D&D 5E Should the game have extensive weapon lists?

[Eubani]

Just saw UA lucky for spell casters new spells are never too much overhead.

 

[Azurewraith]

The current list is ok apart from a few things (quarter staffs Long swords) you know the usual studded leather debates.

What bugs me is you are effectively picking a range damage type(like those ever come up). What I want is each weapon to be a conscious choice not just DUH DOES MOST DAMAGEZZZ. Things like armour piercing or straight up avoiding. Hell give me a rock, paper," lizard Spock armour resistance table.

 

[thedjally]

The current list is ok apart from a few things (quarter staffs Long swords) you know the usual studded leather debates.

What bugs me is you are effectively picking a range damage type(like those ever come up). What I want is each weapon to be a conscious choice not just DUH DOES MOST DAMAGEZZZ. Things like armour piercing or straight up avoiding. Hell give me a rock, paper," lizard Spock armour resistance table.

I just want there to he options to do things other than straight attacks as a martial character. Battlemaster is great but it's literally the only non spellcasting martial class with in combat utility. Meanwhile the wizard can fireball one turn and hold person the next while being considered completely invisible the whole time.

 

[Azurewraith]

I just want there to he options to do things other than straight attacks as a martial character. Battlemaster is great but it's literally the only non spellcasting martial class with in combat utility. Meanwhile the wizard can fireball one turn and hold person the next while being considered completely invisible the whole time.

Its why I loved 4e martials they could do stuff.

 

[Tony Vargas]

My issue is with how they've pigeonholed every martial class's turn into "I swing with my weapon".

To be fair, there are a number of thrusting weapons - one, the rapier, is even an optimal weapon for many builds - and excellent ranged options, as well. Besides, there is no 'martial class' that cannot also use spells to some degree in at least one sub-class.

I would prefer if battle master was rolled into the fighter class and there were further archetypes that provided unique abilities / benefits (as current archetypes do) and then the player could select from the list manouvers and list of archetypes to make more interesting martial characters.

That'd defeat(npi) the purpose of the 'simple fighter' concept.

Adding more spells quite clearly complicates the "weapon" of spellcasting by virtue of adding more options.

Well, sure, and spells are more complex and varied than weapons in the first place. Most of the game's complexity exists in it's several magic systems, afterall.

The thing is, if you want options an complexity, you play a full neo-Vancian caster like a Wizard, Cleric, or Druid. If you want a simple character, you play a Champion fighter, slightly less simple, a Berserker, BM, Thief, or Assassin. The other classes and sub-classes (and optional Multi-classing) fill in the continuum between, if not exactly evenly.

Not to mention that each spell is it's own self contained mechanic with varying levels of complexity. Imagine the outcry if there were a similar number of martial maneuvers.

Remember the outrcy. It started in 2008 and hardly let up for years. You can still here it echoing in the Warlord threads.

Is there some reason I don't know of that you can't just make it a "Sunspear"?

There's no reason you can't, other than tradition, and expectation. 3.x, for instance, had item-crafting rules that allowed you to graft any enchantment onto any weapon. You could have a holy avenger whip or a life-stealing sap or whatever. 5e doesn't go there - though it doesn't tell you can't go there, it also doesn't point out that there's a 'there' there for you to go to.

;|

 

[Gradine]

In my games martial characters do things other than attack over and over again in combat all the time. Do they not in yours?

 

[thedjally]

In my games martial characters do things other than attack over and over again in combat all the time. Do they not in yours?

Imean I play battlemasters​ so I do all kinds of . Without variant rules you can also do what, grapple or shove?

 

[Azurewraith]

In my games martial characters do things other than attack over and over again in combat all the time. Do they not in yours?

No they hit again and again untilled either it dies or they do.

 

[Gradine]

Imean I play battlemasters​ so I do all kinds of . Without variant rules you can also do what, grapple or shove?

They can swing on chandeliers and ropes and slide down banisters and across tables. Trip up foes or shove them into pits. Create bottlenecks or use foes as human goblin shields. They can use every aspect of the environment to their advantage and often do. I'm not aware of any variant rules I'm using to run any of this...

No they hit again and again untilled either it dies or they do.

It might help to create more varied encounter types; think about using the environment or presenting more varied win/lose conditions than "they die/you die". You might be surprised how inventive players get when you give the room and encouragement to try tactics other than "I hit it until it's not a problem anymore."

 

[Azurewraith]

They can swing on chandeliers and ropes and slide down banisters and across tables. Trip up foes or shove them into pits. Create bottlenecks or use foes as human goblin shields. They can use every aspect of the environment to their advantage and often do. I'm not aware of any variant rules I'm using to run any of this...



It might help to create more varied encounter types; think about using the environment or presenting more varied win/lose conditions than "they die/you die". You might be surprised how inventive players get when you give the room and encouragement to try tactics other than "I hit it until it's not a problem anymore."

Why would my martials do any of that? The casters can do all of that from a range of 60ft and fly to boot.