Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 8680939" data-attributes="member: 82106"><p>Well, with 4e's weapons the thing was that the more vanilla weapons generally were just not paid much attention to. So, your basic war hammer, yes there are feats, including some of the 'fighting style' ones that can be applied to it, and all the core weapons are PRETTY WELL balanced out to begin with (some are more appealing than others, like there's not a ton of reasons to use a short sword, but that's not inherent to the weapon itself). The problem is that the more 'advanced' weapons ARE better, so you would replace your warhammer with a crag hammer, you just would, its outright better. OTOH it takes a feat to get that. Now, dwarves have a stupid good racial feat that grants access to it, so basically there are zero dwarves using basic warhammers (maybe a few that are clerics or whatever).&nbsp; Some entire classes of weapons never really got incredibly good as well. Like maces have some stuff, but basically its a blah weapon category. Someone tried to spice it up with the Ruthless Ruffian Rogue build, but it was still very slightly less optimum than other builds. Picks, just not really worth it. Even with that said though, there are some good mace and pick feats and whatnot, they're just not the 'gold' or 'sky blue' options. Basically, while the specific weapons that are 'best' and 'not best' differ slightly between 4e and 5e, the range of difference from best to 'worst' is pretty similar.</p></blockquote><p></p>

[QUOTE="AbdulAlhazred, post: 8680939, member: 82106"] Well, with 4e's weapons the thing was that the more vanilla weapons generally were just not paid much attention to. So, your basic war hammer, yes there are feats, including some of the 'fighting style' ones that can be applied to it, and all the core weapons are PRETTY WELL balanced out to begin with (some are more appealing than others, like there's not a ton of reasons to use a short sword, but that's not inherent to the weapon itself). The problem is that the more 'advanced' weapons ARE better, so you would replace your warhammer with a crag hammer, you just would, its outright better. OTOH it takes a feat to get that. Now, dwarves have a stupid good racial feat that grants access to it, so basically there are zero dwarves using basic warhammers (maybe a few that are clerics or whatever). Some entire classes of weapons never really got incredibly good as well. Like maces have some stuff, but basically its a blah weapon category. Someone tried to spice it up with the Ruthless Ruffian Rogue build, but it was still very slightly less optimum than other builds. Picks, just not really worth it. Even with that said though, there are some good mace and pick feats and whatnot, they're just not the 'gold' or 'sky blue' options. Basically, while the specific weapons that are 'best' and 'not best' differ slightly between 4e and 5e, the range of difference from best to 'worst' is pretty similar. [/QUOTE]

Verification