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.

 

[Eubani]

Well, you got any examples?
What would be worth giving up some damage to achieve... something else... that resolves an encounter in a way that 5e doesn't do? I mean you could add something like SWSE's condition track, but if you incorporate actions that target that, it's essentially just an alternative hit points track.
So what do you have in mind?

Reduce hp for monsters across the board and give more interesting abilities and attacks.

 

[OldSchoolGamerGirl]

this sounds cool. I LOVE the idea that a fighter can make a different mastery effect a weapon. Now I just need some fun non combat options for the fighter and I will be able to play them as my main class again

 

[billd91]

Reduce hp for monsters across the board and give more interesting abilities and attacks.

So.... how does that encourage a fighter to give up some of their damage in favor of something else? Doing damage would just give them an even faster way to end the encounter if the target had fewer hit points than with more hit points. What's going to encourage the fighter player to change his behavior?

 

[theCourier]

As long as monsters have any HP, giving up damage is a bad choice. Fighters need to be able to consistently have control AND damage, making them choose one or the other is always going to slant it towards the latter because damage is going to end a fight. So, they deserve to be able to consistently dish out both.

 

[billd91]

As long as monsters have any HP, giving up damage is a bad choice. Fighters need to be able to consistently have control AND damage, making them choose one or the other is always going to slant it towards the latter because damage is going to end a fight. So, they deserve to be able to consistently dish out both.

This is one thing that the battlemaster's combat superiority ability recognizes. Most of the maneuvers offer the carrot of additional damage above and beyond the other mechanical effect given by the chosen maneuver. It's a pretty good incentive to use them rather than just rely on basic attacks to do damage.
And this is going to be true with anything you use whether it's hit points, condition tracks, timers - players will use whatever advances along that metric as much as they can and avoid things that don't.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Exactly

Flex is +1 damage
Graze is likely anywhere from .5 to +2 damage
Slow is as powerful as how much it slow. 10 feet is useless.
Topple and Push again don't do anything really in combat without DM help.

It's all tame "feel good" mechanics that ultimately do not do anything.

Knocking thungs down is useful regardless of the DM, and forced movement is great when needed, and okay the rest of the time. Slow too, tbh.

 

[OldSchoolGamerGirl]

So.... how does that encourage a fighter to give up some of their damage in favor of something else? Doing damage would just give them an even faster way to end the encounter if the target had fewer hit points than with more hit points. What's going to encourage the fighter player to change his behavior?

Damage isn't the issue with the fighter. I can make a fighter that out damages everyone at my table., what I can't do is make one that feels interesting and engaging

 

[Reef]

Damage isn't the issue with the fighter. I can make a fighter that out damages everyone at my table., what I can't do is make one that feels interesting and engaging

I’m assuming you mean interesting and engaging outside of combat? As someone who does play fighters, I would have thought interesting and engaging are character traits, not mechanics. Personally, mechanically, I’ve never had a problem getting a fighter to engage with non-combat aspects of the game. They might not have the breadth of skill as some classes, but with the right background it’s easy enough to have the right skills to be a non-combat asset.

 

[OldSchoolGamerGirl]

I’m assuming you mean interesting and engaging outside of combat?

both, although I get closer in combat then I ever will out.

As someone who does play fighters, I would have thought interesting and engaging are character traits, not mechanics.

when I play a wizard or a druid I have character traits AND mechanics.

Personally, mechanically, I’ve never had a problem getting a fighter to engage with non-combat aspects of the game. They might not have the breadth of skill as some classes, but with the right background it’s easy enough to have the right skills to be a non-combat asset.

skills again are something you can put on anyone (and rogue and bard do them better) there is no background for 'fighters' there are only backgrounds anyone can have.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Maybe rephrase that to 'interesting and engaging to play'.