D&D (2024) Rebalancing melee weapons for 5.5E


log in or register to remove this ad



Horwath

Legend
Hoping the spear gets some love this edition. Especially now it can't even use polearm master.

1d6/1d8 versatile, reach would be what i'd like to see with it. Spear not having reach is silly.
spear, 1Handed, simple, reach 10ft, d6(V d8) should have been from the start.

then add martial version for d8(V d10) damage.


longspear, simple, 2Handed, reach 10ft, d10 damage


pike should be simple weapon also.

Pike, simple, 2Handed, Heavy, reach 10ft, d12 damage
 

tetrasodium

Legend
Supporter
Epic
I think it would be an improvement if martial weapons went with more but smaller dice rather than big dice. a 3d4 greatsword or greataxe has the same max as 2d6 & 1d12 but better min & more reliable average
The average doesn't change significantly but two things happen that very much reflect the greater skill needed to use martial weapons. Firstly the average roll trends slightly towards the middle rather than min or max making 1+attrib impossible & a 1+1+attrib roll fairly uncommon compared to the much more common +1+(1)+attrib roll. Secondly it does reduce the odds of max+max+attrib rolls but any ability that shifts a roll of 1 or 2 roll up to an automatic 2 or 3 becomes much more valuable. The reroll 1&2 of GWF in both 2014 5e & the expert packet should shift from reroll 1s &2s just to a straight 1&2=3 just to save us all time of watching bob reroll all his 1s & 2s then recalculate the result every attack every round
 

I think it would be an improvement if martial weapons went with more but smaller dice rather than big dice. a 3d4 greatsword or greataxe has the same max as 2d6 & 1d12 but better min & more reliable average
The average doesn't change significantly but two things happen that very much reflect the greater skill needed to use martial weapons. Firstly the average roll trends slightly towards the middle rather than min or max making 1+attrib impossible & a 1+1+attrib roll fairly uncommon compared to the much more common +1+(1)+attrib roll. Secondly it does reduce the odds of max+max+attrib rolls but any ability that shifts a roll of 1 or 2 roll up to an automatic 2 or 3 becomes much more valuable. The reroll 1&2 of GWF in both 2014 5e & the expert packet should shift from reroll 1s &2s just to a straight 1&2=3 just to save us all time of watching bob reroll all his 1s & 2s then recalculate the result every attack every round
This is what we did with Katanas and wakizashis in a game we played. We made them long swords and short swords.

Katana did 2d4 and V 2d5
wakizashi did 2d3.
this was just to reflect that these weapons were of greater quality than the average long sword. It was a small change.
It synergized with Two Handed Weapon Fighting Style which allowed you to reroll 1s and 2s. When you used the Katana in two hands and were rolling 2d5, it really skewed your damage higher. But it seems like a small advantage and not overly broken.
 

Sacrosanct

Legend
IMO, I think the approach is wrong to begin with. Instead of simple and martial weapons, there should be simple and martial training. No one will ever agree 100% over what is a simple weapon and what should be a martial weapon, but we can all agree that certain classes might only be simply trained with weapons and others more robust martial training.

Base damage a based on training. That reflects how a short sword in a fighters hand will be more effective than in a wizards hand.

And no, complex tables would be a mistake. Most people don’t want them. We’ve seen this over and over, starting with 1e and how each weapon did something different, and most players ignored it.
 

IMO, I think the approach is wrong to begin with. Instead of simple and martial weapons, there should be simple and martial training. No one will ever agree 100% over what is a simple weapon and what should be a martial weapon, but we can all agree that certain classes might only be simply trained with weapons and others more robust martial training.

Base damage a based on training. That reflects how a short sword in a fighters hand will be more effective than in a wizards hand.

And no, complex tables would be a mistake. Most people don’t want them. We’ve seen this over and over, starting with 1e and how each weapon did something different, and most players ignored it.
varying damage based on training is a super way of doing it.
 

double-post:
I wonder if you could go even further and have classes unlock certain features for weapons. So, on top of there being higher damage for martial weapon training, even though short sword is finesse but only rogues get access to finesse at first level. Only fighters, barbarians and rangers can use long swords in one hand as a versatile weapon. (as an example)
 

leozg

DM
IMO, I think the approach is wrong to begin with. Instead of simple and martial weapons, there should be simple and martial training. No one will ever agree 100% over what is a simple weapon and what should be a martial weapon, but we can all agree that certain classes might only be simply trained with weapons and others more robust martial training.

Base damage a based on training. That reflects how a short sword in a fighters hand will be more effective than in a wizards hand.

And no, complex tables would be a mistake. Most people don’t want them. We’ve seen this over and over, starting with 1e and how each weapon did something different, and most players ignored it.
Would you agree to do the same with spells? Remove spell damage, base spell damage on magic training?
 

Remove ads

AD6_gamerati_skyscraper

Remove ads

Upcoming Releases

Top