Weapons as special effects

[Verequus]

I've seen in your Word document, that you allow to take certain weapon special abilities, which I consider as magical enhancements (like Flaming Bursts). Would it be unbalancing, if I disallow these?

 

[DanMcS]

I've seen in your Word document, that you allow to take certain weapon special abilities, which I consider as magical enhancements (like Flaming Bursts). Would it be unbalancing, if I disallow these?

I don't think so. They're not overly powerful (you have to give up a round worth of actions to activate the magical ability, and at level 15+, a round is a lot to give up), but they're not strictly necessary either.

They are magical enhancements, but a level 15 fighter is a pretty magical being, himself. It's less obvious than a level 15 wizard, but he's basically a demigod or a hero along the lines of hercules. He can take on a good sized army or duel with a demon, or plummet from a 200' cliff and live. The ability to make his sword burst into flames doesn't seem like it should be beyond him, to me. But do what you like, and enjoy.

 

[Nareau]

OK, I already thought you were cool for coming up with this very elegant combat scheme. But your use of "schrodinger" as a verb just totally made my day.

While I really like your system, I have to ask: isn't the fighter already much more deadly with that dagger than the wizard? Imagine a 6th level fighter going up against a 6th level wizard: Fighter gets +6/+1 (with possible weap. spec., weap. focus, armor) vs. +3. Don't the bonus feats, BAB, and automatic proficiencies the fighter gets already represent his ability to fight extremely well? Would this system replace any or all of that?

Spider

 

[DanMcS]

While I really like your system, I have to ask: isn't the fighter already much more deadly with that dagger than the wizard? Imagine a 6th level fighter going up against a 6th level wizard: Fighter gets +6/+1 (with possible weap. spec., weap. focus, armor) vs. +3. Don't the bonus feats, BAB, and automatic proficiencies the fighter gets already represent his ability to fight extremely well? Would this system replace any or all of that?

Mmm, kinda. I guess that was a bad example. My thought was that two fighters, who have sunk equivalent feats into their weapon of choice, should be equally effective. There's a wide variety of weapons that are all medium sized; in the PHB, some do 1d6 20/x2, some do 1d8 19-20/x2. A fighter is essentially penalized for using a spear style instead of a longsword. I didn't want there to be optimal weapons (cough*spikedchain*cough), just better fighters.

In many games, especially point-buy ones like MnM and Hero, a weapon is just an attack that you buy. Whether you describe it as a spear or a longsword or a barstool, if you pay 10 points for it, it's as good as any other 10 point weapon. That's what I was going for, though I didn't quite go all the way- I still differentiate between light, one-handed, and heavy weapons, for instance. That's too D&D for me to cut out completely.

An interesting point about iterative attacking; I'll have to ponder that. In Mutants and Masterminds, they've done away with iterative attacks. The only way to get extra attacks is to fight with two weapons or the feat rapid strike (2 attacks at -2). Since damage can continue to go up with level, maybe you wouldn't need to use iterative attacks. A high level fighter might do 6d6 damage with his greatsword; you could describe that as him being unstoppably tough and hitting really hard, or you could describe it as several swings and nicks and slashes. I must ponder this more deeply.

 

[Zoatebix]

I read the first post and subscribed. I'll post again once I read through. Wow!
-George

 

[Zoatebix]

I'm directing so many people to this thread. Please look for a publisher!
-George

PS - Did I mention that this is great? Here's hoping that the maneuvers and stunts from Mearls'/Malhavoc's Book of Iron Might mesh really really well with this stuff so we can have us some really cinematic D&D combats.

 

[Fieari]

Wow. This is, quite frankly, awesome. I like how you incorporated weapon size as well. There is something I would love to see though, which I think your system could accomodate even though standard D&D does not... a differentiation between blunt, slashing, and peircing.

There is a real cinematic difference in feel between these types, but almost no mechanical differences at all, and this bothers me. Yes, I know that heros use whatever they have on hand equally well, but they do it in different -ways-. And besides... swords were made for killing people. There's a reason Samurai went into battle with Katana instead of Boken (Bokken?). Under these rules, there'd be no real difference.

My thought was that the three weapon types would get a list of special qualities that could be added with a grip like everything else... like one technique per feat. I... uh... can't actually think of any at the moment, but then, it is 11:30 and my eyes are drooping. I'll come back in the morning. But does anyone agree that this would be a good idea to add?

 

[RangerWickett]

This is a really niffty system. I still have a few ideas/questions/whatever that will have to wait until after I get home from class today. Right now, I wanted to ask if you've thought about getting this published? It seems like a really cool system, and I'm sure somebody (maybe even EN Publishing) would at least take it as an article, possibly expand it into a full length PDF.

I actually wrote up a similar system to this for an issue of the Player's Journal. In it, the weapons you used basically didn't matter. You got iterative attacks, but whether you used one weapon, two weapons, or a dozen, you just made one attack roll and one damage roll.

It was perhaps over-simplified.

If I were to re-create the system, using the 'simplified tactical movement rules' I've been brainstorming, it'd probably end up . . . well, actually, let me start a new thread.

 

[RangerWickett]

Posted here: http://www.enworld.org/forums/showthread.php?p=1803574

 

[Ulorian - Agent of Chaos]

What about having improvised weapons reduce the base weapon damage by one step to reflect that they aren't optimized for combat? I was thinking about making 'improvised weapon' a quality available to all users, but seems cleaner. Great, great system.