Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Salamandyr" data-source="post: 6034990" data-attributes="member: 40233">If some kind of specialization is necessary, and I for one have no interest in it, perhaps it would be better to go back to what AD&D had prior to specialization; weapon proficiencies.Prior to weapon specialization, a characters baseline competency, ie his to hit bonus, was presumed to be with weapons he was trained with.  Rather than getting a bonus for weapons he trained with, perhaps he should get a penalty for weapons he's not trained with.  For instance, a fighter might begin play with proficiency in longsword, hand axe, spear, and longbow.  When using any other weapon, he has disadvantage (it was a -2 penalty in AD&D).  As he progresses in levels, he is able to add more weapons he's proficient with.Weapon proficiencies have a few advantages, that spiraling specialization doesn't.   They allow the player to show areas of competency without limiting him to a particular style.  This allows him to train in a variety of weapon types, so he can adjust if the battle...using a  bow against aerial opponents, readying a spear against charging monsters, etc.  It keeps the bonus bloat down.  And it's easier to balance with other characters.Weapon specialization is the biggest single reason the fighter appears boring to so many players.  It basically takes a character whose defining characteristic is mastery of battle and turns them into a one-trick pony who becomes sub-par in any battle where his schtick cannot be applied.  This lends to the feeling of helplessness for higher level fighters whose class benefits actively discourage them from using the flexibility that is inherent in the class.</blockquote>

Verification