what would you want to see in a revised Weapon Chart?

[Bacon Bits]

Well, we're on post 41 and by my reckoning we have approximately 50 different systems do choose from.

 

[Satyrn]

Well, we're on post 41 and by my reckoning we have approximately 50 different systems do choose from.

Obligatory XKCD

 

[GlassJaw]

Well, we're on post 41 and by my reckoning we have approximately 50 different systems do choose from.

Not really actually! That was my suspicion when I posted my question but I'm pleasantly surprised at the consistency.

I count 2 main buckets: 1) scrap the weapon chart and instead use universal damage dice, and 2) fix the inconsistencies in the current weapon chart.

Now there might be a fair amount of debate within those buckets but it's easy to determine which of the buckets any given idea falls into (my design is definitely in bucket 2).

 

[Dessert Nomad]

I don't remember anything especially noteworthy about the 3e weapon chart. I would actually look to the BECMI weapon chart for inspiration - there different weapons had different effectiveness against different enemy types (melee, ranged, natural weapons) and had special abilities based on the weapon's characteristics. I wouldn't add specialization, but instead would tie special abilities to either level or number of melee attacks.

 

[WaterRabbit]

Wow, awesome stuff so far! Lots of things I've already considered but a lot of new ideas too.

I should also add a couple more design goals:

• Make the system as plug-and-play as possible, so keep the changes to the core rules as minimal as possible.
• Stay as close as possible to the "spirit" of D&D.

I always try to keep in mind possible publication on DMs Guild so while interesting ideas, these deviate too far from my design goals:

I will point out that Weapons speeds that modify initiative are in the rules already. DMG pg. 271

 

[Immortal Sun]

I have issues with the weapon chart as well, but my solution is the exact reverse of yours: less emphasis on specific weapons.
Simple Weapons:
1d4 Light Weapon (like a dagger)
1d6 Medium Weapon (like a club)
1d8 Heavy Weapon. (like a big club)
1d6 Ranged Weapon. (like a shortbow)
Martial Weapons:
1d6 Light weapon (like a short-sword)
1d8 Medium Weapon (like a longsword)
2d8 Heavy Weapon (like a greatclub)
1d8 Ranged weapon. (like a longbow)

And then just have the flavor paragraph describe what types of weapons would typically fall into which categories. Maybe with the option of certain weapons being able to have certain keywords, such as reach or finesse (use dex instead of str) or two-handed (1.5x str damage) and the player picks one to apply to their weapon.

I dunno. I think I'd like that better.

 

[Greenstone.Walker]

I count 2 main buckets: 1) scrap the weapon chart and instead use universal damage dice, and 2) fix the inconsistencies in the current weapon chart.

I've run games of Dungeon World a few times, where damage is all class based. I had a D&D player who was very confused by this. "What do you mean my fighter does d10 damage? Do I do more damage if I get a big sword? No? That doesn't make sense!"

I'm not sure which option I favour. I like a weapon chart that has bad weapons and good weapons, so that the game can have rabble and conscripts and so on - forces that typically have subpar weapons (for reasons of skill and/or cost). Sure, swords are better and every adventurer will have one, but swords are expensive, so a militia shouldn't have them.

I also like the simplicity of saying, "Hey, fighter, you do 1d10 damage per hit. Whether you have a sword or a spear or a honking big axe is just fluff."

 

[Guest 6801328]

That's a great idea .... for advanced players.

One thing I try to remember is how much of a learning experience early D&D/AD&D was.

Say what you will about the weapon table in the AD&D PHB (and, perhaps, about the accuracy of some of it), but I certainly think that it provided a springboard for my appreciation of weapons.

Yeah, I'd probably delete the part about "no weapon table" and instead make sure the weapon table correlated perfectly to the rules. In other words, the weapon table as a bunch of common examples.

 

[Bacon Bits]

Base damage:

1d8,

damage die steps: 1d3-1d4-1d6-1d8-1d10-1d12-2d6-2d8


martial weapon, increase die by one step.
two handed, increase die by one step.
heavy increase die by one step.

reach, reduce damage die by one step.
light, reduce damage die by one step.
finesse, reduce damage die by one step.
thrown 30/120, reduce damage die by one step.

versastile, free for any non-light, non-finesse weapons,


some logical rules:

heavy must be two handed weapon,
finesse cannot be heavy,
light cannot be heavy, doh!
thrown cannot be two handed,

Yeah, I tried this before, intending the rules for DMs to introduce new weapons.

Weapon Building Rules

Instructions:

1. Choose Weapon Group and base Die Size from Table 1a and 1b
2. Choose one Weapon Maneuverability Size Property from Table 2
3. Choose zero or more Special Weapon Properties from Table 3, up to the total allowed on table 1a

Table 1a: Weapon Group

+---------+---------------+--------------------+
|  Type   | Base Die Size | Special Properties |
+---------+---------------+--------------------+
| Simple  |             2 |                  1 |
| Martial |             3 |                  2 |
+---------+---------------+--------------------+

Table 1b: Weapon Damage Die Size

+-------+----------+
| Size  |   Die    |
+-------+----------+
|     1 | 1d4      |
|     2 | 1d6      |
|     3 | 1d8      |
|     4 | 1d10     |
|     5 | 1d12/2d6 |
+-------+----------+

Table 2: Weapon Maneuverability Size Property

+------------+------------+---------------------------------------------------------------+
|  Property  | Die Effect |                         Other Effects                         |
+------------+------------+---------------------------------------------------------------+
| Light      | --         | Incompatible with Reach                                       |
| Normal     | --         | --                                                            |
| Versatile  | --         | +1 die size when used in two hands. Incompatible with Finesse |
| Two-handed | +1 Size    | Incompatible with Finesse and Thrown                          |
+------------+------------+---------------------------------------------------------------+

Table 3: Special Weapon Properties

+------------+------------+---------------------------------------------------------------+
|  Property  | Die Effect |                         Other Effects                         |
+------------+------------+---------------------------------------------------------------+
| Finesse    | -1 Size    | Incompatible with Versatile and Two-Handed                    |
| Reach      | -1 Size    | Incompatible with Light. -2 Size if Normal.                   |
| Thrown     | --         | Incompatible with Two-Handed. Grants ranged attack 20/60      |
| Ammunition | -1 Size    | Incompatible with Versatile, Finesse, Reach. No melee attack. |
|            |            | Simple weapons range 80/320, martial weapons range 150/600.   |
| Heavy      | +1 Size    | Requires Two-Handed.                                          |
| Loading    | +1 Size    | Requires Ammunition.  Allows one additional property.         |
+------------+------------+---------------------------------------------------------------+

If I remember right, there are at least two current weapons that don't fit the above: Heavy Crossbow and Dagger (both have too many properties) [Edit: Also Dart]. But I think I may have moved stuff around trying to clean it up and it might not be correct anymore. If you're curious, the Finesse, Reach weapon is the Whip. There are several weapons that are too weak (sling, blowgun, mace). Reach might be better as "-2 Size, -1 if Two-Handed". There are no versatile reach weapons so it's not clear.

However, you shouldn't give players this kind of tool to build weapons because it's trivial to min/max. "Normal" basically serves no purpose except to not make certain weapons behave weirdly (whip, sling, mace). There's little reason not to be either light or versatile.

 

[FrogReaver]

While 5E is my favorite edition of D&D since I started playing the Red Box, no system is perfect. So aside the feat system, the weapon chart is the other major weakness of 5E in my view. I've started to do some work on a major redesign that is sort of a hybrid of 3E and 5E.

Design Goals:

• Make choice of weapon more interesting
• Create more differentiation between the weapons
• Add more weapons
• Add more weapon properties
• Fix the damage discrepancy between weapons (like Greatsword and Greataxe)
• Address other balance issues (rapier, quarterstaff, etc)
• Make the system as plug-and-play as possible, so keep the changes to the core rules as minimal as possible.
• Stay as close as possible to the "spirit" of D&D.

If you think the weapon chart is fine, this thread isn't for you.

But if you have issues with it as well, what else would you like to see in an expanded/revised weapon chart?

Combo attacks could be an interesting approach.
Adding critical effects.
Each weapon could give you 2-3 different special attacks it can do in place of it's standard attack (each with unique effects)

I think the bolded could actually differentiate weapons enough on it's own to make them all unique and interesting. Things like chance to prone, pushing back 5 feet, chance for a counter attack, chance to parry, chance to hook an opponenets weapon so he can't use it to attack next turn etc.