D&D General [rant]The conservatism of D&D fans is exhausting.

[Maxperson]

Using weapons and being proficient in weapons are not the same thing. Why do I need to keep saying this over and over?

Because you aren't understanding.

The PHB does not say commoners are proficient in all simple weapons. You keep claiming this, but those words are not there.

"Most people" when talking about PCs in wording that was changed for 2024 <> "All Commoners"

The PHB is NOT talking about PCs. It's talking about the entire game, which is why the DMG says the PHB contains the rules to play the ENTIRE GAME. You keep trying to make this about PCs and nowhere does it limit the PHB to PCs.

The section you are talking about in context is specifically about PC proficiency, and it was changed in the 2024 rules

If you option the 5.5e rules, sure. The 5e rules are just as valid, though. And I really don't know all the wording for the 5.5e PHB, so you might not be right there, either.

Oh yes but it is not all simple weapons (in 2014). So you have commoners that are automatically proficient in weapons that seasoned adventures are not proficient in?

No matter how you twist and shout, you can't avoid that most people(which includes commoners who are in fact most of the people in existence) are proficient with simple weapons.

Yes. Because they are commoners. Unless the weapon is so simple that virtually no skill is required or they are using the weapon daily, like hunting with it, slaughtering livestock with it .... then they should not be proficient in it IMO.

And that's a fair opinion. It's just not RAW. RAW says that most people, and commoners are in fact most people in existence, are proficient with simple weapons. There is no limiter there. It doesn't say most simple weapons, so they are proficient with all of them.

Apparently, wizards, sorcerers, and druids are not a part of the "most people."

Actually the game does describe it:

2014: "Gladiators battle for the entertainment of raucous crowds. Some gladiators are brutal pit fighters who treat each match as a life-or-death struggle, while others are professional duelists who command huge fees but rarely fight to the death."

2024: "Gladiators are professional fighters who pit themselves against one another, monsters, and other challenges to entertain audiences. While some compete merely to survive, others love the thrill of performing—and all gladiators know the importance of theatrics in keeping audiences excited."

IRL Gladiators are actors more than anything else. In ancient Rome they specialized in specific fighting styles. So a "Galus" would have been proficient in heavy weapons and heavy armor used by the Guals, while a "Dimacherous" would have fought in no armor and with a Gladius (short Sword) in one hand and a Sica (Dagger) in the other.

So yes Gladiators were very specialized and "proficienT" with specific weapons and armor.

How much do you want to bet that if a gladiator subclass ever comes, it will be a subclass of fighter and be proficient in all simple and martial weapons? The NPC gladiator is a fighter with a gladiator subclass, but built via the NPC stat block rules.

They are easy to use, they are not easy to use effectively, especially in combat. Have you ever tried to hunt with a crossbow?

I've practiced a small amount with one. It wasn't hard to hit the target.

No it doesn't and it is not easy to be proficient with a crossbow. It is easy to fire it. It is not easy to hit something with it.

Real world history disagrees with you. The ease with which commoners could purchase and learn to use them changed the battlefield.

 

[Faolyn]

Because I like talking about RPGs, and the kind of games I don't like keep coming up in seemingly every discussion. If I want to discuss the hobby in any significant way I have to address the narrative elephant in the room.

Or, y'know, you could just ignore those parts of the thread and talk about something else. Or start a thread talking about the things you like.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Or, y'know, you could just ignore those parts of the thread and talk about something else. Or start a thread talking about the things you like.

There are plenty of threads talking about things I like. They still end up talking about things I don't like. Ignoring the parts I don't like is not realistic or fair, and neither is asking me not to post unless I have something positive to say (which is functionally what you're doing).

 

[Faolyn]

What kind of cover do you expect to have while flying? If slings bother you, how about light crossbows. Not exactly a stretch that a town could have a militia of 100 light crossbowmen or archers. "In formation" means, hey guys spread out a bit so it can't breathe on all of you at once. Not exactly Navy Seals here.

Any town of 1000 people or more could easily field this. Not city. Not huge settlement. Any town. This would be the minimum militia I would assume for a town that size. An Adult Green Dragon has a 19 AC. That means that our commoners are hitting on a 17 or better. TWENTY PERCENT per round. With a quarter of those being crits. So, 25d6 damage/round. It's only got 207 HP. That means an adult green dragon dies in about 4 rounds against COMMONERS. Not even soldiers or guards.

This is why I talk about D&D being such an incredibly poor simulation. Dragons are supposed to be these terrifying engines of destruction. Yet, against the weakest units a town could muster, a dragon dies. The mechanics just don't match the narrative.

Using 5.14 rules, on its turn, the dragon can use its three physical attacks (all of which do enough damage to automatically kill a 4 hp peasant or 11 hp guard) and then use its Frightful Presence (Wis save 16). With a 120-foot radius range, how many of those peasants or guards, neither of which have a Wisdom bonus, will make that save?

The adult dragon can also use its Legendary Actions. Its Tail Attack will automatically kill a peasant and will almost certainly kill a guard. Its Wing Attack requires everyone within 20 feet of the dragon make a DC 19 Dex save (+0 for peasants, +1 for guards) or take 2d6+6 damage (all peasants automatically killed, and it's quite likely that the guards will be as well, and even if they survive, they're prone). The dragon can then fly up to 40 feet away, so any townsfolk that thought themselves safe because they were spread out are a lot less safe now.

And remember that the dragon can also make its normal move in addition to the move included in Wing Attack, so it can reposition itself so that Wing Attack will take out a lot of the opposing forces.

Those people who are frightened now have disadvantage on their next attack against the dragon, so they have to roll a 17 or better on 2d20. It's suddenly a lot less likely that so many of them will succeed, yeah? Oh, and they will stay frightened for a minute, unless they somehow manage that DC 16 Wis save. So most of them will have disad for the remainder of the battle.

And then on its next turn, the dragon can use its breath weapon. Everyone in a 60-foot cone--and remember, it can move to get the best effect out of it--will die even if they succeed on their save. DC 18 Con save (+0 for peasants, +1 for guards, 16d6 poison damage; even if the dragon rolled a 1 on every d6, that's more than enough to kill the guards). And then the dragon gets more Legendary Actions.

And that's without assuming regional effects, spells, minions (which green dragons are notorious for using), or particularly clever tactics (Int 18, so those tactics would be pretty clever).

Just for funsies, I used rolladie to roll a d20 150 times to see how many people would make their save against the Frightful Presence, just on the assumption that they were all within 120 feet of the dragon. Since the dragon would be smart enough to position itself in a way that the vast majority of its attackers would be able to be in hit by its fear, of course. A mere 34 of those results were 16 or higher.

After round one, 116 townsfolk will make their next attack at disadvantage. How likely is it that they will roll a 19 or 20 on both of their d20s? Google says about 1%. So, round 2, one, maybe two townsfolk will hit. And there's a 1/3 chance that the dragon can use its breath again, but even if it can't, that wing attack is pretty nasty.

Because by the end of round two, I'd wager least a third of them will be dead.

The mechanics match the narrative just fine if you actually pay attention to them.