Weapons: What Are They Good For?

[Dausuul]

So, I was reading the "Tyranny of the Sword" thread, and someone made the excellent point that it's silly how D&D fighters always seem to be using swords against giant monsters, when really the weapon of choice against a big animal should be a spear (e.g., boar-hunting).

That got me to thinking about 5E and ways to support different weapons being strong at different times/against different foes. (This would presumably be an optional module.) Some possibilities I can think of:

• Spear/Polearm: Best in melee against big monsters with reach, and in the initial clash between two enemy groups.
• Light Sword: Best in melee against multiple lightly armored foes.
• Heavy Sword: Good second-best weapon all around.
• Mace/Axe: Best in melee against heavily armored enemies, as well as foes that lack vital organs (undead, golems, etc.) and must be hacked apart or pounded into bits.
• Dagger: Best in tight quarters, when grappled, swallowed, etc. Also highly concealable, for infiltration.
• Bow: Best at range against multiple lightly armored foes, due to its comparatively rapid fire.
• Crossbow: Best at range against large or armored foes, due to its harder "punch."

Of course, this leaves the question of how to implement these benefits. Perhaps creature-specific vulnerabilities? Or something like AD&D where some weapons did more damage versus large foes?

Would this be something you'd be interested in, assuming it was well executed? How would you want to see it executed, and what weapon categories would you want, with what benefits?

 

[Janaxstrus]

Spears are awesome, in that they give reach (in 3.5).
Spears are bad, in that they require 2 hands (in 3.5)

Because the spear was such an under utilized weapon, our house rule is to allow them with light shields. Now someone actually picks one up once in a while (my current cleric of Saranrae has a +2 Ghost Touch spear)

As much as I would love some special rules for this stuff, it would certainly have to be a module. I'd love to see bonuses vs certain types of creatures (or special effects) depending on your weapon, as well as different damage/dr vs other types of weapons.
Definitely an option module type thing though

 

[KidSnide]

I think this is a fun area of experimental design, but I wonder how it translates to play. If the differences are large enough, then fighters will want to carry a comically large number of weapons.

There may be some fun to be had by limiting the number of weapons conveniently available in hand or sheath (which could lead to fighter choosing carefully which weapons they have "out"), but I fear the complexity of the end result.

-KS

 

[BobTheNob]

Just curiously, when did this bit about bows having "Rapid Fire" actually start. Have you tried shooting a bow? Its a long drawn out process which requires time to draw a bead if you want any hope of hitting anything. Sure, if you train you might get your speed up, but one might argue that if someone puts the same amount of training to a melee weapon, they would fair outstrip APR a bow would achieve.

Yea, a longbowman could have 5 arrows in the air, but that was just a combination of its enormous range with the fact that longbown were trained to hit an area, not a target! (The longbow was actually an indirect fire weapon, like a mortar)

I get this funny feeling that RPG's, with their turn based mechanics, never quite modeled correctly the fact that the melee'ist had to close with the ranged attacker, and that in that time, the ranged attacker had the opportunity for a couple of attacks. Doesnt mean the ranged guy had rapid fire, it meant he had time. This in turn lead to "Hey, lets give the 2 APR" (2e) and we have since envisaged the bow as a kind on medieval machine gun.

I could be wrong about this. Am I? Always been curious.

(Back to Op)
Totally agree that all weapons should have varying applications. I dislike that weapons are just damage and stats and far prefer that they have different applications.

 

[Gundark]

"what are weapons good for?"

Um...Killing stuff of course !!!

 

[Kynn]

Yeah, the rate of fire for bows in earlier editions never made much sense, even when you try to take into account the one-minute combat round.

 

[Boarstorm]

[MENTION=82425]BobTheNob[/MENTION] I've never gotten that impression, except from the LotR movies.

On topic: Weapons having different applications sounds like a fun idea, but I too worry about the added complexity and the "golfbag of weapons" issue.

Personally, with such a system, I would always specialize heavily in heavy blades. 2nd best at everything? Sure, sign me up. Beats carrying around weapons that are good in some situations, and rubbish in others.

 

[Dausuul]

Just curiously, when did this bit about bows having "Rapid Fire" actually start. Have you tried shooting a bow? Its a long drawn out process which requires time to draw a bead if you want any hope of hitting anything. Sure, if you train you might get your speed up, but one might argue that if someone puts the same amount of training to a melee weapon, they would fair outstrip APR a bow would achieve.

Well, "rapid" by the standards of shooty-things. Obviously it isn't rapid compared to a sword stroke! But I'm pretty sure it's faster to nock an arrow and draw than it is to crank the windlass on a heavy crossbow.

On topic: Weapons having different applications sounds like a fun idea, but I too worry about the added complexity and the "golfbag of weapons" issue.

Personally, with such a system, I would always specialize heavily in heavy blades. 2nd best at everything? Sure, sign me up. Beats carrying around weapons that are good in some situations, and rubbish in others.

Well, that would explain why so many fighters use swords.

I agree that the golf-bag thing can get excessive, but I do rather like the idea that a fighter carries around a couple of weapons--a spear and a sword, say, or axe and bow, or some such. The question is how to make it so that "some weapons" is a viable approach compared to "one weapon" or "all weapons."

 

[KesselZero]

I like this idea for two reasons.

One, in 3e and 4e at least, there's a huge list of weapons, of which most are pointless because they're objectively worse than something else. I'd like to see either fewer weapons or meaningful distinctions between 'em.

Two, it would synergize with another desire of mine, the move away from extreme weapon specialization/dependency, in which a fighter who puts down his magic longsword and picks up a fallen orc's axe suddenly loses almost all his combat prowess. I'd love to play a fighter who can use just about any weapon he finds without having to either take feats or lose effectiveness to do so. Actually, I think this should be the default, and fighters can choose to focus on one weapon but receive drawbacks in some other way. You can certainly argue that lack of flexibility is a drawback, but while that can work for specialist wizards (you can specialize, but you lose access to a few schools of magic, thus losing whole lists of spells) I've just found that moments when the fighter is without his gear are just too few and far between to be relied on as a balancing mechanism. Maybe if weapons could break, but then again, I hate breakage...

 

[Minigiant]

I would go the normal size/type/range ratings.

Size
Small- Good at close quarters and tight spaces. Concealable. Throwable. Weildable in off-hand
Light- Good at close quarters and tight spaces without sacrificing damage.
One handed- Versatile. Good all around. Highest damage while wield shield/small weapon in off-hand
Two handed/Heavy- Highest damaging weapons.

Type
Slashing- Heavy/Bonus damage to lightly armored foes (via feat or module)
Piercing- Heavy/Bonus accuracy to lightly armored foes (via feat or module)
Hacking- Heavy/Bonus damage to naturally armored foes (via feat or module)
Bludgeoning- Heavy/Bonus damage to heavily armored foes (via feat or module)
Flailing- Heavy/Bonus accuracy to heavily armored foes (via feat or module)

Range
Melee- Highest damage
Reach- Allows attack against non-adjacent enemies. Bonus damge to larger foes (with feat or module)
Thrown- Allows attack at distance
Projectile- Allow attacks at long distances

So a fighter might keep a rapier for humanoids and a halberd for giants.