D&D 5E Non choices: must have and wants why someone that hates something must take it

[Lokiare]

Why would I care what the totals from a 1e module that was loosely adapted to 5e so people had something to play early on says about actual 5e rules for treasure? I have the actual rules from the playtest document itself and those rules saying nothing like that. I am sure that 1e module has magic weapons and armor you can find as well in larger quantities, and those are also clearly not part of 5e at such a level.

I've said it before and I will say it again - if you're going to be so vehement in your opinions, you need to actually read the rules you're debating. Go read them, and argue based on what's actually in them rather than this weird cobbled-together half-wrong information you seem to utilize between older versions of the playtest rules and earlier 1e adapted modules and stuff you've heard on message boards and earlier development articles and speculation.

I've read the rules, but I'm looking at the adventures that were put into the play test. They all end up with each character getting plate mail by the end of the adventure. There is no indication WotC will change these things later.

In fact if someone could count up the treasure in the adventure they released at the convention that was supposedly made specifically for 5E, that would be helpful.

 

[Mistwell]

I've read the rules, but I'm looking at the adventures that were put into the play test. They all end up with each character getting plate mail by the end of the adventure. There is no indication WotC will change these things later.

In fact if someone could count up the treasure in the adventure they released at the convention that was supposedly made specifically for 5E, that would be helpful.

I am reading through Scourge of the Sword Coast, so let's use that.

First I counted the gp value of everything, and it added up to about 13,000 gp to split between the party (this takes you to level 4). Now some of that is really heavy and bulky stuff that might be difficult to get out and get to a place you can sell it, but it's in there so I counted all of it. It's unclear how many players this is intended for, but probably 4-6? Assuming 5, that's 2600 gp each, if you find everything, haul it all out, and manage to get it back to a town and find a buyer.

It also has what I consider a lot of magic items, including: several Scrolls, several potions, Boots of Striding and Springing, +1 chainmail, +1 warhammer, a spellguard shield, a Spellbook, a +1 long sword, +1 studded dragon leather armor, another +1 long sword, a bag of holding, a +1 silvered greataxe, and a +1 Dagger. It also has a magic sword called Lawflame, but it's unclear if that is +1 or just flametongue, and I don't know if you get to keep it (I think you don't as it belongs to the Duke).

 

[Cybit]

I've read the rules, but I'm looking at the adventures that were put into the play test. They all end up with each character getting plate mail by the end of the adventure. There is no indication WotC will change these things later.

In fact if someone could count up the treasure in the adventure they released at the convention that was supposedly made specifically for 5E, that would be helpful.

Based on my experience, I think this is a situation where the standard deviation will be higher than the average. SotSC is a good template I think though.

I think saying at 4th level a fighter has access to plate is a fair statement - assuming a swashbuckler type build is supported, I could see it being dragged into a feat or an archetype, which per the L&L, would be level 3 or 4 (if levels 1 and 2 end up being "beginner" levels).

 

[Ulrick]

I guess it all depends on if humans have free will or not.

If they don't, then they truly have no choice but to except the rules as written, without alterations.

If they do, then only by coercion or force can they be "made" to except things they don't like. But, according to philosophes like Rousseau, this would be an "unnatural" convention...

 

[Herobizkit]

I once made a 2e Fighter with the Swashbuckler kit who fought in plate mail and used a rapier. I'd do it in any edition of D&D and never once consider it sub-optimal because fighter-in-plate-mail-and-small-pointy-sword.

I based her off the character of Charlotte in the SNK arcade fighter Samurai Shodown. :3

Not that Wikipedia is THE source, but when I look up epee (Charlotte's sword)...

The épée /ˈɛpeɪ/ is the modern derivative of the dueling sword, the smallsword (itself descended from the rapier), used in sport fencing.

Small sword's a rapier, mang. A short sword is simply a longer dagger that's not as long as a longsword.

 

[Lokiare]

I once made a 2e Fighter with the Swashbuckler kit who fought in plate mail and used a rapier. I'd do it in any edition of D&D and never once consider it sub-optimal because fighter-in-plate-mail-and-small-pointy-sword.

I based her off the character of Charlotte in the SNK arcade fighter Samurai Shodown. :3

Not that Wikipedia is THE source, but when I look up epee (Charlotte's sword)...



Small sword's a rapier, mang. A short sword is simply a longer dagger that's not as long as a longsword.

the small sword is descended from the rapier in a similar way as the two handed sword is descended from the longsword. yet the long sword and two handed sword have different stats in dnd.

 

[Argyle King]

Small Sword is not a Rapier. It is most certainly a weapon which evolved from a Rapier, but a Small Sword is a different weapon. However, I do not believe there is enough granularity when it comes to D&D or D&D equipment for the difference to matter. (In other rpgs, it does matter.) In actual practice there are significant differences between the two, but they are close enough in style that I believe they would appear to be the same to most people; at least people not fluent in what the differences are and why they matter or why the weapons are designed differently.

It's kind of a moot point anyway because the terms for D&D weapons and armor map very poorly to terms used for weapons in our own real world history. For example, what D&D calls 'studded leather' is most likely more similar to brigandine. I only bring that up because -despite the fact that I personally enjoy a bit more verisimilitude when it comes to equipment- I've grown to be comfortable and ok with D&D's broad classifications, and I realize that arguing over whether one specific option has accurate nomenclature or not is silly in the face of an entire list which cares little for anything resembling historical accuracy.

 

[Lokiare]

Small Sword is not a Rapier. It is most certainly a weapon which evolved from a Rapier, but a Small Sword is a different weapon. However, I do not believe there is enough granularity when it comes to D&D or D&D equipment for the difference to matter. (In other rpgs, it does matter.) In actual practice there are significant differences between the two, but they are close enough in style that I believe they would appear to be the same to most people; at least people not fluent in what the differences are and why they matter or why the weapons are designed differently.

It's kind of a moot point anyway because the terms for D&D weapons and armor map very poorly to terms used for weapons in our own real world history. For example, what D&D calls 'studded leather' is most likely more similar to brigandine. I only bring that up because -despite the fact that I personally enjoy a bit more verisimilitude when it comes to equipment- I've grown to be comfortable and ok with D&D's broad classifications, and I realize that arguing over whether one specific option has accurate nomenclature or not is silly in the face of an entire list which cares little for anything resembling historical accuracy.

The problem is, by the same classification a long sword and short sword are the same thing and should be the same weapon.

The different between the two is that a long sword is much longer than a short sword. The same difference between a rapier and a small sword.

Thus the idea that it should be under a different category.

Hopefully they'll put out a historically accurate module that has each sword listed from history, but until then we have to classify weapons the way they do in D&D and the small sword fits a lesser damage type and should thus be merged with short sword rather than rapier.

 

[Hussar]

Rotflmao. DnD with historically accurate weapons? Yeah that'll happen.

Hint - how many hands does it take to use a real word longsword?

 

[Mistwell]

I still prefer the Old School Hack method of weapon classification. At character creation you pick Light, Reach, Ranged, Heavy, or Very Heavy (each has their distinct advantages and disadvantages) and then you as a player are free to describe what the weapon looks like, as long as it makes sense.

So if you want to call your light weapon a Small Sword, you can do it. Or, if you want to call it a heavy weapon, you can do that. As long as it could logically fit in either category, it would be fine (though it's fixed once you choose).

This allows a LOT more flexibility in character customization, without any rules changes.