It is the wielder that matters, not the blade. (3.5 weapon system remake, PEACH)

[bobthe6th]

Ok, so you know exotic weapon proficiency? The feat famous for handing out an additional damage die step and telling you to like it? Well to hell with that.

The whole system seemed to be a way to make fighting styles viable. The spiked chain is the basis for the idea of a chain tripper, but most of the others are flops. you could spend another feat away from the insane TWF feat chains to grab an EWP for a bastard sword or one of the many double weapons... for a whopping +1 average damage! Because that makes sense! Or you could get a whip, and be utterly useless against 99% of opponents! Yay!

The spiked chain is the only decent option in core, mostly because it has more bells and whistles then a kindergarten music class. It is a THW with inclusive reach, finessable(the only Two Handed Weapon in core to hand this out), useable for tripping, and +2 to disarm checks...

The problem is, as a weapon, it makes next to no sense. Much like a scythe, no one ever put spikes on a chain. it kinda makes it hard to hold.

the reason for this is, realistically, there is not all that much difference between the exotic weapons and their normal counterparts. A bastard sword is physically identical to a longsword, so doing more then a small damage boost is hard to explain.

Then there is the simple weapons, or inverse exotic weapons. They see more use because they are normally open to every one, while martial weapons aren't. The loss of a damage die step isn't that irritating, and they can have some nice niche uses.

So... I feel like fixing this.

Part 0:
When the term weapon is used, it means some sort of weapon that is close enough to the original weapon proficiency. So if you said "my character is proficient with one handed slashing, two handed bludgeoning, ranged, and two handed piercing" you could use a sledge hammer as the two handed bludgeoning, or a great club, or whatever. you could use a scimitar or a katana or whatever as a one handed slashing. You could use a bow, a crossbow, or whatever as a ranged weapon. You could use a spear, or a sharpened stick, or what ever as a two handed piercing.
As long as you could comfortably wield it in the appropriate number of hands and it was the right kind of edge on it, it counts.

Part I:
All weapon are either slashing, bludgeoning, or piercing. Slashing weapons have a base critical rate of 19-20/x2, piercing weapons have a base critical rate of x3, and bludgeoning weapons have a base critical rate of x2(but they can score critical hits against things normally immune to critical hits).

Why?:
Because it makes the damage types distinct. Also to make bludgeoning useful.

Part II:
All weapon's damage is equal to an unarmed strike damage as a monk of the wielders size(-1 size for light weapons, +1 size for two handed weapons), with a level equal to the wielders base attack bonus.

Why?
First of all, BAB is underrated. It is nice for some things, but the game designers thought it was on par with spells... so i hope to make it closer to worth that mush. This also tries to fix the problem of base weapon damage. At low levels a great sword will kill most anything in one hit from just the base damage. now it is just doing d8, I hope melee is less insane level 1-3. a) BAB now matters a bit more, and b) now damage scales.

Part III:
You gain your proficiencies at level 1*, 6, 11, and 16. At each of these points, figure out what the characters average BAB(average BAB=base attack bonus/HD). If it is 1/1, they gain four proficiencies. If less then 1/1 but greater then 1/2, they gain 2 proficiencies. If it is 1/2 they gain one proficiency.

Each prof lets you make a weapon by choosing one option off both the following lists (slashing, bludgeoning, or piercing) and (light, one handed, or two handed). Alternatively, they can chose to get a ranged weapon(bow, crossbow, gun... whatever), that counts as a piercing one handed weapons(that must be used with both hands), has a 60ft range increment, and reloads as a light cross bow.

*This assumes you are using fractional base attack bonus. If you aren't using fractional base attack bonus, for first level medium base attack bonus classes count as over 1/2 but less then 1/1 for proficiencies.

Why?
Because it fixes the silly "I can use any martial weapon" silliness, and continues the plan of making Full BAB worthwhile.

Part IV:
When you gain +2 BAB and every +4 BAB there after you get to modify one aspect of all weapons you are proficient with. Unless otherwise noted, you can only chose each modification once.

for melee weapons you can...

throw it as a thrown weapon with a 30ft range increment(10ft for two-handed melee weapons).

Gain +5 ft reach, but can't hit targets adjacent to you. (if the weapon already has this choice, you can take it again to make the reach inclusive)

Double the critical threat range of the weapon.

You can use your dexterity modifier in place of your strength for attack rolls with the weapon finesse feat.

You can use this weapon to trip.

You get +4 to a combat maneuver from the following list(disarm, trip, bull rush, feint, overrun, sunder) with this weapon. This option can be taken multiple times, but not for the same option.

Increase the weapons damage progression as if they were a size larger then they are. This option can be taken as many times as you want.



For ranged weapons you can...

Reloaded it as a free action you can take at any time(allowing you to full attack with it).

Increase the critical multiplier to x4.

Use the weapon to make a combat maneuver from the following list (disarm, trip, bull rush, feint, overrun, sunder) at up to one range increment, but as a creature Two sizes smaller(this requires you to effectively make an attack, so the weapon becomes unloaded after you make the maneuver). You can take this option multiple times, each time the maneuver is made as one effective size larger then it was before. Using

Increase the weapons damage progression as if they were a size larger then they are. This option can be taken as many times as you want.

The weapon now threatens attacks of opportunities as a reach weapon as long as it is loaded.

You can now wield the weapon in one hand. you may select this option again to wield the weapon as a light weapon.

The weapon now has a range of 100 feet.



Why?
Again, to make BAB more relevant and make weapons cooler as you level without requiring you spend feats on it. Now the weapons can evolve with you style choices, becoming better(Both from a pure numbers perspective and for fitting the character's style) with the character.


hopeful end result of this: less problems with melee versus everything else at low levels, more cool melee stuff at high level. Less insanity, more fun for mid to high level warriors, and clerics less like any melee class.

So, does this look ok? Or is it silly? Thoughts?

edit: droped the first modification to 2, so now Full BAB classes get either a modification or a +1 damage die size at each even level.

[Razanir]

It looks decent, though I'm not the best judge of balance. I'm normally the formatting and spelling/grammar check guy. Which reminds me, I'd take the actual fix out of the spoiler tags, and just have the explanations behind them as spoilers

[Tvtyrant]

I like the idea of getting proficiency as you level; it fixes the exotic weapon problem rather well. My biggest issue is that damage already moves up far faster than defense in D&D; it seems unnecessary to add extra weapon damage. Still a cool idea, it just makes combat that much more about initiative.

[bobthe6th]

It looks decent, though I'm not the best judge of balance. I'm normally the formatting and spelling/grammar check guy. Which reminds me, I'd take the actual fix out of the spoiler tags, and just have the explanations behind them as spoilers

I was mostly trying to avoid wall of text syndrome by breaking it up into bite sized chunks.


I like the idea of getting proficiency as you level; it fixes the exotic weapon problem rather well. My biggest issue is that damage already moves up far faster than defense in D&D; it seems unnecessary to add extra weapon damage. Still a cool idea, it just makes combat that much more about initiative.

Well, the issue with rocket tag was always an issue. The idea with a progression was to lower the power of Melee in the low levels(like 1-6), and increase the power at higher levels). Exponential growth classes tend to be really weak at low levels when compared to melee, then out pace them at mid to high levels.


edit: Just so people know, this is probably not the best wording. If any one wants to fix any part of the wording, I would be grateful.

[Vadskye]

How does this interact with thrown weapons? As far as I can tell, this means that a dagger is strictly superior to a short sword. And what is the damage progression for a shuriken (and how do I become proficient with it)?

[bobthe6th]

How does this interact with thrown weapons? As far as I can tell, this means that a dagger is strictly superior to a short sword. And what is the damage progression for a shuriken (and how do I become proficient with it)?

Well, actual weapons got shed. A thrown weapon just chose the throw weapon option at one of the +4 BABs... and a short sword would be a light weapon with the increase size option. A shuriken is the same as a dagger under this system, so it has the damage progression as a monk one size smaller then the wielder.

I should probably clerify that this is just how you wield a weapon. and make a mechanic for switching styles with the same weapon... gah.

[Vadskye]

Sounds to me like you're trying to solve the problem of weapons by getting rid of the idea of actual weapons, and replacing them with abstract concepts that do damage. So either I can throw all weapons, including my greatsword - I mean, my Two Handed Slashing Weapon - or I can throw no weapons, not even a javelin or a dagger. Same thing goes for tripping, or anything else; my warhammer (One Handed Bludgeoning Weapon) is no better at tripping than my flail (One Handed Bludgeoning Weapon). Do throwing axes and similar weapon concepts just not exist in this world? No one except highly trained soldiers can figure out how to throw a weapon properly, apparently - but when they do figure it out, they can go around throwing anything they feel like with equal ease. And what are javelins, anyway - are they ranged weapons (with a 60 foot range increment) or one-handed weapons that you... can't throw?

Bottom line is, I think this has a whole lot of logical issues. Weapons in D&D are different from each other because... weapons are different from each other in real life. They serve different purposes and have different properties, just because of their shape and design, and you're going to have an awful time trying to totally abolish the idea of weapons like you are doing.

[Zman]

I think you've got a good base idea, but implementation is a bit off.


Ok, weapon damage like a monk, modified by size? Not bad.

Scaling with BaB? Getting better with a weapon is represented so many different ways, is this necessary?

BAB based progession for extras? Now this is where it brake down and doesn't make much sense.

What if you create extra goodies for a weapon?

Throwable? Down a weapon size category, must be light to begin with. If Medium, down a size category and suffers a -2 in Melee.

Reach? Can't be used to attack Adjacent.

Mounted Charge? Only usable on a charge, includes Reach. Up one Damage category, or additional damage.

Tripping: May be used for Trip attack, -1 in Melee.

Oversized: +1 size Category Category, -2 in Melee combat.

These are just example, but could be used for all weapons to replicate most of them. Just need to watch out for things that don't make sense.

[bobthe6th]

Sounds to me like you're trying to solve the problem of weapons by getting rid of the idea of actual weapons, and replacing them with abstract concepts that do damage. So either I can throw all weapons, including my greatsword - I mean, my Two Handed Slashing Weapon - or I can throw no weapons, not even a javelin or a dagger.

ah, I should clerify. you can take the same prof more then once, and therfore have diffrent options on them based on BAB. So you can have a "Two handed slashing" that has 10ft reach and a "two handed slashing" that counts as a size larger for damage progression.





Same thing goes for tripping, or anything else; my warhammer (One Handed Bludgeoning Weapon) is no better at tripping than my flail (One Handed Bludgeoning Weapon). Do throwing axes and similar weapon concepts just not exist in this world? No one except highly trained soldiers can figure out how to throw a weapon properly, apparently - but when they do figure it out, they can go around throwing anything they feel like with equal ease. And what are javelins, anyway - are they ranged weapons (with a 60 foot range increment) or one-handed weapons that you... can't throw?

+4 is not that highly trained, especially considering D&D. Also javelins are probably ranged weapons, or one handed piercing with the throwing option.



Bottom line is, I think this has a whole lot of logical issues. Weapons in D&D are different from each other because... weapons are different from each other in real life. They serve different purposes and have different properties, just because of their shape and design, and you're going to have an awful time trying to totally abolish the idea of weapons like you are doing.

Weapons still have a lot of differences, and different wielders can get different things out of them. Much like not all swordsman using a sword the same way, not all people using a one handed slashing will use it the same way. One might lunge to add 5ft to his reach, or another might have figured out the trick of blocking away his oponents weapon and shoulder checking him to the ground for a trip. The things is this takes a little more thought then you are putting into it so far.


in bold

I think you've got a good base idea, but implementation is a bit off.


Ok, weapon damage like a monk, modified by size? Not bad.

Scaling with BaB? Getting better with a weapon is represented so many different ways, is this necessary?

You got a better way? one were a rogue won't have the same damage progression as a barbarian?

BAB based progession for extras? Now this is where it brake down and doesn't make much sense.

Why? the game seems to assume BAB is a big deal, so I made it one.

What if you create extra goodies for a weapon?

What do you mean?

Throwable? Down a weapon size category, must be light to begin with. If Medium, down a size category and suffers a -2 in Melee.

Eh... I don't see why. It means needing quick draw or a move action every round. Thrown weapons are bad enough as it is...

Reach? Can't be used to attack Adjacent.

says somthing like that already, but I think I have a better wording now.

Mounted Charge? Only usable on a charge, includes Reach. Up one Damage category, or additional damage.

See I would think a flat BAB to damage on a mounted charge would be better. niche but powerful

Tripping: May be used for Trip attack, -1 in Melee.

Why the minus?

Oversized: +1 size Category Category, -2 in Melee combat.

So a crappy forced PA? why? monkey grip is a bad feat for a reason.

These are just example, but could be used for all weapons to replicate most of them. Just need to watch out for things that don't make sense.

[bobthe6th]

bump. here are some letters.

[4th number]

A friendly suggestion: Edit your title. :smallsmile:

[Razanir]

*facepalm*

4th Number was referring to the fact that you spelled weapon wepon

[bobthe6th]

sigh... *edit*

[bobthe6th]

Ok, edited the OP a lot, made some better whys...

so, any new thoughts?

[bobthe6th]

bump...

"There are strange things done under the midnight sun by men who moil for gold. These arctic trails have secret tails that would make your blood run cold. These arctic lights have seen strange sights, but the strangest they every did see was the night on the merge of the lake lamburge where I cremated Sam MacGee.

[Howler Dagger]

I have to say I do like this system. It makes it easier to wield weapons not in rulebooks, and also makes weapon uses more useful and varied.

[bobthe6th]

I have to say I do like this system. It makes it easier to wield weapons not in rulebooks, and also makes weapon uses more useful and varied.

You see any issues with it? Anything that is insane or unbalanced?


Edit: dropped the level of the first mod to 2, so you arn't waiting for +4 BAB to get anything.

[bobthe6th]

four day bump

[Ziegander]

It's intriguing, I'll give you that. I've always sort of admired systems where the weapon itself does not matter at all, and this is one of those for sure. Seems functional if not overly powerful or utility-based, but still, it's a bit of an upgrade for warrior-types.

[Just to Browse]

I want weapons that look different to operate differently, and give characters reasons for using certain weapons, and this doesn't do that because weapons are almost entirely homogeneous (except rogues now use all bludgeoning weapons).

I also want weapons to be easy to just pick up and use. This system also doesn't do that, because a character appears to re-customize their weapon every time they use it.

And it appears that I am not allowed to be a weapon master until at least level 11, because there are 10 proficiencies and I get at most 4/5 levels.

I just feel like this system is just very clunky. Weapon proficiencies should be easy things, not tax forms.

[Carl]

I have to agree with just to browse here. If you'd stacked the scaling damage on top of the existing system there wouldn't be an issue. In fact it's a hugely elegant way of making BAB more useful. But completely throwing weapons out as individual entities and letting your throw properties like that on any weapon is just dumb. You could have Durkons Hammer be a trip weapons with a +4 to trip attacks with this, and that's just wrong on so many levels. Real weapons are nowhere near anything like that. Some weapons are naturally easy to use to do some things untrained whilst even absolute masters of another weapon cannot do some things with that weapon. That's why Pikes, Crossbows, and Eventually Muskets became so popular IRL. They where very easy to train people to use to a basic level and where superbly effective against a wide range of opponents. Only good tactics and very well trained soldiers with the right weapons could effectively tackle such things. And since the number of any type of soldier you could field was inversely proportional to the amount of training required the Pike, Crossbow, and Musket took over.


That's the logical negatives aside and the positives dealt with. On a non-logical level I have another issue with this. There's no obvious reason for the homogenisation. Damage scaling, even individual weapon modification and damage type modification, sure. But not a wholesale dropping of the individual weapons. Once you fix the issue of irrelevance on base weapon damage much of the problems with Exotic weapons go away because that damage tier increase is no longer minor. Of course i'm not sure Exotic weapons should be superior to martial ones in a straight up way. I'm fine with Martial beating simple because most classes with just simple access either aren't using their melee as a core damage dealing mechanic or have alternatives or other affects that make the lack less painful or outright irrelevant. Honestly One handed melee and Ranged aside the Exotic section seems to be a repository for Double Weapons, (no need to explain why their Exotic type), or Monk Weapons, (again, explanations unnecessary). The main thing screwing that up is the One Handed melee type and the Heavy repeating Crossbow. Reign those in and it would just be another alternative. Albeit an interesting and unique one.

I should also point out that double bladed swords, and double bladed axe's, (orc), aside all the double weapons get bonuses of some kind. So it's not even like they don't have something unique going for them, (though i agree it's kind of sad how poor the double weapon rules are).

EDIT: Here's my suggested progression mechanism btw:


{table=head]1 Base Dice Progreshion|2 Base Dice Progreshion

1|-
1D2|-
1D3|-
1D4|2D2
1D6|2D3
1D8|2D4
1D10|*
1D12|2D6
2D8|-
2D10|-
2D12|-
3D10|-
3D12|-
[/table]

A Value in the 2-Dice column of - means use the 1 dice column instead.

A Value of * in the 2 dice column means skip ahead to the next step.

A BAB of less than Zero reduces the base Damage by 1 Tier. A BAB's of 6+, 11+, 16+, and 20+ induce cumulative 1 tier increases in Damage Tier. A Double Weapon wielded with only one head in use and used in two hands gains a 2 tier positive increase.

[bobthe6th]

edit: @JtB:
In Bold

I want weapons that look different to operate differently, and give characters reasons for using certain weapons, and this doesn't do that because weapons are almost entirely homogeneous (except rogues now use all bludgeoning weapons).

I mean, a spear and a dagger still operate differently.

I also want weapons to be easy to just pick up and use. This system also doesn't do that, because a character appears to re-customize their weapon every time they use it.

No, they have a mix of "proficiencies" that work when you wield a weapon that fits the "proficiencies." So, you pick up a weapon, and consider which way the fighter uses it. Then you just use that weapon with the statistics of the "proficiently."
It is much easier then having to ask for the weapons stats from the DM.


And it appears that I am not allowed to be a weapon master until at least level 11, because there are 10 proficiencies and I get at most 4/5 levels.

Wait, weapon master is still a thing? Just change the prereques.


I just feel like this system is just very clunky. Weapon proficiencies should be easy things, not tax forms.

Not sure were you are getting this.

Spoilered the giant wall of text.


I have to agree with just to browse here. If you'd stacked the scaling damage on top of the existing system there wouldn't be an issue. In fact it's a hugely elegant way of making BAB more useful. But completely throwing weapons out as individual entities and letting your throw properties like that on any weapon is just dumb. You could have Durkons Hammer be a trip weapons with a +4 to trip attacks with this, and that's just wrong on so many levels. Real weapons are nowhere near anything like that. Some weapons are naturally easy to use to do some things untrained whilst even absolute masters of another weapon cannot do some things with that weapon. That's why Pikes, Crossbows, and Eventually Muskets became so popular IRL. They where very easy to train people to use to a basic level and where superbly effective against a wide range of opponents. Only good tactics and very well trained soldiers with the right weapons could effectively tackle such things. And since the number of any type of soldier you could field was inversely proportional to the amount of training required the Pike, Crossbow, and Musket took over.


Except that is for large scale battles. The biggest party is like maybe 8.
They might face down like 20 dudes at the outside. A D&D fight is more like a kungfu movie then a proper battle. Making some weapons batter then others means the lesser weapons are irrelevant.

Durkons hammer doing that just means he knows how to do a good leg sweep. Realize the add ons are supposed to be mostly the fighter getting better a fighting with his weapon, not just the weapon getting better. and trip+improved trip meant 2 add ons, or level 6 for a full BAB class, and like level 8 for say, a cleric.

D&D is about customization, and weapons tend to be static... which is wrong. Weapons should be able to grow with a character.



That's the logical negatives aside and the positives dealt with. On a non-logical level I have another issue with this. There's no obvious reason for the homogenisation. Damage scaling, even individual weapon modification and damage type modification, sure. But not a wholesale dropping of the individual weapons. Once you fix the issue of irrelevance on base weapon damage much of the problems with Exotic weapons go away because that damage tier increase is no longer minor. Of course i'm not sure Exotic weapons should be superior to martial ones in a straight up way. I'm fine with Martial beating simple because most classes with just simple access either aren't using their melee as a core damage dealing mechanic or have alternatives or other affects that make the lack less painful or outright irrelevant. Honestly One handed melee and Ranged aside the Exotic section seems to be a repository for Double Weapons, (no need to explain why their Exotic type), or Monk Weapons, (again, explanations unnecessary). The main thing screwing that up is the One Handed melee type and the Heavy repeating Crossbow. Reign those in and it would just be another alternative. Albeit an interesting and unique one.


um.... if you take away the base damage, and move specials to add ons bought as you level, what is left? I prefer to rely on the players and DMs imagination, rather then restraining people to the odd preconception of what a weapon means.



I should also point out that double bladed swords, and double bladed axe's, (orc), aside all the double weapons get bonuses of some kind. So it's not even like they don't have something unique going for them, (though i agree it's kind of sad how poor the double weapon rules are).


You seem not to get what 1 feat equals. 1 feat is 1/6 of a characters feats. A double flail is two flails, but one is treated as light! wow, so not worth it. Do you know of any double weapons the doesn't equal "2 of x weapon strapped together, but one is light"?

[Xhosant]

For a less controversial version, you could just boost BAB usefulness in a more direct way (such as dropping the extra attack threshold to 4, aka get BABs of +5/+1 or +18/+14/+10/+6/+2 (i know it scales out of hand, that's just a rough concept) and tackle exotics separately.

For another draft on exotics, something along the line of "class x can get a single bonus feat of EWP at any time after level y (and another after level z etc., depending on how many you want to give a class) perhaps requiring {tutoring under/figting alongside or against/whatever} a user of the weapon, using the weapon at a disadvantage for some time while you are "figuring it out", or some combination of the above or more.

You could even make "class exotic weapons", meaning that a peculiar short of exotic, say, spellbook can only be used by wizards etc. allowing them to substitute a spell prepared for one of the few scribed in it (known or not). Such ideas would make exotic weapons more exotic and interesting, while fitting (i think) the above system.

On a side note, "spiked chains" are NOT chains with pointy lumps. Player's handbook has a picture of it, it's more like couple of blades linked to a chain's edges.

[Carl]

Except that is for large scale battles. The biggest party is like maybe 8.
They might face down like 20 dudes at the outside. A D&D fight is more like a kungfu movie then a proper battle.

I choose the specific scenario because anyone who's read even a smidgeon about medieval weapons gets it. Not for it's relevance to small scale fights like D&D. The basic principal remains unchanged. A sword is infinitely easier to parry with than any hammer or axe as a more obvious example. An Axe or a Hammer have drastically different balance, to the point you can't be proficient with one, and automatically use the other without training.


Durkons hammer doing that just means he knows how to do a good leg sweep. Realize the add ons are supposed to be mostly the fighter getting better a fighting with his weapon, not just the weapon getting better. and trip+improved trip meant 2 add ons, or level 6 for a full BAB class, and like level 8 for say, a cleric.

Except no amount of skills will let Durkons hammer trip someone, no matter how good they are. It has no notches for catching weapons so you can't entangle someone's weapon and pull them off balance, it has no hooks to grab at limbs or armour to pull someone over. It lacks the reach to even reach Durkons own legs fully never mind an opponents, a leg sweep is totally out of the question. Short of throwing himself at his opponents feet on his face Durkon is never going to get a leg sweep with that, the reach is too short.

Even with longer weapons it takes a lot more than length to make a good trip weapon. Without hooks or notches or something similar your limited to leg sweeps. That means either the weapon has to be able to hook behind the enemies legs or it needs to be properly designed for the job. Up to a point any merely long sword that strikes the leg will just glance off. Most of the weight is between the hilt and the impact point, this results in a poor leverage factor and a tendency to pivot around a midpoint between the hilt and contact point. Generally you needed a perfectly aimed blow from a weapon with a long haft and a heavy head, (think sledgehammer or more). The only weapon i'm aware of that could really pull off the blow to the legs with any degree of success without relying on a leg injury was the many variants of Halberd. A trained user could use their very long haft to sweep with the butt whilst the heavy head on the other end provided a counterweight and their body the fulcrum, but even that required relatively close range to work and was a trick to down a disarmed opponent, (something else Halberd's traditionally excelled at).

As for weapons being better or worse. hat why Weapons have special properties and the like. To differentiate equivalent weapons.


D&D is about customization, and weapons tend to be static... which is wrong. Weapons should be able to grow with a character.

May i point you to the sections marked special materials and magic Items and Equipment. Something your changes does not in any way negate.



um.... if you take away the base damage, and move specials to add ons bought as you level, what is left?

That's precisely my point vis a vis the logic side of things. What is left that defines a specific weapon. Nothing.

On a non-logical level i still don't understand the point from a game mechanic PoV. How does this inn any way add anything good or new to the game, what is it's purpose within the system vis a vis expanding the system.




You seem not to get what 1 feat equals. 1 feat is 1/6 of a characters feats. A double flail is two flails, but one is treated as light! wow, so not worth it. Do you know of any double weapons the doesn't equal "2 of x weapon strapped together, but one is light"?

I get exactly what one feat equals, but as i already aid, double weapons are poorly implemented. To be blunt they stink of the idea that the developers assumed people actually dual wielding would use only light weapons making Double weapons an upgrade because you can get one handed melee damage and/or bonus capabilities over that AND have the option of going 2-hander if you need to. They pay for that versatility by being exotic weapons. It's a nice idea, but A) a one handed melee i the main hand part negates the benefit and B) the total irrelevance of the base damage, C) the relatively limited utility of their extra's.

This is where scaling damage and improved double weapon damage when wielded as a 2-hander comes in. It makes the 2-hander option of a Double Weapon appealing when you have a high AC foe to fight, and the damage scaling means that for those with good off-hand damage the tradeoff compared to separate main and off hands is worth it. The ones with utility are a bit harder to balance out but i think the added 2-hander utility would help there too.

Maybe i was a little unclear earlier. I don't have an issue with something having an advantage over contemporaries, but like the Double weapons their ought to be some degree of uniqueness to it for exotics, it should be something that's a question of combat style and weather it suits yours, rather than a direct simple +x Damage, Double weapons with the changes i mentioned would be much less useful if your style didn't include the special attacks or if you had little use for the 2-handed utility. The damage from the off hand alone might not justify the feat for you. Bastard Swords, Waraxe's and Heavy Repeaters are just straight upgrades in nothing but pure damage, there's not the feeling of a unique style to the that makes them upgrades if you want a specific thing. Though for Heavy repeaters that's just a side affect of how crossbows in general are handled. and the other two could be made by lowering their damage dice tier by one when wielded two-handed, so that they're once again a more versatile weapon for switching, at the expense of a feat, (though that might not be enough).

Anyway getting tired now, nearly time I got my head down for a few hours so maybe i'll be more coherent later if your having problems with this post.

[Just to Browse]

I mean, a spear and a dagger still operate differently.


No, they have a mix of "proficiencies" that work when you wield a weapon that fits the "proficiencies." So, you pick up a weapon, and consider which way the fighter uses it. Then you just use that weapon with the statistics of the "proficiently."
It is much easier then having to ask for the weapons stats from the DM.Ah, I see that now. Well it bothers me for another reason, then--weapons don't feel different at all. My whip and dagger will both have extended reach (wat?) and my flail and quarterstaff deal the same critical (wat wat?)


, weapon master is still a thing? Just change the prereques.Yes, the concept of being a master with all weapons does still exist, and it should not be delayed until level 10.


sure were you are getting this."All right I'm level 11! What's my BAB/level? Crap, is +8 bab part of the weapon progression? I forgot if I proficient with 1-H bludgeoning or 1-H bludgeoning and Piercing. Does my Morningstar only inflict bludgeoning if i only have bludgeoning proficiency?"

[bobthe6th]

I choose the specific scenario because anyone who's read even a smidgeon about medieval weapons gets it. Not for it's relevance to small scale fights like D&D. The basic principal remains unchanged. A sword is infinitely easier to parry with than any hammer or axe as a more obvious example. An Axe or a Hammer have drastically different balance, to the point you can't be proficient with one, and automatically use the other without training.

so you'd rather use the system that with one level a fighter can use any weapon, and the difference between a sword and an axe is negligible?(x3 is the same damage boost as 19-20/x2)

the current system is just as silly, this one just owns the gamist focus.



Except no amount of skills will let Durkons hammer trip someone, no matter how good they are. It has no notches for catching weapons so you can't entangle someone's weapon and pull them off balance, it has no hooks to grab at limbs or armour to pull someone over. It lacks the reach to even reach Durkons own legs fully never mind an opponents, a leg sweep is totally out of the question. Short of throwing himself at his opponents feet on his face Durkon is never going to get a leg sweep with that, the reach is too short.

Durkon can only really reach mos peoples thighs with a strike. why do you suggest he can reach their torso so much easier then their shins? Or baring that, just say he swings hard enough to knock them over. but this is semantics, and rather pointless.




Yes, the concept of being a master with all weapons does still exist, and it should not be delayed until level 10.

Oh, I thought you meant a PRC. Just make a feat then, I won't mind,


May I point you to the sections marked special materials and magic Items and Equipment. Something your changes does not in any way negate.

So? that is called magic... and the system likes using it. Most of the special materials are really meh, besides adimantine.



"All right I'm level 11! What's my BAB/level? Crap, is +8 bab part of the weapon progression? I forgot if I'm proficient with 1-H bludgeoning or 1-H bludgeoning and Piercing. Does my Morningstar only inflict bludgeoning if I only have bludgeoning proficiency?"
8/11=.7, so better then .5, but less then 1. You get 2 profs.
you have to rember at most 10 things, which should be written out on your sheet.

One calculation, and a tiny amount of thought. Am I level 1, 6, 11, 16? if no, you get no proficiencies. If yes, BAB/Level. If it is 1, you get four profs. If it is less then one but greater then .5, you get 2. If i is .5, you get 1. Are you really freaking over this? that is less work then skill points.
{table=head]level|special
1|proficiency
2|
3|
4|
5|
6|Proif
7|
8|
9|
10|
11|Prof
12|
13|
14|
15|
16|Prof
17|
18|
19|
20|
[/table]

then divide your BAB/2. Is it 1, 3, 5, 7, 9? then all you profs get an add on. Is it 2, 4, 6, 8, or 10? then your damage goes up a die. Is it .5, 1.5, 2.5, 3.5, 4.5, 5.5, 6.5, 7.5, 8.5, Or 9.5? then you get nothing.

[Just to Browse]

Yes, I need to write some 3-10 things on my sheet and do division and reference my level with the homebrew textbook level advancement text.

I'm not saying that this is the bane of homebrew, it's functional and I'm sure you could wrangle some players into using it, but it only achieves your goals with more bookkeeping and list-references than I (and most players, I would think) are willing to put up with. Simpler systems can be designed that solve the same problems.

[bobthe6th]

Yes, I need to write some 3-10 things on my sheet and do division and reference my level with the homebrew textbook level advancement text.

I'm not saying that this is the bane of homebrew, it's functional and I'm sure you could wrangle some players into using it, but it only achieves your goals with more bookkeeping and list-references than I (and most players, I would think) are willing to put up with. Simpler systems can be designed that solve the same problems.

Seriously? The math takes place only at level up, and is reducible to a small flow chart... Like every other part of leveling up. Like fractional BAB/saves or selecting your feats or skill points. Hell, a spell caster has more complex table reference.

Its just you keep asserting it is really complicated, but I argue it isn't. I can't see what is so complicated, so I can't really fix it.

[Just to Browse]

Seriously?Yes, seriously. Do not fall prey to the idea that must because I do complicated things it's ok to make me do more. I am in school, but my ideal time is not going home and studying. I work in a lab, but my idea of a relaxing time is not sitting down and pipetting for two hours. I write characters and level up, but that doesn't mean I want to do bookkeeping.
The math takes place only at level up, and is reducible to a small flow chart... Like every other part of leveling up. Like fractional BAB/saves or selecting your feats or skill points. Hell, a spell caster has more complex table reference.yes, it's like leveling up. That's why it's bad. I"/ already replacing spells, choosing feats, buying skills, perhaps picking class levels, advancing animal companions, updating damage, and spending wealth, and you want to add another thing on to that? Character leveling already takes half an hour at my table, why on earth should I make that longer shen I can just keep the current system and not make players do extra work? What's the net benefit here?


Its just you keep asserting it is really complicated, but I argue it isn't. I can't see what is so complicated, so I can't really fix it.You keep asserting that it's more work. I can't enjoy extra work, so I really can't commend it.

[bobthe6th]

Character leveling already takes half an hour at my table, why on earth should I make that longer when I can just keep the current system and not make players do extra work? What's the net benefit here?

The benefit? Added character customization(weapons as you want them, growing to fit the character as he or she levels), and an increase in balance(making the damage of weapons scale so that it is saner at low levels and relevant at high levels and make BAB actually important for things other then iterative attacks).

The cost of this benefit is maybe 5 extra minutes at the outside at each level up. Probably much less, except for the decision points, which are every 2 levels for full BAB characters, every 2-3 levels for a 3/4 BAB character, and every 4 levels for a 1/2 BAB character. So much like feats, I suspect they have probably already planned out the moves in advance by a few levels.

[Just to Browse]

The benefit? Added character customization(weapons as you want them, growing to fit the character as he or she levels), and an increase in balance(making the damage of weapons scale so that it is saner at low levels and relevant at high levels and make BAB actually important for things other then iterative attacks).A minimal amount of customization more or less reproducible in the current syatem that provides a modicimal change in balance and makes BAB only slightly more important.


The cost of this benefit is maybe 5 extra minutes at the outside at each level up. Probably much less, except for the decision points, which are every 2 levels for full BAB characters, every 2-3 levels for a 3/4 BAB character, and every 4 levels for a 1/2 BAB character. So much like feats, I suspect they have probably already planned out the moves in advance by a few levels.The cost is me printing off and remembering these rules, and having to explain and debate them with my suspicious playgroup. The cost is in my npc's and monsters that I need to rewrite for proficiencies and adaptations from the ground up, the retcon I need to do on multiclassers, and the amount of swimming through paper I have to do anytime someone needs a refresher on which weapon type does what or which weapon adaptations to advance.