D&D (2024) Weapon Masteries too Ubiquitous? New Fighter ability suggestion.

Something Ive been persuing in LNO is the diversification of physical damage through combinations and integrated status effects. Your basic 3 of Blunt, Piercing, and Slashing are all straightforward and come with their own statuses (that I have trigger on Crits).

But then through combinations, which would be tied to specific weapons. For instance, Axe type weapons would deal out Blunt/Slashing. For any regular damage, the Axe splits the damage dealt between the two types. But on a crit, rather than the Bleed of Slashing or the Daze of Blunt, you gain the status effect "Laceration", which delivers a stronger bleed that deals its damage as a penalty to the targets Reaction (meaning they're gonna have a harder time defending themselves).

Meanwhile, sword type weapons can deal all 3 damage types, and they come with the special property (axes above can also be used to trip enemies) that allows the user to choose which damage types get dealt to their target.

Meanwhile meanwhile, the Warrior, my take on the Fighter, comes into this system and had the capability to treat any weapon as though they were a sword, but with swords they can chase Crits and even use them to deal out any of the special status effects of other weapons, like Laceration.

Which just makes a whole bunch of sense. Warriors still have cause to want to use other weapons (as the special properties and other useful traits are going to be competitive with swords), but it really drives home the idea that the Warrior more than anybody else is a master of arms. And of course, this all pays dividends as anybody who uses weapons is going to have nearly as many options available to them as mages do.
 

log in or register to remove this ad



Remathilis

Legend
it's the exact same thing that happened with maneuvers in the next playtest. first it was to make fighters less boring, and they polled so well all the martials got them, and by the time 5e actually came out they were relegated to a single fighter subclass.
Having weapon maneuvers be relegated to a single subclass is the greatest sin 5e made in the Next playtest. The fact they have tried to give them to other subclasses (Xanathar) and feats (Dragonlance) before pulling them back is double infuriating.

I think it proves having Attack Roll: The Class is a poor idea and that the fighter should have been given some flavor without relying on subclasses to do so.
 

Zaukrie

New Publisher
Having weapon maneuvers be relegated to a single subclass is the greatest sin 5e made in the Next playtest. The fact they have tried to give them to other subclasses (Xanathar) and feats (Dragonlance) before pulling them back is double infuriating.

I think it proves having Attack Roll: The Class is a poor idea and that the fighter should have been given some flavor without relying on subclasses to do so.
Agreed
 

Horwath

Legend
Having weapon maneuvers be relegated to a single subclass is the greatest sin 5e made in the Next playtest. The fact they have tried to give them to other subclasses (Xanathar) and feats (Dragonlance) before pulling them back is double infuriating.

I think it proves having Attack Roll: The Class is a poor idea and that the fighter should have been given some flavor without relying on subclasses to do so.
everyone should know a number of maneuvers equal to prof modifier.
and number us usages per day equal to twice the modifier. refresh all on long rest or one on short rest.

battlemasters, OFC would get more of both and ability to refresh more on short rest
 

Stalker0

Legend
To be honest, as I was going over the document today. I could see weapon masteries being pulled back from several classes.
I think they are redundant on the monk without giving the monk more resources to exploit them. As it is the monk can barely exploit its own resources at low levels.
Or maybe just give each class 1, and let the fighter get 3. Other classes can specialize, but the fighter is the weapon master.
 


TwoSix

Dirty, realism-hating munchkin powergamer
Not by much if they only get 3.
Well, going from 1 to more than 1 is actually pretty meaningful, much more so than the difference between 2 and 4. That lets you do a scimitar+short sword (vex + Nick) combo, for example, or have both a melee weapon and a ranged weapon.
 

Zaukrie

New Publisher
Well, going from 1 to more than 1 is actually pretty meaningful, much more so than the difference between 2 and 4. That lets you do a scimitar+short sword (vex + Nick) combo, for example, or have both a melee weapon and a ranged weapon.
I think the main issue is magic weapons....once you have a magic weapon, how likely are you to NOT use it?
 

Remove ads

Top