D&D General Weapon Mastery - Yea or Nay?

[Snarf Zagyg]

Try playing the old war game "Battles of the South Pacific" I think it was named.

Your bombers might hit the target, if the carriers have enough fuel to turn into the wind, the bombers can then choose to bomb from high altitude (safer, less accurate) or low altitude (also consider cloud cover and fuel to get to altitude), oh and wind direction and speed at the target....and did your fighter escorts have the range to provide cover on the trip? Etc. Etc.

When I first entered the hobby, I would go to the FLGS. I was into the TTRPGs, but there was always (ALWAYS) a table of grizzled old wargamers. I remember their vast tabletop, and that they were often playing a naval game (don't remember if it was a specific one, or one with bepsoke rules) that had them moving their fleets around, milimeters at a time by ruler, working out complicated firing scenarios and how the aircrafts from the aircraft carriers would function, and so on. It looked like an advanced calculus class that was occasionally broken up by moving an exquisitely detailed (but tiny) miniature of a ship an imperceptible difference, then going back to do more math.

One afternoon, they took a break and for fun they sat around and calculated ranges to hit major targets in town from the FLGS with various types of artillery, from mortars up. ....it was a different time.

 

[SkidAce]

One afternoon, they took a break and for fun they sat around and calculated ranges to hit major targets in town from the FLGS with various types of artillery, from mortars up. ....it was a different time.

Ahh, ye olde magiks......

 

[Micah Sweet]

Because those points are 100%, absolutely, completely useless other than to permit you to swing a weapon MADE OF MAGICAL ENERGY.

I thought "realism" was supposed to matter.

In order for the magic energy to be a greatsword, it has to emulate the qualities of a greatsword.

Weight is a quality.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

In order for the magic energy to be a greatsword, it has to emulate the qualities of a greatsword.

Weight is a quality.

Quantity is also a quality. That is why I fight with two greatswords, each of which has the weight of four greatswords!
-Uncle Joe

 

[Stalker0]

The problem with this approach is that armor or weapon requiring more than a 14 str would never arise. There just aren't enough people to bother making weapons for them. You could live your whole life and never meet one 20 strength person.

100% agree. I think these str values are too PC centric, lots of npcs don't have anywhere near the stats that a PC routinely has.

 

[James Gasik]

Now me personally, I'm of two minds when it comes to the "streamlining" of classes. My mental picture of a Monk isn't some skinny dude in robes that would never survive the "Training from Hell" that's common for martial arts movies- I'd want Monks to have 13 Strength (or more!) as a matter of course.

So when the game says "oh, you can just use your good score for things", it bothers me a little. But when the concept of "point buy is good/dice rolling is bad" became enshrined in so many gamer's minds, it's annoying when character concept A has to invest in four different ability scores and character concept B only has to invest in three, or even two!

I mean, let's say you want to play a classic undead smashing Cleric. You need Strength to use that mace and wear that armor, Con to survive being in melee since you're a d8 hit die class that also has to routinely cast spells in melee range, and of course, Wisdom is necessary to use your magic.

That doesn't leave a lot of room to also be able to debate Theology with the party Wizard, or preach the Good Word to the flock, let alone be able to not trip over your own two feet constantly. If the game also asked you to invest in a fourth stat (say, Charisma to use d20 Turn Undead consistently), it becomes harder and harder not to be mediocre all around.

It becomes even more obnoxious when other classes are built different. A Wizard can prioritize Intelligence more than our battle Cleric can for Wisdom, and when the game decides to let said Wizard pretend to be a warrior, oh well, he gets Int to AC and extra attack, something the Cleric is never afforded.

Similarly, our Warlock friend could just focus on three stats at most and just spam Eldritch Blast all day- he has no need to enter melee! But if someone decides they want to be a Bladelock, well, sure, you get to use Charisma to hit and damage, but you still need to invest a little more of your character to just keep up with the blast spammer, who already gets Charisma to hit and gets extra attacks handed to him as he levels and might not need as much defense as he sits in the back of the party hiding in a bubble of magical darkness!

It might not be a big tax, but it is a tax, and it's not really justified just to validate the concept of the Blade Pact. In a perfect world, where the game was built with all ability scores equal, everyone wants them equally, and you weren't forced to figure out how to split your points among them, sure, 13 Str for a Bladelock would be no big deal.

But that's not the game we're given. It's lopsided and you can be taxed for wanting to play against type.

I understand there's a much larger argument about multiclassed Blade Warlocks, but I don't think that should enter the conversation about how a single classed character functions.

 

[payn]

Now me personally, I'm of two minds when it comes to the "streamlining" of classes. My mental picture of a Monk isn't some skinny dude in robes that would never survive the "Training from Hell" that's common for martial arts movies- I'd want Monks to have 13 Strength (or more!) as a matter of course.

So when the game says "oh, you can just use your good score for things", it bothers me a little. But when the concept of "point buy is good/dice rolling is bad" became enshrined in so many gamer's minds, it's annoying when character concept A has to invest in four different ability scores and character concept B only has to invest in three, or even two!

I mean, let's say you want to play a classic undead smashing Cleric. You need Strength to use that mace and wear that armor, Con to survive being in melee since you're a d8 hit die class that also has to routinely cast spells in melee range, and of course, Wisdom is necessary to use your magic.

That doesn't leave a lot of room to also be able to debate Theology with the party Wizard, or preach the Good Word to the flock, let alone be able to not trip over your own two feet constantly. If the game also asked you to invest in a fourth stat (say, Charisma to use d20 Turn Undead consistently), it becomes harder and harder not to be mediocre all around.

It becomes even more obnoxious when other classes are built different. A Wizard can prioritize Intelligence more than our battle Cleric can for Wisdom, and when the game decides to let said Wizard pretend to be a warrior, oh well, he gets Int to AC and extra attack, something the Cleric is never afforded.

Similarly, our Warlock friend could just focus on three stats at most and just spam Eldritch Blast all day- he has no need to enter melee! But if someone decides they want to be a Bladelock, well, sure, you get to use Charisma to hit and damage, but you still need to invest a little more of your character to just keep up with the blast spammer, who already gets Charisma to hit and gets extra attacks handed to him as he levels and might not need as much defense as he sits in the back of the party hiding in a bubble of magical darkness!

It might not be a big tax, but it is a tax, and it's not really justified just to validate the concept of the Blade Pact. In a perfect world, where the game was built with all ability scores equal, everyone wants them equally, and you weren't forced to figure out how to split your points among them, sure, 13 Str for a Bladelock would be no big deal.

But that's not the game we're given. It's lopsided and you can be taxed for wanting to play against type.

I understand there's a much larger argument about multiclassed Blade Warlocks, but I don't think that should enter the conversation about how a single classed character functions.

Which is why I wish all classes were MAD.

 

[Micah Sweet]

100% agree. I think these str values are too PC centric, lots of npcs don't have anywhere near the stats that a PC routinely has.

I think that just about everything in most games is too PC centric.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Now me personally, I'm of two minds when it comes to the "streamlining" of classes. My mental picture of a Monk isn't some skinny dude in robes that would never survive the "Training from Hell" that's common for martial arts movies- I'd want Monks to have 13 Strength (or more!) as a matter of course.

So when the game says "oh, you can just use your good score for things", it bothers me a little. But when the concept of "point buy is good/dice rolling is bad" became enshrined in so many gamer's minds, it's annoying when character concept A has to invest in four different ability scores and character concept B only has to invest in three, or even two!

I mean, let's say you want to play a classic undead smashing Cleric. You need Strength to use that mace and wear that armor, Con to survive being in melee since you're a d8 hit die class that also has to routinely cast spells in melee range, and of course, Wisdom is necessary to use your magic.

That doesn't leave a lot of room to also be able to debate Theology with the party Wizard, or preach the Good Word to the flock, let alone be able to not trip over your own two feet constantly. If the game also asked you to invest in a fourth stat (say, Charisma to use d20 Turn Undead consistently), it becomes harder and harder not to be mediocre all around.

It becomes even more obnoxious when other classes are built different. A Wizard can prioritize Intelligence more than our battle Cleric can for Wisdom, and when the game decides to let said Wizard pretend to be a warrior, oh well, he gets Int to AC and extra attack, something the Cleric is never afforded.

Similarly, our Warlock friend could just focus on three stats at most and just spam Eldritch Blast all day- he has no need to enter melee! But if someone decides they want to be a Bladelock, well, sure, you get to use Charisma to hit and damage, but you still need to invest a little more of your character to just keep up with the blast spammer, who already gets Charisma to hit and gets extra attacks handed to him as he levels and might not need as much defense as he sits in the back of the party hiding in a bubble of magical darkness!

It might not be a big tax, but it is a tax, and it's not really justified just to validate the concept of the Blade Pact. In a perfect world, where the game was built with all ability scores equal, everyone wants them equally, and you weren't forced to figure out how to split your points among them, sure, 13 Str for a Bladelock would be no big deal.

But that's not the game we're given. It's lopsided and you can be taxed for wanting to play against type.

I understand there's a much larger argument about multiclassed Blade Warlocks, but I don't think that should enter the conversation about how a single classed character functions.

This is a great reason to keep rolling for stats over point buy. There's no shrine for the latter at my table.

 

[James Gasik]

This is a great reason to keep rolling for stats over point buy. There's no shrine for the latter at my table.

I've had this debate with people I play with for years. They insist point buy is the way to go, even though point buy for one class can be very different than another class.

And I've been making this argument since 3e, lol. Go on, build a Monk and a Fighter with point buy in 3e. Let alone hear the Fighter explode when you remind him he's going to need 13 Int for just about every Feat he actually wants to take!