D&D General Practical advice for running 5.5e and 5e PCs side by side

[OB1]

I like weapon masteries but objectively they can slow the game down and make it more complex.

Whether or not thats a good or bad thing is subjective.

Newer players often forget they exist. Experienced players no bg deal.

I've never seen a new player forget they exist. It's a core piece of the character for them because they never new a system without them. I've see 5e vets forget them for a session or two, until someone uses one to great effect and then it's locked in.

Which will objectively slow the game down and make it more complex to a greater degree? A fighter with 2 weapon masteries at 5th level, or a Druid at 5th level? It's the second.

I'm not arguing that weapon masteries don't make martials take a slight bit more time, I'm arguing that they don't objectively take more time than a full caster of the same level.

The fun they bring, to me, is worth the slight bump in time, and I would hate to see OP decide to preemptively get rid of them out of fear that combat is going to become a slog that takes forever. I haven't had a single player come up to me since making the switch to complain that combat is too slow or boring. Quite the opposite.

 

[TwoSix]

This is the worst case, and its less bad than a caster. And having weapon masteries helps that people not all are playing casters because martials are underpowered and boring.

I don’t mind the powering up martials part, I just don’t like the implementation.

Some of the masteries are fine, like Nick. I just don’t like the fiddly ones that require more rolls or apply a minor status effect that has to be remembered on an NPC’s turn. (I don’t like cantrips like Ray of Frost that do a similar thing, either.)

 

[Whisper-Kitten]

Weapon masteries dont really add more slowdown to combat especially compared to what spells and cantrips do.

Its only a problem in the beginning when people dont know what their basic attacks do.

We play with them and what makes much a bigger difference is if people can roll their dice alltogether. (Advantage dice + noemal dice + damage already as one roll).

The biggest slowdown we have are still spells which are not 100% clear what they do and lead to discussion.


The only weapon mastery which can slow things down a bit is the one with the trip needing an extra saving throw.

Not to mention that players often forget about them.

 

[Whisper-Kitten]

I've never seen a new player forget they exist. It's a core piece of the character for them because they never new a system without them. I've see 5e vets forget them for a session or two, until someone uses one to great effect and then it's locked in.

Which will objectively slow the game down and make it more complex to a greater degree? A fighter with 2 weapon masteries at 5th level, or a Druid at 5th level? It's the second.

I'm not arguing that weapon masteries don't make martials take a slight bit more time, I'm arguing that they don't objectively take more time than a full caster of the same level.

The fun they bring, to me, is worth the slight bump in time, and I would hate to see OP decide to preemptively get rid of them out of fear that combat is going to become a slog that takes forever. I haven't had a single player come up to me since making the switch to complain that combat is too slow or boring. Quite the opposite.

I dont know. I never remember them and in the game that I occasionaly gm for my niece the players tend to forget them pretty often.

 

[Zardnaar]

I've never seen a new player forget they exist. It's a core piece of the character for them because they never new a system without them. I've see 5e vets forget them for a session or two, until someone uses one to great effect and then it's locked in.

Which will objectively slow the game down and make it more complex to a greater degree? A fighter with 2 weapon masteries at 5th level, or a Druid at 5th level? It's the second.

I'm not arguing that weapon masteries don't make martials take a slight bit more time, I'm arguing that they don't objectively take more time than a full caster of the same level.

The fun they bring, to me, is worth the slight bump in time, and I would hate to see OP decide to preemptively get rid of them out of fear that combat is going to become a slog that takes forever. I haven't had a single player come up to me since making the switch to complain that combat is too slow or boring. Quite the opposite.

Difference is Druids are opt in. Now there's no simple class as such.

Easy for veterans but just what I've noticed with the 2024 starter+ newbies and even veterans.

Its more slow down on top of what Druids are also doing. Some are easy eg graze then theres topple.

 

[Horwath]

Only weapon mastery that slows combat down is topple.
One workaround is, when you beat AC by 5 or more, you topple the target, no save. That removes the extra roll for a save.

 

[Zardnaar]

Only weapon mastery that slows combat down is topple.
One workaround is, when you beat AC by 5 or more, you topple the target, no save. That removes the extra roll for a save.

Cleave as well plus hew keeping track of it all.

Just more stuff to keep track of. I've seen veterans write down 4 attack lines.

Otherwise they're adding up different numbers depending on what's triggered.

 

[CreamCloud0]

I've had 2 PCs make characters with weapon masteries. After 2 sessions of "oh, I had advantage on that attack, I forgot" and "oh, that guy has to make a save or be prone, I forgot", I asked if they wanted to keep the masteries OR get a free +2 to Str or Dex.

Haven't seen weapon masteries since, and everyone is happier.

i feel like the only thing this 'proves' is that players typically value having higher stats.

there's alot of features i reckon that players would be willing to trade in for an extra ASI given the opportunity, that if you allowed it as a general rule your player characters would be alot lighter on features with far more inflated stats.

 

[Horwath]

i feel like the only thing this 'proves' is that players typically value having higher stats.

there's alot of features i reckon that players would be willing to trade in for an extra ASI given the opportunity, that if you allowed it as a general rule your player characters would be alot lighter on features with far more inflated stats.

there is always a battle between "active" and "passive" abilities in any RPG game.

it's about how much buttons I want to push in the fight vs how much I can upgrade few buttons.

 

[TwoSix]

i feel like the only thing this 'proves' is that players typically value having higher stats.

there's alot of features i reckon that players would be willing to trade in for an extra ASI given the opportunity, that if you allowed it as a general rule your player characters would be alot lighter on features with far more inflated stats.

Yes? It “proves” (I mean, it doesn’t really prove anything, it’s an anecdote) that players will trade complexity for even a relatively simple power boost. Which only demonstrates that some players aren’t attached to the fiddly complexity and prefer “numbers go up”.