D&D (2024) Why are weapon masteries limited?

[ECMO3]

what should a guy who trains to be a fighter take?

Things that do not tie them to specific weapons. Strength ASIs, Defensive Duelist, Sentinel are three off the top of my head if you want to lead into martial combat.

Chef, Skill expert and Skulker?

Sure if you want those. I think a Fighter with those is going to be happier in play than a GWM-PAM-SENTINEL Fighter.

I have seen a Fighter with Chef and I have played a Fighter with Skill Expert, both using 2014 rules, I don't know that I have ever seen a Fighter with Skulker. But as for the other two, both he and I had a lot fun, more fun than the GWM-PAM fighters generally have.

Keep in mind the fiction around the fighter is a person who is expert with weapons, not with one or two weapons.

PAM, GWM and SENT are natural progression of the fighter that fights in that way.

They are the progression if you want to pigeonhole yourself and have less fun at the table.

I play a ton of 5E and I have never played a fighter with the GWM feat as a player. This includes Fighters who started with a 20 Strength at level 1 and did not even have to worry about staying on the strength ladder.

The game is full of choices and this is one of them (well 3 of them) and the people who make those choices commonly have less fun with the class IME.

you want diversity in builds, give extra feats slots every 4 levels that can be only taken by "cool" or "roleplay" feats.

No, the rules don't need that kind of bloat IMO. As others noted many tables are not finding masteries to be more fun, it is unlikely even more complication to how fighters attack would improve things.

 

[ECMO3]

They're the people being underserved by random treasure.

They're being forced to be less effective at the game for no good reason* while the players of the handful of classes that actually matter to the designers don't have to put up with that kind of thing.

No they are not.

No one tells a fighter they need to give up their non-magic Polearm and use that Vorpal Scimitar.

Are they less effective if they don't? Sure. Are they less effective than if they took other feats or ASIs? Sure. But both of those are choices that the fighter makes. Making those choices necessarily includes the result that they will be less effective in most cases. Now if they found an awesome Glaive before they took their feats, that is a different story.

If I decide I want to use a Blowgun I am going to be less effective, that does not mean I can't use it and it does not mean I can't get feats like Sharpshooter and Piercer to make it more effective than it otherwise will be, but I am making a decision that will make my character less effective in almost every fight.

Taking GWM or PAM or especially both of those feats is the same sort of choice.

*No, seriously what is being served by randomized treasure

It is the most fun way to play, both as a player and as a DM.

. This isn't even one that someone can claim the v-word because no one is hoarding that many flaming slings and +2 whips vs the polearm--the literal most common weapon of war in history.

We have actually seen more Flaming Whips than magical Glaives or Halberds, and my characters, including my fighters, have used more whips than they have Glaives or Halberds (but not more than staffs or spears).

I actually am playing a Bard-Rogue-Warlock right now with a flaming whip. I actually took the Warlock level to become proficient in it as I found it before I had a Warlock level (this uses 2014 rules where Rogues are not proficient in whips). That was not random though, it is what was printed in the adventure.

 

[Steampunkette]

... oh.

Another reason weapon masteries are so limited: They're the basic combat maneuvers.

Rather than allowing anyone to try and trip an opponent, you can ONLY trip an opponent if you have a Toppling weapon.

You can ONLY force enemy movement if you have a Push weapon. No more Bull-Rush or Shove option.

So not only do the weapon masteries pigeonhole you to specific weapon choices for character concepts, they also severely limit your options for things to do in combat as a martial character!

WOO HOO! Great Game Design, folks. Take away options and then repackage a few of them as benefits.

 

[Ashrym]

... oh.

Another reason weapon masteries are so limited: They're the basic combat maneuvers.

Rather than allowing anyone to try and trip an opponent, you can ONLY trip an opponent if you have a Toppling weapon.

You can ONLY force enemy movement if you have a Push weapon. No more Bull-Rush or Shove option.

So not only do the weapon masteries pigeonhole you to specific weapon choices for character concepts, they also severely limit your options for things to do in combat as a martial character!

WOO HOO! Great Game Design, folks. Take away options and then repackage a few of them as benefits.

Anyone can still trip or push. They use Shove and give up damage for it. It's not common but it's still there.

 

[Steampunkette]

Anyone can still trip or push. They use Shove and give up damage for it. It's not common but it's still there.

Neither Shove nor Trip are in the Rules Glossary. Nor are they in the Combat section that I saw.

Do you have a page reference?

 

[Pauln6]

Neither Shove nor Trip are in the Rules Glossary. Nor are they in the Combat section that I saw.

Do you have a page reference?

P377 under Unarmed Strikes. A5E gets around this by packaging these as 'Basic Manoeuvres' so that you can combine 1 damage + strength with whatever else you want to do but the basic damage can't then also be combined with damage from anything else. It helps take away the bitter pill of sacrificing damage for fun while giving strength builds an edge. They do separate out shoving and tripping into separate manoeuvres though.

 

[Steampunkette]

P377 under Unarmed Strikes. A5E gets around this by packaging these as 'Basic Manoeuvres' so that you can combine 1 damage + strength with whatever else you want to do but the basic damage can't then also be combined with damage from anything else. It helps take away the bitter pill of sacrificing damage for fun while giving strength builds an edge. They do separate out shoving and tripping into separate manoeuvres though.

Heeeeeey... at least that's something!

... Something they literally stole from A5e. >.>

A5e's "Basic Maneuvers" are Disarm, Grab On, Grapple, Knock Down, Overrun, and Shove. All of them do 1+Str/Dex Mod as "Basic Melee Damage" and force a saving throw against your Combat Maneuver DC (8+Prof+Str/Dex Mod)

Only 5e also requires you to land an attack -and- forces a save, giving the target two chances to avoid anything negative happening to them...

Lame. And still really limiting.

 

[abirdcall]

Neither Shove nor Trip are in the Rules Glossary. Nor are they in the Combat section that I saw.

Do you have a page reference?

Pg 376 top right under unarmed strikes.

Bull rush and shove aside are no longer things as far as I am aware though.

But then if you shove prone I think you can then move past? I need to look that up.

 

[abirdcall]

Heeeeeey... at least that's something!

... Something they literally stole from A5e. >.>

A5e's "Basic Maneuvers" are Disarm, Grab On, Grapple, Knock Down, Overrun, and Shove. All of them do 1+Str/Dex Mod as "Basic Melee Damage" and force a saving throw against your Combat Maneuver DC (8+Prof+Str/Dex Mod)

Only 5e also requires you to land an attack -and- forces a save, giving the target two chances to avoid anything negative happening to them...

Lame. And still really limiting.

You don't make an attack roll if you grapple or shove.

The opponent just makes the save.

 

[Steampunkette]

You don't make an attack roll if you grapple or shove.

The opponent just makes the save.

"A melee attack that involves using your body to damage, grapple, or shove a target within 5ft of you."

Hmmm...

Though the Damage option -does- specify that you have to make an attack roll, separately from the introductory text.

I'll accept this interpretation because it's marginally less lame for D&D24 than the alternative... but A5e's implementation remains superior, IMO.

Though I almost can't wait to see some funky interactions since grappling is a melee attack tied to unarmed strike when someone implements a mechanic that applies to all melee attacks and results in someone pulling off a flaming Piledriver of a grapple check 'cause it "Adds 3d6 fire damage to all melee attacks!"