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.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

But as the 3.5 Spike Chain user showed, I don't want knock down spamming to be optimal due to a player being able to knock down and deal full damage every turn.

I’ve no idea what on earth that is, because 3.5 was the worst TTRPG I ever tried to play, but that sounds like decent feedback for the survey, I’d topple does what we are all assuming it will do.

 

[Minigiant]

I’ve no idea what on earth that is, because 3.5 was the worst TTRPG I ever tried to play, but that sounds like decent feedback for the survey, I’d topple does what we are all assuming it will do.

Because of how 3.Xe designed fighters, players would be encouraged to use cheese tactics. The spiked chainer was a fighter build that allowed fighters to deal damage and provide control via rips and disarms every turn to human shaped weapon using foes. It allow look stupid in one's imagination.

I don't think many people want 5e to see a flood of halberdiers and maulers spamming damage+knock down.
I fear masteries bringing back annoying One Trick Pony Spam Fighters due to fighters being "resourceless". This is why I'd prefer masteries unlocking optional attack alternatives like parrying, choking up, lunging, twirling, blocking, switching damage type, executing, or wide swinging,

Like I fear Cleave, will be triggered on kill instead of opening the option to deal less damage to 2 enemies in reach.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Like I fear Cleave, will be triggered on kill instead of opening the option to deal less damage to 2 enemies in reach.

If so then it would seem they’re building parts of weapons feats into weapons and classes, which isn’t terrible.

If it’s crit or kill like the feat, I don’t see the problem.

 

[Minigiant]

If so then it would seem they’re building parts of weapons feats into weapons and classes, which isn’t terrible.

If it’s crit or kill like the feat, I don’t see the problem.

It's not bad. Just lame.

Fantasy video games have figured some of these things off and display the pro and cons of each path. D&D is older than video games but refuses to learn from them.

I mean I can play a game like Battle Brothers whch is all weapon combat. However it makes weapon choice and weapon mastery fun and meaningful.

 

[Chaosmancer]

So maybe the better answer is to bring some of that back, and provide that context once again where the Fighter can hold its own.

The issue with that is that study after study, practical example after practical example, shows that people don't like balance to be enforced with nerfs.

If it were a single poorly designed item, or a single OP monster, that would be different, people can accept that. But we are talking about fundamentally rewriting the game. To nerf the majority of classes. All so we don't have to buff fighters.

Why? Why not just buff fighters? It is SOO much simpler and will be so much better received.

That's kinda poor design, actually.

I say this in part as I've been reading along here waiting for someone to post the idea of a weapon's Mastery ability being to stop the foe from moving at all (i.e. its move speed becomes 0) for a round, and if I didn't see it I was going to post it myself. Yet here you're saying that slowing effects like Lance of Lethargy can't even stack to produce a zero move speed.

Actually, I don't think it is poor design. If it stacked, then every single Warlock would be able to reduce any enemy to 0 movement, from 600 ft away. Every single warlock getting an at-will ability to win any fight. That is far too broken.

Well, yes you can, if for example each "extra" time you're made prone added another round to how long you have to stay down.

Thus, if you're made prone three times in one round, thats three rounds before you can even think about getting to your feet; three rounds during which the foes can tack on more prone-bestowing abilities that could, in the end, see you spend the rest of your (probably now very short) life lying on the ground.

And that doesn't make you more prone, just prone for longer, and that sort of dynamic track would be a pain in the neck to track, for no real benefit. Because if you can knock someone prone multiple times a round, you can just knock them prone once per round. Or you could grapple them to give them a movement speed of zero, which prevents them from getting back up.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Like I fear Cleave, will be triggered on kill instead of opening the option to deal less damage to 2 enemies in reach.

According to the grapevine, it does trigger on a kill, but in a way I really really like. Supposedly, the damage from a cleave is the spillover damage. So, let us say you kill an enemy with 10 damage, but they only had 6 hp, then you can deal 4 damage to another enemy in range.

I kind of like this, because like the Graze, the idea is to increase reliability.

 

[OldSchoolGamerGirl]

I have to ask: which older editions and what did they have that's lacking now with the fighters you're playing? What got lost?

1e/2e and it's not what they lost its what got added to everyone.

in TSR days there were no skills as we have them now, you juust roll played and made attribute checks. FOr a while there were non weapon profs but even that was still not like current skills. So outside of combat unless you were aranger rogue bard or barbarian you didn't have a way to do non combat things other then rp.
Back then the fighter was king of combat though, not just damage but hitting and it wasn't close.

a fighter and a wizard with the same str, that was the only attack stat, had the same chance to hit at 1st level only. If you had a +1 to hit and damge in 2e, and that is a good str, at 3rd level the fighter had 2 better to hit.

each edition starting in 3rd they gave the casters more and more. skills became anyone had a way to interact with skill, but casters kept there auto win spells. Castters got better at attacks, got at will attacks and fighters got worse at attacking. Casters spells got harder to resisit and fighters could no longer reliably at mid to high level shrug them off.


5th edition with everyone being able to up and down cast and no prep per spell level really was the final nail int he coffin as the wizard cleric ect all got more and more flexible and more and more combat survivable but the fighter got little new.

 

[OldSchoolGamerGirl]

I can't speak to there,experiences but there are two angles to take here.

1) Fighters lost quite a few things in defensive abilities over the years, and if we go far enough back, the inclusion of the rogue carved out a lot of the skill-based things the fighter used to do.

2) It is also important to recognize what other classes gained. The ability to leap 8 ft in the air, or 20 ft across a gap isn't as useful when every caster has a remote flying drone that they can send anywhere, to interact with anything, and without major penalties. And, every class is good in a fight. Fighters might, mathematically, barely, with feats and magic items, eek out ahead as the best at fighting, but if you play RAW with no feats and no magic items... they aren't even the best at fighting anymore.

Even if fighters lost nothing (and they did lose somethings) everyone else has GAINED a lot, which still creates a problem. After all, you don't play an AD&D fighter in a 5e game.

exactly. in 1e and 2e the fighter was the explorer the diplomat and the warrior, in 3e and beyond he is at best a damage dealer at worst a door stop.

 

[OldSchoolGamerGirl]

I mean, WotC is trying with adventures like Witchlight and Golden Vault. They have a way to go to be successful, but it's not like they ever nailed down combat-intensive design either...

and the mage school setting too

 

[CleverNickName]

Why? Why not just buff fighters? It is SOO much simpler and will be so much better received.

With the way multiclassing is currently written, any buff to the Fighter class would also be a buff to Wizards, Sorcerers, pretty much any class... and the earlier these buffs become available, the worse it will spread. Part of the trouble with adding power to the game is keeping it from creeping into areas where it isn't needed.

I'm not saying they don't need to buff the Fighter; I'm saying they need to make sure those buffs stay with the Fighter.