first roles a 15, ah a miss, he parried you stab at the last second. The Druid swing and rolls a 16, also a miss as he blocked it with his shield. So the players are paying attention and getting an idea of the number need to hit and do roll damage. Fighter comes up rolls a 14 and i get to say…you grazed him with your greatsword or crossbow bolt and you do 3 damage. In my minds eye, I see the rogue and Druid player looking and wondering…he rolled lower than me and still did damage. At some point, mentally we could get used to it cause it feels kinda like those old to hit charts in 1e, 2e days with the number getting easier to hit for a fighter than say a mages to hit charts, and their improvement to the chart at varying levels.

Not so big of a change once I think of it in that way.

 

[Pauln6]

if/when DoaM UA comes put and we try it I can see my table/players going like this…

Rogue goes first roles a 15, ah a miss, he parried you stab at the last second. The Druid swing and rolls a 16, also a miss as he blocked it with his shield. So the players are paying attention and getting an idea of the number need to hit and do roll damage. Fighter comes up rolls a 14 and i get to say…you grazed him with your greatsword or crossbow bolt and you do 3 damage. In my minds eye, I see the rogue and Druid player looking and wondering…he rolled lower than me and still did damage. At some point, mentally we could get used to it cause it feels kinda like those old to hit charts in 1e, 2e days with the number getting easier to hit for a fighter than say a mages to hit charts, and their improvement to the chart at varying levels.

Not so big of a change once I think of it in that way.

I would just say you also hit his shield but the force of your blow transfers through the Shield and staggers him slightly. Or the sword hits the wall sending splinters or shards flying. Or when trying to dodge the reach of the wide arc, the enemy over extended their knee or ankle.

 

[Bluenose]

Aren’t you a “rules matter” person?

If i didn't care about the experience the rules provide what would be the point of expressing an opinion on them.

Basically. The name D&D is too much of a millstone now when it comes to trying to do good design, because whenever you try that, you get hit with 'but does it feel like D&D, including the bad design stuff?'.

D&D has been changed before in mechanical terms - 3e to give a very obvious example decided to change how saving throws worked dramatically to weaken high-level characters' resistance to SFX - and it could happen again.

 

[JiffyPopTart]

if/when DoaM UA comes put and we try it I can see my table/players going like this…

Rogue goes first roles a 15, ah a miss, he parried you stab at the last second. The Druid swing and rolls a 16, also a miss as he blocked it with his shield. So the players are paying attention and getting an idea of the number need to hit and do roll damage. Fighter comes up rolls a 14 and i get to say…you grazed him with your greatsword or crossbow bolt and you do 3 damage. In my minds eye, I see the rogue and Druid player looking and wondering…he rolled lower than me and still did damage. At some point, mentally we could get used to it cause it feels kinda like those old to hit charts in 1e, 2e days with the number getting easier to hit for a fighter than say a mages to hit charts, and their improvement to the chart at varying levels.

Not so big of a change once I think of it in that way.

Are you saying your players wouldn't understand the concept of DoaM and understand the monsters AC is 17+ once the fighter explained their ability during session 0/1???

 

[Minigiant]

The thing about DOAM is it is just short hand for another attack.

"When you miss with this weapon, deal X damage"
vs
"When you miss with this weapon, make another attack, if this attack hits deal X+Y damage."

And if you say that is too many attacks, well that's the point.

And this reveals the other issue. Nothing short of another attack or attack equivalent is worth bothering caring about. It's the old Control spell vs Damage spell conundrum. Control spells that don't lock down or heavily debuff are not worth using over damage and vice versa. There is a level of "power" that players and DMs quickly notice.

 

[EthanSental]

Are you saying your players wouldn't understand the concept of DoaM and understand the monsters AC is 17+ once the fighter explained their ability during session 0/1???

I’m saying, still just a guess cause we havent had a chance to talk through it, that they’ll say that’s stupid as his ac is a 18 and I rolled a 15 and the other players rolled higher but missed…so I’m trying to think through how to try it. For us it seems like the short rest mechanic that we don’t use as written but tweaked for our style. They roll up various characters so they aren’t always playing x every campaign. I may just text the game group to check out this thread and DoaM and see if they post as they read some on Enworld but aren’t actively posting.

I guess my point is, DoaM is t for every table like a a lot of rules in the game. Make it an optional rule for people that want it or if the surveys say 80% think it’s cool, great but even then until we get used to the concept, may not use it. Doesn’t mean it’s archaic thinking as one poster keeps alluding too like he’s talking at the high school lunch room table about “old people” just gotten traction enough to slowly change many gamers perspective yet. Give it time and it may, talk down to everyone and people, get defensive and push back.

 

[Eubani]

The fact that the designers thought Fiighter players would accept flex ie +1 damage says a lot about what the designers think about Fighter players. No wander they believe the Fighter should be the "simple " class.

 

[EthanSental]

I guess with the last post, someone wants a fighter to scratch an itch they have in concept but aren’t getting it in the current game…probably in the 20% of feedback that don’t think it’s fun, but 80% do. I understand the frustration but dismissive remarks don’t help build the case that changes need to be made.

 

[Eubani]

I guess with the last post, someone wants a fighter to scratch an itch they have in concept but aren’t getting it in the current game…probably in the 20% of feedback that don’t think it’s fun, but 80% do. I understand the frustration but dismissive remarks don’t help build the case that changes need to be made.

Talking about dismissive.....

 

[Eubani]

Call me crazy but I think that Nick is more designed for Rangers and Rogues. I bet there is an easy way for them to access it ie feat or 1 level dip, if not outright giving them access. Fighter design has a history of letting other classes steal its lunch. What exactly does the Fighter get out of Nick? What are they using their bonus action on that this saves? What I think would be good would be an extra effect if both primary and secondary weapon hit. Oh and make it more than +1 damage, we may be Fighter players but we know how math works, believe it or not.