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

[MarkB]

Yeah, I tend to agree. I know why they made them limited, because they wanted them to be an added feature of the martial classes, but I'd much rather that anyone proficient with a weapon could use its mastery property.

1) Because the point was to make weapons with the same damage die and base property feel different.

Battleaxe, Longsword*, Warhammer, and Warpick were all 1d8 versatile (1d10) weapons in 2014. To make them different but still be backwards compatible, they kept that and gave each a different* mastery.

Yeah, but that's the point - because characters only know a limited number of masteries (or none, for some classes), those weapons don't feel different from each other unless you know their respective masteries.

 

[pukunui]

I don’t think that’s right. You pick a mastery.

No, you don't. You pick specific weapons and can use the mastery properties of those specific weapons only.

For instance, the fighter's Weapon Mastery feature reads: "Your training with weapons allows you to use the mastery properties of three kinds of Simple or Martial weapons of your choice."

The rogue's Weapon Mastery features reads: "Your training with weapons allows you to use the mastery properties of two kinds of weapons of your choice with which you have proficiency, such as Daggers and Shortbows."

Also, the Weapon Master feat: "Your training with weapons allows you to use the mastery property of one kind of Simple or Martial weapon of your choice, provided you have proficiency with it. "

 

[Crimson Longinus]

I fully agree with the OP. Switching masteries is just bizarre and makes zero narrative sense, and all that having them to just function all the time does is that in a super unlikely situation where you suddenly need to use a weapon you've not prepared to use you can do a mildly interesting cool thing with it.

 

[Pauln6]

I think Weapon Mastery should provide something extra and access to an additional mastery would not have been a bad idea as per the final version in the playtest but I would be reluctant to gift every mastery to every weapon because I like weapons retaining some unique flavour.

I think the changes I would make would be a bit more far reaching:

• Masteries available to fighters and rangers only or via the Weapon Master Feat
• Drawing and stowing changes:

You can draw a weapon at the start of your turn as part of the attack action
You can draw a weapon as part of your free object interaction
It requires no action to drop a weapon at your feet but this weapon is now an unattended object
You can swap a weapon into a free hand as part of your free object interaction
You can un-equip and drop a shield as part of your free object interaction
You can stow a weapon as part of your free object interaction
You can stow shield as part of the Utilise an Object action
You can pick up a dropped weapon as part of your free object interaction
Dual Wielder Feat Quick Draw: You can draw or stow two weapons when you would ordinarily only be able to draw or stow one
Thrown weapon property includes the ability to draw a weapon as part of each thrown attack.

- Weapon Master Feat -
Choose two simple or martial weapons with which you are proficient. You can use the mastery property of those weapons. If you can already have mastery in a weapon, you can instead choose a second mastery for which the weapon also qualifies (refer to playtest packet). You can swap freely between properties but must declare which property you are using before making the attack roll.
You can swap weapons from one hand to the other before or after making an attack roll.
You can stow a weapon at the end of your turn.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

I think Weapon Mastery should provide something extra and access to an additional mastery would not have been a bad idea as per the final version in the playtest but I would be reluctant to gift every mastery to every weapon because I like weapons retaining some unique flavour.

To make the weapons feel different.

But it isn't a big deal if you want to allow push with a longsword and vex with a warhammer.

Personal preference.

This is not what the OP was suggesting! It was not about giving weapons more masteries, it was about allowing the character with mastery to always use the mastery (determined by the weapon,) regardless of which weapon they're using.

 

[Tales and Chronicles]

I think I would have prefered masteries being upgrades on your fighting style.
Like GWS giving you cleave damage, or Archery giving you graze damage etc.

 

[ezo]

Given that you can change at least one of your weapon masteries each long rest, why do you even need to pick them?

I don't even get why you can change them on a long rest? It is MASTERY after all... so , you can mastery a different rider on a long rest, but suddenly forget one you just had mastered???

Come on!!! That's just gamist and silly IMO.

At best, changing a mastery should be once when you level, require downtime to train (or retrain), etc.

But hey, whatever, just another way to demonstrate why 2024 5E isn't my cup of tea.

So basically, the way it's set up, it doesn't define your character's style (since it can be easily changed), it just discourages you from doing cool things when they come up.

I agree with the first part. The way it is, it doesn't define your character's style at all.

But, I don't see how it discourages you from doing cool things???

Seems like the system would be better (and save word count) if barbarian, fighter, paladin, ranger, rogues just got this feature instead:

Weapon Mastery
If you have proficiency in a weapon you can use its mastery property when you wield it.

With the exception of rogues, all those classes can already use all weapons. You might as well just allow them all (including rogues) to use all weapons and know all weapon masteries since that is basically the direction you've gone.

So, I guess now you can do all the cool things, but you're even further away from anything that helps define your character's style...

 

[Bacon Bits]

I fully agree with the OP. Switching masteries is just bizarre and makes zero narrative sense, and all that having them to just function all the time does is that in a super unlikely situation where you suddenly need to use a weapon you've not prepared to use you can do a mildly interesting cool thing with it.

We let Life clerics take Toll the Dead. We let Abjurers take summoning spells. We tell Warlocks they make a permanent pact with an otherworldly patron like Asmodeous, but then say he doesn't have any special ability to influence, manipulate, or compel you. You just get to sell your soul to the devil and he'll let you keep your soul. We tell players that this is a world with actual, real gods, and then let them get divine powers from ideas. The worlds are supposed to be full to the brim with exotic monsters, but also quaint little villages that somehow never get harassed unless it's a plot point. Everyone knows that dungeons have more powerful magic items, but they just let any group of random knuckleheads venture into them and take whatever they find. The game is full of pretty absurd narratives, and almost all of them are like that because it's a collaborative game first and foremost. Making martials have to play fair because they're more mundane is not remotely fair at all.

So, narratively it doesn't make much sense, but as a game mechanic it's basically fine. Mechanically it's no different than attunement or cleric-like spell preparation, and that's about as restrictive as it's meant to be. You're picking your option for today, and it means you can't have a golf bag of weapons where you just use the most optimal mastery ability every round. The point is so that you can't easily push on round 1, topple on round 2, slow on round 3, etc. Maybe if you're a high level Fighter you can do that, but that's its own opportunity cost.

With 2 weapons, most classes will feel pressured to pick 1 melee and 1 ranged weapon simply out of utility. You pick what you plan on using. Then, if your DM award the party with a magic weapon, you'll be able to take that item. You won't have a blank for a class feature because you took battleaxe but the module says longsword and your DM thinks the game is supposed to screw you out of the feature because it never says you can change your choice. Nah. Features are supposed to work the whole game even if you find a different weapon, or if you picked a maul but now you're doing an underwater adventure.

 

[Demetrios1453]

One thing that I haven't seen brought up in this thread is that fighters do gain the ability to swap out some Weapon Mastery properties at level 9 with the Tactical Mastery class feature. Sure, it's only Push, Sap, or Slow, but that does give some flexibility when it comes to choosing different Weapon Mastery properties for any given weapon a fighter may choose/favor.

 

[Minigiant]

I don't even get why you can change them on a long rest? It is MASTERY after all... so , you can mastery a different rider on a long rest, but suddenly forget one you just had mastered???

Come on!!! That's just gamist and silly IMO

It's GAMIST...but if you couldn't switch masteries we'd have Ranger Favored Enemy and 3e Weapon specialization. And players demanding DMs drops specific weapons.

"A magic greataxe! But I have great sword mastery. This is useless You're a terrible DM! Why you dropping a weapon that's not for what my build is?! This is terrible. These module sucks this It's adventurous stinks I'm not engaged wah wah wah wah wah."

I'll take long rest weapon Mastery switching over that nonsense again.

"Oh players shouldn't be so entitled."

I do Not want to deal with that nonsense again. It will happen. It always happens. Happened in second edition. Happened in third edition. Sometimes even happen in 4th edition.

"Another +1 Magic bow. Where's the magic hand crossbow?"

I hate Crossbow expert.