OJGR's House Rule #4: Martial Weapons

[Jack Daniel]

Okay, try this one on for size. Assuming that a given feat represents an amount of time training towards a specific aim, it seems that one martial weapon per feat vs. one exotic weapon per feat is not a very balanced choice. They have the same prereqs, but the exotic weapons are better and are classified as such because they're supposed to be harder to learn. The rarity of a weapon nonwithstanding, martial weapons should be easier to learn than exotic weapons.

I've seen people try to push a version that works like the Simple Weapon Proficiency, learning all martial weapons with one feat, but this seems really wrong: that's a darn powerful feat. I've also seen weapon group proficiencies, and that's a little better since there are clear-cut groups of martial weapons (swords, axes, bludgeons, polearms...) but I never liked weapon groups in AD&D, and I don't like them in D&D:d20 either. Exotic Weapon Group: Firearms? I tossed that right out the window as soon as I saw it in the DMG.

My solution is this: Allow Martial Weapon Proficiency to grant a character 1 + Int bonus martial weapons. This is, of course, making the rather broad and simplifying assumption that the training time for one exotic weapon equals some martial weapons versus all simple weapons. But that's okay IMO, because roleplaying games don't ever need to be that realistic. All I want to know is, what are the implications that might cascade off this house rule? The rarity of magical exotic weapons is one thing, but I doubt it would reduce the popularity of the EWP feat.

Thoughts?

 

[graydoom]

I really don't think that this would be imbalanced. If fighters and the rest still kept their current proficiency with all Martial weapons, I don't see this doing anything other than making INT a bit more valuable for the few people who aren't proficient with Martial weapons automatically but would like to be.

 

[Crothian]

that wouldn't be to bad. What's wrong with weapon groups, though? THe way I did it was have 7 groups that composed of all Martial weapon. Any exotic weapon still required the exotic weapon feat. No exotic weapon groups.

I've found that PCs only use a few certain types of weapons. So unless they just happen to find a very powerful weapon of a different kind, they stick to what they consider their main weapon.

 

[knight_isa]

Okay, try this one on for size. Assuming that a given feat represents an amount of time training towards a specific aim, it seems that one martial weapon per feat vs. one exotic weapon per feat is not a very balanced choice...

My solution is this: Allow Martial Weapon Proficiency to grant a character 1 + Int bonus martial weapons...

The biggest problem I see is that has the potential of a very intelligent character burning one feat to grant proficiency in 5-6 completely different weapons (ie. long sword, halberd, longbow, greataxe, flail, and lance). If someone wants to be learning that many different kinds of weapons, they ought to be taking levels in Fighter.

that wouldn't be to bad. What's wrong with weapon groups, though? THe way I did it was have 7 groups that composed of all Martial weapon. Any exotic weapon still required the exotic weapon feat. No exotic weapon groups.

I think this might be better. What were the groups?

 

[Crothian]

Here are the groups I have. Some of the weapons are forced into a group cause I felt every weapon needed to be in a group and I didn't want to have a bunch of groups. The groups aren't perfect, but they worked.

Tool types: Throwing Axe, Light Hammer, Hand Axe, Light Pick, Battle Axe, heavy pick, warhammer, great axe, scythe, Waraxe*
Lances: Light Lance, Heavy Lance
Swords: Short Sword, long sword, rapier, scimitar, falchion, great sword, Bastard sword*
Other: Sap, light flail, trident, heavy flail, great club
Pole Arm: Glaive, Guisarme, Halberd, Longspear, Ransuer
Bows: Long, Long Composite, Short, Short Composite

Both these require two hands. To weild them with one hand requires an Exotic Weapon Feat.

 

[graydoom]

Here are the groups I have. Some of the weapons are forced into a group cause I felt every weapon needed to be in a group and I didn't want to have a bunch of groups. The groups aren't perfect, but they worked.

Tool types: Throwing Axe, Light Hammer, Hand Axe, Light Pick, Battle Axe, heavy pick, warhammer, great axe, scythe, Waraxe*
Lances: Light Lance, Heavy Lance
Swords: Short Sword, long sword, rapier, scimitar, falchion, great sword, Bastard sword*
Other: Sap, light flail, trident, heavy flail, great club
Pole Arm: Glaive, Guisarme, Halberd, Longspear, Ransuer
Bows: Long, Long Composite, Short, Short Composite

Both these require two hands. To weild them with one hand requires an Exotic Weapon Feat.

Looks good. Might be good to have a "Hafted Weapon" type, it would include some of the things that are a bit out of place. Other than that, I don't see much wrong with this. Some of the categories are a bit strained, but overall it'd work.
Still, it might just be simpler to go the way of "Int bonus + 1 martial weapons learned".

 

[Crothian]

the groups are strained and not all are created equal. But I wanted a small, workible amount of groups. Another thing I did was change the weapons classes got. Barbarians, Paladin, and Rangers got 3 of the 6 groups. Fighters got all of them. I used this to further the distinction between fighters and the rest.

 

[drnuncheon]

Here are the groups I have. Some of the weapons are forced into a group cause I felt every weapon needed to be in a group and I didn't want to have a bunch of groups. The groups aren't perfect, but they worked.

Tool types: Throwing Axe, Light Hammer, Hand Axe, Light Pick, Battle Axe, heavy pick, warhammer, great axe, scythe, Waraxe*
Lances: Light Lance, Heavy Lance
Swords: Short Sword, long sword, rapier, scimitar, falchion, great sword, Bastard sword*
Other: Sap, light flail, trident, heavy flail, great club
Pole Arm: Glaive, Guisarme, Halberd, Longspear, Ransuer
Bows: Long, Long Composite, Short, Short Composite

Both these require two hands. To weild them with one hand requires an Exotic Weapon Feat.

Another option for grouping them would be by damage type and hands - I think that using a one-handed axe would be more similar to using a one-handed sword than it would be to using a two-handed axe, because the way you have to stand and move is completely different.

So: one-handed bludgeoning, two-handed bludgeoning, one-handed slashing, two-handed slashing, one-handed piercing, two-handed piercing.

For a little more realism though, I'd use the following categories:

One-handed unbalanced (axes, picks & hammers)
One-handed cutting swords (long sword, scimitar)
One-handed thrusting swords (short sword, rapier)
Spears (spears, trident, lances)
Flails (the chain makes them very different from other weapons)
Two-handed unbalanced (greataxe, war axe, greatclub)
Two-handed balanced (bastard sword, greatsword, falchion)
Slashing polearms (scythes, polearms)
Bows

Technically, polearms could be used to deal piercing damage with spear proficiency, but I wouldn't let them use any of their special abilities.

Yes, some of these groups are much larger than others. On the other hand, there's just not that much difference between how you wield a thowing axe and a battle axe - but neither are anything like how you wield a scythe or a greataxe.

 

[Magus Coeruleus]

I think the biggest danger of allowing 1+INT weapons is that it makes the feat much more effective for wizards than other classes that don't normally get martial weapons. A wizard starting with a mere 15 INT, increasing to 16 at 4th level, gets first 3, then 4 martial weapons. That really carves out a nice chunk of the drawback for being a wizard in the first place.

You could always just say that Martial Weapon gives you a flat TWO weapons, without any bonuses for ability scores.

Something I'd prefer to that, however, is giving Exotic Weapon a prerequisite of either:

1) the ability to use a Martial Weapon
2) one Martial Weapon feat

(being able to use all Martial Weapons would count in both cases).

This would mean that fighters could grab an Exotic Weapon feat right away, no issue of balance with Martial because they don't need that feat anyway. Anyone else needs to learn a martial weapon first, to "break into" the ranks of more complex weapons.

It would be up to you whether classes that have a specific weapon list that includes one or more (but not all) martial weapons should be able to take Exotic right away or would have to take a Martial feat. (If you wanted to get complicated and go on a case by case basis, you might decide whether they need a Martial feat based on whether their martial weapon seems like a cousin of the exotic weapon in question.)

Classes that start out with only simple weapons always would need two feats to get an exotic weapon--one for the Martial feat (prereq) and a second for the Exotic feat. As above, you could rule that a given exotic weapon would require one of a subset of martial weapons as a prereq.

All said and done, I personally would not house rule on this issue, since I think the rarity of exotic weapons acts as something of a balance for the fact that it requires the same 1 feat as martial weapons. Then again, this is based on a campaign where magic exotic weapons are even rarer than magic martial weapons, and where training is required for weapon-related feats, meaning you have to find someone proficient enough with the given weapon willing to teach you how to use it in the first place, and again if you want to acquire Weapon Focus, Weapon Specialization, etc.

 

[drnuncheon]

Something I'd prefer to that, however, is giving Exotic Weapon a prerequisite of either:

1) the ability to use a Martial Weapon
2) one Martial Weapon feat

Why would a wizard who wants to use a whip have to learn to use a sword first?

J