D&D 4E Weapon variety in 4E

[Keenath]

IIRC the weapon stats we've seen have proficiency numbers associated with them. I'm guessing you get a certain number of proficiency points to spend and different weapons cost different numbers of points to become proficient in.

Just a guess on my part.

I have my own ideas about that, which I'll get into below.

I'm feeling pretty good about the weapon system. They haven't pointed out any great weaknesses of the existing system, which suggests they aren't going to change it much -- but just add special abilities that let weapon-focusing classes like Fighters to feel different.

I mean, really, the main problem with the existing weapon system (wonderful as it is compared to earlier editions) is that the weapons are a little bland. All polearm fighters feel pretty similar; a longsword doesn't feel significantly different from a battleaxe; and so on.


The one problem that they're clearly fixing is that of proficiency. It's kind of silly that a dwarf who's all into his axe is also able to use a flail and a rapier with equal ease. The most common fix is what they did in SWSE with weapon proficiency groups, so you have "pistol proficiency" and you can use all pistols, and so on.

The problem with that system is that it also has some silliness in that a "rifle proficiency" makes you good with everything from a sniper-blaster to a shotgun, and Heavy proficiency lets you use grenade launchers and flame throwers equally. That's fine for the SW universe (which is less equipment-centric), but wouldn't work here -- it'd be silly if the same feat let you use shortswords and greatswords (or put another way, you can't be shortsword proficient without also getting greatswords in the package).


It looks like they handled that by slightly increasing the complexity of weapon proficiency. To me, it reads as a two-index system.

The war-pick, given in the Crits article, says it has "category: Picks", which suggests that you need proficiency with that weapon category to use it. It also says "Prof.: 2", which suggests proficiency comes in various levels, possibly relating to the current simple/martial/exotic division. Proficiency 2 probably means "martial", so it's a weapon that requires "martial level proficiency with the pick category".

In other words, the fighter starts with "martial proficiency", but he isn't proficient with ALL martial weapons; only the categories he chooses to learn. If he learns a new category, he automatically has martial proficiency in that new category, too. If he invests in opening up "exotic proficiency", he doesn't get only a single exotic weapon; he gets all the exotic weapons for all the categories he knows, and if he learns a new category, he'll get all the new exotic weapons for it, too. (They may have also increased the number of categories, so that some exotics are Prof. 3 while others are Prof. 4. Prof. 3 could contain some of the more outlandish "currently-martial" weapons, like scythes.)


Thus, for example, a fighter automatically starts with Proficiency 2 ('martial') in, say, three weapon categories of his choice -- suppose he picks sword, axe, and polearm. A rogue might start with only two categories and only Proficiency 1 ('simple'), so he could have Sword and Polearm but would be limited to shortswords and spears, while the fighter with those same categories could use greatswords and halberds and so on. The Rogue could invest in increasing his proficiency to learn those weapons, too, of course.

 

[Spatula]

The one problem that they're clearly fixing is that of proficiency. It's kind of silly that a dwarf who's all into his axe is also able to use a flail and a rapier with equal ease.

Bwa?

 

[Keenath]

Bwa?

Bwa what?

A dwarf fighter who's focused on axes and always wields and axe has the ability, due to his class proficiencies, to walk over and pick up any other martial weapon -- like a rapier -- and start using it with no difficulty.

That's kinda silly. In 4e I'm hoping (and it looks like this will be the case) that a fighter gets to pick some number of weapon groups, so a fighter won't be proficient with axes unless he takes axes, or with rapiers unless he takes "light blades" or something.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Bwa what?

A dwarf fighter who's focused on axes and always wields and axe has the ability, due to his class proficiencies, to walk over and pick up any other martial weapon -- like a rapier -- and start using it with no difficulty.

That's kinda silly. In 4e I'm hoping (and it looks like this will be the case) that a fighter gets to pick some number of weapon groups, so a fighter won't be proficient with axes unless he takes axes, or with rapiers unless he takes "light blades" or something.

Figuring out good weapon categories is fiendishly difficult, especially if you also aim for some general game balance in these categories...

That does't mean that the 4E designers shouldn't try, and I suspect that they did...

 

[Victim]

Bwa what?

A dwarf fighter who's focused on axes and always wields and axe has the ability, due to his class proficiencies, to walk over and pick up any other martial weapon -- like a rapier -- and start using it with no difficulty.

That's kinda silly. In 4e I'm hoping (and it looks like this will be the case) that a fighter gets to pick some number of weapon groups, so a fighter won't be proficient with axes unless he takes axes, or with rapiers unless he takes "light blades" or something.

If he's actually focused on axes in that he has feats that apply there, and not to other weapons, then he can't actually use rapiers as well as axes. While he's not taking attack penalties with the other weapons, he is forfeiting bonuses and other options.

 

[Moochava]

If he's actually focused on axes in that he has feats that apply there, and not to other weapons, then he can't actually use rapiers as well as axes. While he's not taking attack penalties with the other weapons, he is forfeiting bonuses and other options.

And I would rather have a bonus to something I'm good at than a penalty to everything I'm not good at, even if the results are mechanically identical. I think most players are that way, which is why 4E is nixing racial penalties.

 

[Spatula]

If he's actually focused on axes in that he has feats that apply there, and not to other weapons, then he can't actually use rapiers as well as axes. While he's not taking attack penalties with the other weapons, he is forfeiting bonuses and other options.

Yes, this is what I was boggled by. The dwarf isn't using other weapons as well as he could his axe.

And getting rid of individual weapon proficiencies was one of the best "little" changes that 3e made. My sympathies lie more to the simulationist side, but that's granularity that I don't need. It only complicates the "cool weapon but no one can/wants to use it" problem, needlessly punishes non-martial classes even further at low levels, and (when combined with specialization) results in 1st level fighters who only know how to use one or two weapons effectively.

 

[pukunui]

I agree that 3E's weapons were fantastic. Enough variety to be interesting, but close enough that the differences weren't extreme.

That said, I didn't like how a scimitar was as different from a longsword as it was from a longbow. Meaning, not at all (they all counted as "martial weapons") AND as different as can be ("Weapon focus: scimitar" gave no benefit to longbow or longsword).

That's kind of silly. A longsword and a scimitar are both sharp one-handed blades. If you spend time learning how to be good at swinging a sword, it really should apply to any one-handed bladed weapon.

Maybe what I'm looking for is basic "weapon focus" applying to all weps of a certain category (any sword, any impact weapon, any crossbow) and "greater weapon focus" applying to only a certain type of weapon (just scimitars, just flails, just heavy crossbows).

Sounds like you would've liked the Weapon Group feats variant in Unearthed Arcana. I use them in my campaign.

 

[HP Dreadnought]

Sounds like you would've liked the Weapon Group feats variant in Unearthed Arcana. I use them in my campaign.

I liked the concept behind the weapon group feats in the UA, but the execution was poor. Why on earth would EVERY class not choose "swords" (or whatever it was with most of the best weapons in it - I forget the specific groupings).

I think there is room for a system like that and the one described above is intriguing. . . although probably a little overbuilt. Proficiency points would be a lot simpler and easier. Guess we'll just have to wait and see what they came up with.

 

[pukunui]

I'm not sure there is one group with most of the best weapons in it. I guess it depends on what you consider the best weapons are. Here's a link: http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/buildingCharacters/weaponGroupFeats.htm

The variant has worked perfectly well for me. I like it, both in concept and in execution.