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.

 

[Lanefan]

Why not both/either? There's a lot of ways to mechanically represent the same fiction. IF damage on a miss is a mechanical feature, THEN you use descriptions like that. Simple. You can use anything you can imagine for any part of the game that makes sense to you and your table. So: Why NOT?

If you're doing damage then it's not a miss, pure and simple; it's a hit.

In fact, there's a better case to be made for no-damage-on-a-hit than DoaM. Consider a hypothetical where you're trying to punch me in the face. There's four possible outcomes: 1 - you miss outright, 2 - I block your punch somehow, 3 - you hit me but don't hurt me, or 4 - you hit me and do hurt me. 1 is clearly a miss, 4 is clearly a hit. In my view 3 is also a hit but for no damage. 2 is the messy one; there I'd call it a hit only if the block somehow hurt me and a miss if it didn't. In any case, you can't damage me without first hitting me.

 

[Lanefan]

Depend on how much it wears them down. Lets say for discussion that a greatsword does 2d6+str(5) on a hit but on a miss deals graze damage of str(5) or 3+nothing. You obviously want to hit but even a miss does something useful that adds up

That's just my point: a miss means you didn't do anything useful.

Otherwise hypothetically I could miss someone to death, which somehow seems a bit ludicrous.

 

[tetrasodium]

I suppose my parenthetical wasn't clear.

In the advent that a maximum roll and only a maximum roll changes the outcome, such as when rolling 11 damage on damage roll does not kill the target, but rolling 12 does, WITH everything else factored in, that 12 is more likely to come from the 1d12 than the 2d6. Similarly, in that scenario, a 3d4 is even worse, a 4d3 is atrocious, and a 6d2 is a farce.

Your scenario is not one that exists as a thing that matters within the confines of 5e's rules. Without flat DR the only thing it results in is "someone else kills it on their turn or it dies next round"

That's just my point: a miss means you didn't do anything useful.

Otherwise hypothetically I could miss someone to death, which somehow seems a bit ludicrous.

Yea as a GM it might be annoying having to nickel & dime monsters to deasth by a thousand paper cuts. IF flat DR returns though it could be easy bto have big monsters able to trivially nullify it like flat resist used to decimate scorching ray, that would make the ability to deal some damage on a miss great for mooks & trash/filler but not so hot against elites bruisers & BBEG class opponents

 

[W'rkncacnter]

Otherwise hypothetically I could miss someone to death, which somehow seems a bit ludicrous.

to be fair, i've seen the bard diss the BBEG to death with vicious mockery, so it's not like the game isn't ludicrous already...

(i see your point, though.)

 

[MonsterEnvy]

The rule is called Graze cause you always at least graze the enemy.

 

[Anarchclown]

Warning nerd rant incoming.

When people make statements about how rapier and dagger (which was an actual thing) should be behind a feat tax, but two short swords (where no one can even fully explain what a short sword actually is) should not be behind a feat because they are light (even though they weigh the same as a rapier and two short swords weigh more than rapier+dagger in the game) even though very few records of two stabbing (piercing) short blades being used exist at all. My brain hurts.

Biomechanics aren't just willed away. I get complete fantasy elements like having the Cloudstryfe sword because you think it is cool or being able to fly. Heck I even accept the extremely stupid double edged blade having come into existence due to Darth Maul and similar nonsense. I just don't actually know who grew up having the fantasy of "I wish I could dual wield two short stunted unwieldly stabby blades" and whether there are more of them than there are of people reading and watching fiction and historical accounts wanting to wield rapier and dagger or for that matter rapier and cloak or rapier and hat.

P.S. I claim a short sword is unwieldly because a 2 pound blade that is a dedicated stabbing sword might be a gladius that pretty much stopped being used about 1000 years before the rapier was invented because it was short, specialized at stabbing through hardened leather armor that no one used and just generally kind of crap in comparison to other later swords. It wasn't a stylistic choice, it was a "there are better longer swords around" choice. The small sword which was the lightweight civilian development of the rapier weighed under a pound. Meanwhile the rapier actually most often actually weighed closer to 3 pounds, but that's a different story.

TL: DR version. The rapier + dagger should definitely be a core option if the rapier is supposed to exist as an option at all, the two short swords option is weird as heck and doesn't need to even exist at all.

 

[Charlaquin]

I think it's hard to say that based on what we know so far, particularly with how Fighters can add effects.

I mean, I still think it’ll be generally better for Fighters to have two Masteries that are both better than Flex than to have Flex and one other Mastery that’s better than Flex.

But Flex I expect will hold its own.

I have no doubt it will be a popular choice, maybe even the most popular choice. Simple options are always very popular. I still think mathematically it’ll be one of the weaker ones. That just won’t stop people from picking it, just like it doesn’t stop people from picking Champion for their fighter subclass.

 

[Charlaquin]

If a missed attack wears down an opponent, and a hit attack wears down an opponent, then why bother rolling to hit?

You might as well ask why you even get a save against fireball, since a successful save and a failed save both deal damage. The obvious answer is, there are two different possible magnitudes of success, one of which is greater than the other. You need an attack or a save to determine which state results from the attack/spell.

 

[Charlaquin]

These things are not the same. On a half-damage save you're still "hit" by the effect; if you weren't, you'd take no damage at all.

This is also true of missed attacks with graze weapons. That’s why the mechanic is called graze.

A more parallel mechanic would be one where every time you got hit in melee you got to save to halve the damage dealt.

But that creates three possible degrees of success to a spell’s two. Fireball can either hit directly and deal full damage or hit indirectly and deal half damage; there’s no chance of a complete miss. Graze should do the same, it’s just that the attacker rolls to determine which one happens instead of the defender.

 

[Charlaquin]

That's just my point: a miss means you didn't do anything useful.

Otherwise hypothetically I could miss someone to death, which somehow seems a bit ludicrous.

Well, you’d graze them to death, which is possible. “Death by a thousand small cuts” and all.