Masterwork Weapons: Alternatives to damage?

[Kryx]

I'm converting more Pathfinder Adventure Paths and Masterwork Weapons/Armor are somewhat common. I'd like to offer a small bonus that makes the PCs inclined to keep these items.

Any suggestions other than a +1 to damage?

[Mr.Moron]

Possibilities:

-Gains properties such as Light, or Finesse it might not ordinarily have.
-Deals additional damage on a crit.
-If the player's first attack in the round has advantage and the next attack they make wouldn't have disadvantage they gain advantage on that attack (being exceptionally well-balanced means that a followup attack to one made in favorable circumstances is also more effective.)
-Re-roll attack roll results of "1".
-When an attack has advantage you can re-roll one of the two dice.
-Expanded critical range.
-On a critical hit, it imposes a status effect (Stunned/Proned/etc..)
-On a critical hit, it grants advantage to the next attack made this round.
-Re-rolls 1s & 2s in damage (Great Weapon Fighters may now re-roll "3s)
-When wielded in pairs, or as a 2-handed weapon gives you a +1 bonus to AC that doesn't stack with shields if you manage to stack that somehow.
-When you use a class feature damage die that depends on your skill with the weapon (Smite, Battle Master, Sneak Attack etc..) add +X dice to the roll and discard the lowest X dice.

[Grand Warchief]

Yeah, the most common things I've heard is rerolling any "1" on the damage dice, adding +1 to damage, and making it count as one category lighter than normal. i.e. heavy counts as normal or (versatile), normal counts as light, light counts as finesse, etc. Idk if I have those right but you get the idea. It allows mw to have meaning without unbalancing the game too much. Expanding crit ranges can be dangerous because crits are now auto hits.

Also keep in mind that there type of weapons are supposed to be made better, such as by a very skilled blacksmith often taking years to create. Think the sword from pirates of the Caribbean. It's perfectly balanced and was given to a high ranking official because of it's superior workmanship. Or the sword from ruroni kenshin, so well crafted that only 2 were ever made. I personally like to keep this thought process in 5e because it works with the economy. 3.5e had so much magic that mw stuff was often overlooked. In this edition, it would actually mean something.

One more thing to note, it can be assumed that all magic items must be of a high enough quality to be made magical. Meaning that all magic items are also mw items. If you do introduce mw, don't let your players forget that. (on a side note, this line of thinking also makes sense for why magic items are so rare, as you need such high craftmanship to make them)

[Mr.Moron]

One more thing to note, it can be assumed that all magic items must be of a high enough quality to be made magical. Meaning that all magic items are also mw items. If you do introduce mw, don't let your players forget that. (on a side note, this line of thinking also makes sense for why magic items are so rare, as you need such high craftmanship to make them)

This was true previously, but I see no reason it has to be true now. Even if it is, it's easy enough to say that the magic changes the item sufficiently that whatever the "Mastework" quality it had lost to the enchantment process. This can effectively make the magic effects override masterwork, such that they're mutually exclusive. Or not. It's an option if you'd be worried about that kind of thing.

Regarding crit ranges. The autohitcrit seems solidly in the realm of the table interpretation. That said I'm not sure it's relevant.

With their primary attacks even starting characters are going to have a healthy modifier. Even if you made something as low as a "15" an auto-hit-crit the number of things that aren't going to be hit by 15+Primary Stat+Proficiency Modifier that you're going to run into at any given point is rather low. The number of misses converted to crits when going from 20 to 19-20 or 19-20 to 18-20 is probably trivial. Even at level an "18" is a 23 total for a modest primary attack.

[Grand Warchief]

Personally I don't like the idea of taking away from the champion subclass of fighter. Call me wrong, but the main reason I see going that path over battlemaster is the increased crit range. That said, even the rerolling all "1" damage dice is iffy in my book as that's treading on the feat, though not quite as high. I think +1 to damage or reducing the effective weight ie finesse, light, etc, would be the best way to go, but that's just one playgrounder's opinion.

[Grand Warchief]

With their primary attacks even starting characters are going to have a healthy modifier. Even if you made something as low as a "15" an auto-hit-crit the number of things that aren't going to be hit by 15+Primary Stat+Proficiency Modifier that you're going to run into at any given point is rather low. The number of misses converted to crits when going from 20 to 19-20 or 19-20 to 18-20 is probably trivial. Even at level an "18" is a 23 total for a modest primary attack.

It's not just about hitting though. Yes, you will most likely hit with a 19 on the die, but the fighter gets to crit and A normal character doesn't. That's the allure of the champion. Dip 3 levels to crit on a 19 and now a rogue is that much scarier.

[jkat718]

Maybe say that you only get extended crit range when you have advantage? Or, better yet, say that you roll all damage dice twice on a 19. It's not an auto hit, but it's still a boost. Alternatively, you can switch it. Auto-hits on 19, but not double damage.

[Grand Warchief]

Maybe say that you only get extended crit range when you have advantage? (snip)

I like that. Advantage is easily countered by one instance of disadvantage so when you do have it, that really helps. Careful though if your dm is using house ruled advantage system though. I've seen some dm go crazy with stacking advantage lol.

[Kryx]

I'd really like something that doesn't change the core math of weapons much, but enough to keep around.

Rerolling 1s on damage sounds perfect, but then it makes Greatsword even better than Greataxes. Maybe just adjust those two so greataxe rerolls 1's and 2 and greatsword is 1s. Great Weapon Fighting would be 1-3 in that case...

Ugh I wish I could find something with less math concerns, but still meaningful.

[Grand Warchief]

Then go with lightening the weapon?

[Mr.Moron]

I'd really like something that doesn't change the core math of weapons much, but enough to keep around.

Rerolling 1s on damage sounds perfect, but then it makes Greatsword even better than Greataxes. Maybe just adjust those two so greataxe rerolls 1's and 2 and greatsword is 1s. Great Weapon Fighting would be 1-3 in that case...

Ugh I wish I could find something with less math concerns, but still meaningful.

It doesn't have to be a universal bonus. A masterwork Greatsword and a mastework Greataxe could have different "Masterwork" abilities. Hell, two different "Masterwork" Greataxes might have different abilities from each other. "Masterwork" is just a way of saying better than usual. Things can be better in different ways. Nothing says superior craftsmanship needs to be a 1-size-fits-all bonus.

[Grand Warchief]

It doesn't have to be a universal bonus. A masterwork Greatsword and a mastework Greataxe could have different "Masterwork" abilities. Hell, two different "Masterwork" Greataxes might have different abilities from each other. "Masterwork" is just a way of saying better. Things can be better in different ways. Nothing says superior craftsmanship needs to be a 1-size-fits-all bonus.

This is good

[Kryx]

It doesn't have to be a universal bonus.
But then it becomes much more complicated than I desire... ugh.

[Grand Warchief]

Then don't use them. Or say they overcome magical resistances as though they were magical without giving them a +1 bonus

[Naanomi]

I use advantage to resist being broken. No fiddly combat bonuses in a system where they can be stronger than expected, but still 'better' by a measurable degree.

Also, most historical 'masterwork' weapons were more about value and social status of owning one than actual combat effectiveness so bonuses to appropriate social rolls might also be a way to go

[Mr.Moron]

But then it becomes much more complicated than I desire... ugh.

Probably less than you fear. These are house rules for your table and they only need to exist so far as your PCs want to interact with them.

You don't need to present them with a big table of all the MW bonuses, or even think of them yourself. It's probably OK to just have a general idea of what they might do. You can assign the abilities to individual weapons as they come up, based on what feels right for your game at the time.

If your players never ask to have a Masterwork halberd commissioned you never have to think of what a masterwork halberd does, as they effectively don't exist. You could even put some of the decision in the players hands ask them if they want it to "Handle more easily" (something related to attack rolls), "Have a superior edge" (something related to damage rolls) or "Dig into weak points more readily" (something related to crits).

Those "Somethings" don't have to be announced until it's actually time for the player to use the weapon. This gives you breathing room to decide on the effects while the weapon is being built, and keeps you from having to maintain a complicated system of different bonuses.

[Grand Warchief]

What about advantage on damage rolls? It's weird, but it could worK. Instead of rolling 1d12 you roll 2d12 take the highest. It's pretty easy, though it does increase their damage a lot. Also it only affects weapon damage dice, not all damage dice.

[jkat718]

Why not take the ideas that we've had (weight class reduction, damage bonus, damage reroll, atk reroll...) and make them options? That way, instead of saying "Here, have this generically masterwork weapon," you can say "Here, have a specially masterwork weapon. Do you want a Balanced, Biting, Mighty, or Keen weapon?" We could also try to convert the old Special Abilities system from 3.x into semi-comparable bonuses for 5e.

Melee +1:
Bane
Defending
Flaming
Frost
Shock
Ghost touch
Keen (piercing or slashing only)
Ki Focus
Merciful
Mighty cleaving
Spell storing
Throwing
Thundering
Vicious

Melee +2:
Anarchic
Axiomatic
Disruption (bludgeoning only)
Flaming burst
Icy burst
Holy
Shocking burst
Unholy
Wounding

Melee +3:
Speed

Melee +4:
Brilliant energy
Dancing

Melee +5:
Vorpal (piercing or slashing only)

Ranged +1:
Bane
Distance
Flaming
Frost
Merciful
Returning
Shock
Seeking
Thundering

Ranged +2:
Anarchic
Axiomatic
Flaming burst
Holy
Icy burst
Shocking burst
Unholy

Ranged +3:
Speed

Ranged +4:
Brilliant energy



Now, obviously a lot of these won't work, but if we can convert most or even just some of them, then there should be plenty of options to make masterwork more than just a generic bonus.


EDIT: Whoops, that was from my 3e book, not 3.5. :smallredface: Fixed it now.

[heavyfuel]

I'll just say that Rerolling 1s is way, way too strong. Not only does it copy a unique Halfling ability, it also makes it so Disadvantage becomes much less of a deal. When in Disadv, you have a 10% chance of rolling a 1... That's a pretty big bonus, being able to reroll

[Grand Warchief]

I think they meant rerolling 1 on damage rolls not attack rolls

[Mr.Moron]

I think they meant rerolling 1 on damage rolls not attack rolls

No. One of the things I suggested in my post was re-roll "1s" on attack roll. Though one could easily say "When you don't have disadvantage" if that's an issue. Presumably halfings would get 2 re-rolls, or re-rolls on a 1 and 2.

It was just a big list of things off the top of my head.

[Kryx]

All of these change too much of the core math for my tastes (I focus quite a bit on balance). I say that in consideration of spells, wildshape, twf vs 2H, etc.

I already have a decent list of houserules and don't feel like this complexity will add much enjoyment - it will just require people to purchase the upgrade for X gold.

It's easier for me to just remove all the MW weapons put in for math purposes for PF and then keep any that would be works of art.

You're welcome to continue discussing though.

[Mr.Moron]

All of these change too much of the core math for my tastes (I focus quite a bit on balance). I say that in consideration of spells, wildshape, twf vs 2H, etc.

I already have a decent list of houserules and don't feel like this complexity will add much enjoyment - it will just require people to purchase the upgrade for X gold.

It's easier for me to just remove all the MW weapons put in for math purposes for PF and then keep any that would be works of art.

You're welcome to continue discussing though.

That's fair. I think the point you raised about "requiring an upgrade" is worth addressing generally. I'm not actually trying to speak to your situation specifically, to convince you to do otherwise. It's just this is a general line of thinking I've seen elsewhere and I'm not convinced it's totally true.

For example "Masterwork" could be introduced roughly the same time as "Magic" simply for a different flavor take on "Better Weapon" if that's something they're getting generally.

"Masterwork" might have significant in-game time and/or resource commitments (more than simply dropping gold at unnamed NPC shop) that might offset the benefits when it comes to player analysis of cost:return.

"Masterwork" might not even be something you announce the existence of. Maybe the concept only enters the equation if and when a player is actively looking to get fancy toy, without prompting from the GM's side of things. In this case it might not even come up in some campaigns.

"Masterwork" weapons might show up as matter of course. Where they're introduced to the PCs before they reach the point where they'd be able to buy them. In one game I ran a character's father (a master smith), gave her specially-crafted weapons as a gift.


The idea that "This bonus exists, therefore it's a mandatory upgrade" assumes a lot of things about the way the mechanics are presented, and how the game world allows players to interact with those mechanics. Sure if you've got a menu of bonuses with prices attached that are plainly visible and sort of generically available, that's how it'll turn out.

[Grand Warchief]

I like the idea of a mw weapon being given as a gift and maybe giving a small bonus. Make it something you can't buy or you have to commission a Smith to spend months on. That way, you're looking at getting it after getting magic items. Idk, maybe it gives advantage on some social skill checks because of the prestige of having such a well crafted item.

[Submortimer]

That's fair. I think the point you raised about "requiring an upgrade" is worth addressing generally. I'm not actually trying to speak to your situation specifically, to convince you to do otherwise. It's just this is a general line of thinking I've seen elsewhere and I'm not convinced it's totally true.

For example "Masterwork" could be introduced roughly the same time as "Magic" simply for a different flavor take on "Better Weapon" if that's something they're getting generally.

"Masterwork" might have significant in-game time and/or resource commitments (more than simply dropping gold at unnamed NPC shop) that might offset the benefits when it comes to player analysis of cost:return.

"Masterwork" might not even be something you announce the existence of. Maybe the concept only enters the equation if and when a player is actively looking to get fancy toy, without prompting from the GM's side of things. In this case it might not even come up in some campaigns.

"Masterwork" weapons might show up as matter of course. Where they're introduced to the PCs before they reach the point where they'd be able to buy them. In one game I ran a character's father (a master smith), gave her specially-crafted weapons as a gift.


The idea that "This bonus exists, therefore it's a mandatory upgrade" assumes a lot of things about the way the mechanics are presented, and how the game world allows players to interact with those mechanics. Sure if you've got a menu of bonuses with prices attached that are plainly visible and sort of generically available, that's how it'll turn out.

This makes a lot of sense. For example, Adamantine and Mithral armor are both considered "Uncommon" magical items, even though neither were enchanted. A +1 weapon may indeed just be an exquisitely crafted sword or an axe made of a special material. If this doesnt jive, the easiest thing to do would be to split the +1 bonus to hit dan the +1 bonus to damage and give one of them to the "Masterwork" weapon, which is kinda whats already been suggested.

[jkat718]

So Masterwork gives +1 atk OR +1 dmg, but not both? If Masterwork and magic stack, then you could have a Masterwork +1 weapon that has +1 atk and +2 dmg, or you could have one that has +2 atk and +1 dmg. That works, I guess.

[Grand Warchief]

So Masterwork gives +1 atk OR +1 dmg, but not both? If Masterwork and magic stack, then you could have a Masterwork +1 weapon that has +1 atk and +2 dmg, or you could have one that has +2 atk and +1 dmg. That works, I guess.

I would rather it be absorbed into the properties of the Magic weapon. So a +1/+0 mw weapon becomes a +1/+1 magic weapon. Not that it really matters. It's not like you can go to your local magic shop and ask to have your well crafted grandfather's sword made magical.

[Gritmonger]

Why not look at the flavor tables for magic items in the DMG? Many of them are about differences in material, or other relatively minor effects that nonetheless can make the weapon unique and special. It also would effectively already be balanced for your campaign and in the rules already.

[Grand Warchief]

Why not look at the flavor tables for magic items in the DMG? Many of them are about differences in material, or other relatively minor effects that nonetheless can make the weapon unique and special. It also would effectively already be balanced for your campaign and in the rules already.

True, you could just give them the minor magic properties. The first dm for 5e I had let us start with a weapon with minor magic properties. Didn't unbalance anything, just added some flavor.

[CrusaderJoe]

Masterwork: Overcomes immunity to nonmagical weapon damage.

Masterwork weapons in the hands of a trained warrior can be used to better effect depending on the weapon when used with a maneuver. You may use these BA after using the attack action with the weapon.

Morningstar/Mace: BA to knock an enemy prone

Maul: BA to shove a creature back 10'

Longsword/Rapier: BA to disarm a creature.

Expand what a trained weapon user can do. Make specific actions easier because the weapon is made for it. This gives a player a fun thing to do but it won't really break any math or be something they couldn't already do.

[Grand Warchief]

Masterwork: Overcomes immunity to nonmagical weapon damage.

Masterwork weapons in the hands of a trained warrior can be used to better effect depending on the weapon when used with a maneuver. You may use these BA after using the attack action with the weapon.

Morningstar/Mace: BA to knock an enemy prone

Maul: BA to shove a creature back 10'

Longsword/Rapier: BA to disarm a creature.

Expand what a trained weapon user can do. Make specific actions easier because the weapon is made for it. This gives a player a fun thing to do but it won't really break any math or be something they couldn't already do.

Awesome ideas. Would need to expand to include all weapons, but fantastic thinking. I might propose this to my dm :)

[heavyfuel]

Masterwork: Overcomes immunity to nonmagical weapon damage.

Masterwork weapons in the hands of a trained warrior can be used to better effect depending on the weapon when used with a maneuver. You may use these BA after using the attack action with the weapon.

Morningstar/Mace: BA to knock an enemy prone

Maul: BA to shove a creature back 10'

Longsword/Rapier: BA to disarm a creature.

Expand what a trained weapon user can do. Make specific actions easier because the weapon is made for it. This gives a player a fun thing to do but it won't really break any math or be something they couldn't already do.

I dislike this. It makes MW weapons more powerful than magical ones, it also hurts TWF and the Battlemaster more than they're already hurt.

[CrusaderJoe]

I dislike this. It makes MW weapons more powerful than magical ones, it also hurts TWF and the Battlemaster more than they're already hurt.

Fighters suck and need a rehaul, I don't care about them. As far as I'm concerned they might as well not exist, they bring nothing good to the game.

Magic weapons suck for non casters, they can be nice but they are just "meh". I rather have masterwork weapons be awesome and have some legendary smithe make them than have noncasters rely on mages and magic to have cool weapons. We don't need to have everything cool in the game rely on magic.

TWF, oh well. It already needs fixed. Fix twf so it doesn't fall behind. This doesn't hurt twf, twf hurts twf.

[heavyfuel]

@OP: Why not give them a higher dice? d6 to d8; 2d6 and d12 to 2d8.


Fighters suck and need a rehaul, I don't care about them. As far as I'm concerned they might as well not exist, they bring nothing good to the game.

Magic weapons suck for non casters, they can be nice but they are just "meh". I rather have masterwork weapons be awesome and have some legendary smithe make them than have noncasters rely on mages and magic to have cool weapons. We don't need to have everything cool in the game rely on magic.

TWF, oh well. It already needs fixed. Fix twf so it doesn't fall behind. This doesn't hurt twf, twf hurts twf.

Fighters don't suck... Lv 11 Pally is dealing (2d6+2d8+3)*2 damage for average of 34. Lv 11 fighter deals (2d6+3)*3 for average of 27. However, if the Pally decides to nova, he can deal add an extra 6d8, averaging at 58. If the Fighter wants to nova, he can spend lots of SupDice and Action Surge for extra 6d10+6d6+9, averaging 84 damage plus the maneuver effect. He doesn't suck, he has his niche.

+1 to Dmg helps TWF and Fighters, since lots of attacks = more damage.

And TWF isn't... too bad. It's just a couple points of damage behind other combat styles (except for the Fighter), but you get the added benefit of it being AWESOME

[Submortimer]

I would rather it be absorbed into the properties of the Magic weapon. So a +1/+0 mw weapon becomes a +1/+1 magic weapon. Not that it really matters. It's not like you can go to your local magic shop and ask to have your well crafted grandfather's sword made magical.

Correct. Either "Masterwork" is just a fancy name for "+1" (not a bad idea by any means), Or this. It's how it worked in 3.5: MW was +1 to attack, All magical weapons were masterwork, so that was absorbed when it became +1. in this edition, id' give it the +1 to damage instead, since +1 to hit is much more of a big deal.

Also, there ARE rules for crafting magic items in the DMG, and uncommon/rare items don't take THAT long to make, overall.

[Kryx]

@OP: Why not give them a higher dice? d6 to d8; 2d6 and d12 to 2d8.
That's mathematically the same as +1 dmg with less clarity and even more imbalanced toward multi dice rolls like 2d6. I've already stated above why I don't want +1 to damage.

Pathfinder hands out MW like candy. I was hoping to find something to use in that place. What people are suggesting here is too powerful for that rate of handing out.

[Mr.Moron]

That's mathematically the same as +1 dmg with less clarity and even more imbalanced toward multi dice rolls like 2d6. I've already stated above why I don't want +1 to damage.

Pathfinder hands out MW like candy. I was hoping to find something to use in that place. What people are suggesting here is too powerful for that rate of handing out.

There is no bonus that will at once be minor enough to hand out all over the place without bumping power levels that will also be major enough for players to treat as special and hold on to. If the only bonus you want to hand out is a trivial one, then player will treat them as trivialities. At least as far as bonuses go you've got a self-defeating goal.

That said, maybe there are alternatives to making players hang on to things and keeping the bonus tiny. Add story significance. Maybe early on you can introduce an NPC that's looking for a collection of weapons by a particular craftsman, someone who made 100 special weapons in his day. The masterwork weapons can be (or at least a lot of them can be) part of this collection. The players have a incentive to seek out and preserve these so they can return to the NPC for some kind of reward.

[jkat718]

I would rather it be absorbed into the properties of the Magic weapon. So a +1/+0 mw weapon becomes a +1/+1 magic weapon. Not that it really matters. It's not like you can go to your local magic shop and ask to have your well crafted grandfather's sword made magical.

In other words, masterwork bonus don't stack with magic bonuses?

Masterwork: Overcomes immunity to nonmagical weapon damage.

Masterwork weapons in the hands of a trained warrior can be used to better effect depending on the weapon when used with a maneuver. You may use these BA after using the attack action with the weapon. *snip*

Part 1 takes away what is basically half the shtick of a +1 magic item. It's just making a masterwork weapon equivalent to a +0 magic weapon (which could be what you're looking for).

Part 2 is overly complex for what OP is asking for. I understand where you're coming from, though. What you're saying is similar to my suggestion from earlier (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?402048-Masterwork-Weapons-Alternatives-to-damage&p=18913877#post18913289).

[Myzz]

I like the "counts as magical for what you can hit with it"...

The bonuses to maneuvers idea is cool... Perhaps just add it as a condition on crit vice adding a straight bonus to those???

Would Master Work Armor require a magic (or masterwork) weapon to hit?


using the Maneuver idea actually makes TWF kinda cool... you could use a Rapier in one hand a Baton in other, get bonus to disarm and bonus to knock prone??? or Dual Shortswords to double bonus on disarming???

Although I would probably give all Bludgeoning weapons stunned till end of your next turn... Boot to da head style! But again I think those work best just on crits...

Slashing weapons = disarm? or blinded? (cut above the eyes)

Piercing = bleeding dot? 1 bleeding dmg at the end of that creatures turn for 1 min or until the creature expends an action to stabalize the wound (Spare the dying works, as does a heal kit, or any form of healing)...

Heavy weapons with the above tags could have an expanded 'crit threat' range just for the above effects??? a Nat 19, if it still hits targets AC, from a Great Sword would do 2d6+nomal mods and result in target being blinded for until the end of your next turn... Or could have Heavy weapons double the duration of the effect... Until the end of your turn after next... or in case of Piercing 2 dmg per turn for 10 turns...

[Naanomi]

An alternative is specialized weapons with bonuses and negatives... A barbed knife with +3 damage on a sneak attack but disadvantage to targets in heavy armor?

[jkat718]

I think having separate bonuses for different weapons/kinds of weapons is too complicated, especially for converting MW-heavy adventures. There sound either be one, universal bonus for all weapons, or separate ones for very major categories, like bludgeoning/piercing/slashing, simple/martial, or melee/ranged. If the separation is any more granular, the system becomes too complex to implement in a simple manner.

[Kryx]

There is no bonus that will at once be minor enough to hand out all over the place without bumping power levels that will also be major enough for players to treat as special and hold on to.
Exactly why I relented and just removed them/downgraded them to normal. :)

Special loot should be important, not handed out like candy like PF does for math purposes.

[jkat718]

For conversion purposes, why not say that some percentage of the weapons that are written as masterwork are now normal, and the rest have have either +1 damage, +1 attack, or bypass magic resistance? You get a wider mix of bonuses (avoiding "just another +x weapon" to some extent), and you still give some minor advantage. Bonus, you don't have to decide which advantage to give. :smallwink:

[Kryx]

For conversion purposes, why not say that some percentage of the weapons that are written as masterwork are now normal, and the rest have have either +1 damage, +1 attack, or bypass magic resistance? You get a wider mix of bonuses (avoiding "just another +x weapon" to some extent), and you still give some minor advantage. Bonus, you don't have to decide which advantage to give. :smallwink:
Because PF put those in as math fixes. Giving a higher damage isn't expected at all in 5e. DMs are free to boost their players above the norm, but I'd rather not. I'm also not giving any +X magic items as I don't feel like those fit with 5e's bounded accuracy (common thought shared here often). I just remove the +X and keep the rest.

I'd rather stick to normal magic items than making homebrew special properties that change a lot of expected math. Again - I have a high focus on balance.

[Myzz]

For conversion purposes, why not say that some percentage of the weapons that are written as masterwork are now normal, and the rest have have either +1 damage, +1 attack, or bypass magic resistance? You get a wider mix of bonuses (avoiding "just another +x weapon" to some extent), and you still give some minor advantage. Bonus, you don't have to decide which advantage to give. :smallwink:

Orrr... don't do +magic items anymore... +1 = Masterwork... Everything else is on specific weapons that give the +X and other riders...

Ex. Holy Avenger is a +3 bonus and dmg and does 2d10 extra radiant dmg to fiends and undead. Plus it has the aura effect.

for a magic light game this would seem to be the BEST option. For a Magic Laden world, its not bad either since a mere +1 can be attained from a normal crafter... "Why would I the great Wizard Hokus Pokus bother to subject myself to such a mediocre enchantment, such a waste of my time... A Holy Avenger, or Vorpal Sword... Now that is a project worth doing!"

[dunnetg]

One thing I haven't seen mentioned for masterwork bonuses would be a +1 to initiative. Since masterwork items are often described as being lighter or better balanced than their standard counterparts, it makes some sense that they could be brought to action a little faster. It's not a big advantage, but one that could benefit all wielders without trampling on any class features like improved crits or damage re-rolls. It could also work with magical foci, if you figure a masterwork wand allows you to channel magic just a little faster...

[Gritmonger]

One thing I haven't seen mentioned for masterwork bonuses would be a +1 to initiative. Since masterwork items are often described as being lighter or better balanced than their standard counterparts, it makes some sense that they could be brought to action a little faster. It's not a big advantage, but one that could benefit all wielders without trampling on any class features like improved crits or damage re-rolls. It could also work with magical foci, if you figure a masterwork wand allows you to channel magic just a little faster...

This was one of the reasons I threw out the DM's Guide "Special Features" (pp 142-143) as an option - one of them is just that - "Guardian - The item whispers warnings to its bearer, granting a +2 bonus to initiative if the owner isn't incapacitated"

You can define it fluff-wise as the balance of the weapon, or some other effect.

Used with the "masterwork" concept, the "Minor Property" alone could work with Beacon, Gleaming, Guardian, Language, Sentinel, Strange Material plus "Who Created It" (example: Fey for 5' dim glow, Elf for half weight, etc.), Unbreakable (!), War Leader, or Illusion... throw out some of the attunement and morality affecting features, if you prefer...

[Argothair]

Correct. Either "Masterwork" is just a fancy name for "+1" (not a bad idea by any means), Or this. It's how it worked in 3.5: MW was +1 to attack, All magical weapons were masterwork, so that was absorbed when it became +1. in this edition, id' give it the +1 to damage instead, since +1 to hit is much more of a big deal.

Also, there ARE rules for crafting magic items in the DMG, and uncommon/rare items don't take THAT long to make, overall.

This is a good summary of the traditional approach to masterwork weapons, and that approach has some obvious advantages: it's clear, it's mathematically safe, it's non-trivial, and it's at least mildly flavorful.

That said, I'd prefer to have a sharper mechanical distinction between masterwork and magical weapons, and I'd prefer to have masterwork weapons and magical weapons be of at least theoretically equal value. I agree with some of the earlier commenters that magic shouldn't be the only source of major 'cool' in the game. I don't care about DPR; I'd agree that DPR is balanced in 5e. What I care about is making sure martial or mundane characters have access to exciting and flavorful perks. I think that's less well-balanced in 5e.

So far, the only idea I've been able to think of for making 'different but equal' masterwork weapons is to give the *masterwork* weapons up to a +3 on attack rolls, damage rolls, and/or crit range (but no special abilities), and to give the *magical* weapons special abilities (but no stat bonuses).

For example, a masterwork Nimble Rapier might be a Rapier with +2 to attack rolls and +1 damage that otherwise behaves as normal. A Longsword of Enduring Flame might be a Longsword with standard attack rolls and standard damage rolls that deals fire damage instead of piercing damage, gives off 15' of dim light, and sets wooden weapons (quarterstaffs, clubs, etc.) on fire when they parry or otherwise strike each other. Neither is necessarily better or rarer -- they just have different kinds of bonuses.

Within a given category, you can raise or lower the power level as desired, and raise or lower the rarity accordingly. You could imagine having a common Balanced Rapier that just gets +1 to attack rolls, all the way up to a legendary Feathertalon Rapier that gets +3 to attack rolls, +2 damage, and +1 to crit range. Similarly, you could have a common Longsword of Unusual Warmth that has no magical effects beyond providing its holder with resistance to cold, all the way up through a legendary Longsword of the Searing Inferno that sets everything within 10 feet of it on fire unless the thing is specifically fire-retardant.

What do you guys think?

[Battlebooze]

A simple idea that I haven't seen yet, how about simply adding +1 damage to each dice, without increasing the damage over the normally rolled maximum.

A 1d8 Longsword would then do from 2 to 8 damage.
A Dagger would do 2 to 4
A Greatsword would do 4 to 12.

[jkat718]

@AMArgothair: I think that just saying "all MIs with a flat bonus and nothing else are no longer magical, just masterwork" is probably what you're looking for.

@Battlebooze: That's...actually not a bad idea. Not sure if it's strong enough for most tables, but I like it. The only issue is that it essentially equates to "re-roll all 1s on damage dice," which is supposed to be a GWM feature.

[Grand Warchief]

@AMArgothair: I think that just saying "all MIs with a flat bonus and nothing else are no longer magical, just masterwork" is probably what you're looking for.

@Battlebooze: That's...actually not a bad idea. Not sure if it's strong enough for most tables, but I like it. The only issue is that it essentially equates to "re-roll all 1s on damage dice," which is supposed to be a GWM feature.

It amounts to an extra 0.5 damage per hit, which is weaker than the usual suggested +1. As for the GWM feat, that one says you reroll 1s, but you must keep the new roll. Having damage from 2-8 for a longsword is marginally better since you could feasibly roll 2 ones in a row.

[Myzz]

@Battlebooze: That's...actually not a bad idea. Not sure if it's strong enough for most tables, but I like it. The only issue is that it essentially equates to "re-roll all 1s on damage dice," which is supposed to be a GWM feature.[/QUOTE]

its Great Weapon Fighting Style (GWF) vice Great Weapon Master (GWM)

and is reroll 1's and 2's AND must use the new roll.

If the reroll ones property from Masterwork(MW) was keep rolling em till their not ones... that would make GWF even better... since you get more rerolls on ones and still get 1 reroll on 2's...

If MW was limited rolls, say must use the new value... with GWF it could give you an extra reroll on 1's...

Either way not bad...

ORrrr...

by increasing the min dmg dealt... Roll a 1 count it as a 2 idea... up till 7 counts as 8 and an 8 counts as an 8 (on a d8), GWF with Great Sword pretty baller... Frequent Min dmg will likely be 6 plus attribute mod on 2d6...

[Easy_Lee]

There are a lot of ideas in this thread that would be good qualities for a masterwork weapon to have. I believe that the exact benefits of a masterwork weapon should be particular to the masterwork weapon in question. One weapon might be masterwork because it has a sharper edge which crits more often, while another might have a lighter weight category.

In addition, I think it would be reasonable to treat these reasons similar to magic items: because they're special, they are rare and don't have a set price.

[Knaight]

A conditional +1 could work, though that does get into fiddly numbers a bit much. Another option would be to assume that the default weapon stats are for masterwork weapons (price wise a lot of them are comparable to armor), with particularly crude weapons (listed as non-masterwork) taking a penalty of some sort. Yet another option would be to negate one source of disadvantage.

In general though, 5e just doesn't model things to the level of detail where masterwork weapons are particularly worth distinguishing. The difference between a decent sword and a fantastic one just isn't that big of a deal.

[Grand Warchief]

As it's been said before, maptdpwmpd weapons in this edition should be just as rare or rarer than magic items depending on how you view it. Remember, they are master crafted weapons that probably took months or years to make. They may even be a life's work. They shouldn't be given out lightly in this edition since they aren't as prevalent as candy like they were in 3.5.

[Occasional Sage]

If your desire is to differentiate magic and masterwork, and magic is about combat bonuses, one easy solution is to give masterwork items noncombat bonuses.

Your masterwork ninjato: it's profile is easy to conceal, cancel one instance of Disadvantage on hiding.

That masterwork armor: obviously you are a person of substance and import to wear armor engraved and gilded in such a manner, gain the Noble background (afb, I may have the wrong gain-social-status name) when interacting for the first time with a civilized NPC.

[Argothair]

If your desire is to differentiate magic and masterwork, and magic is about combat bonuses, one easy solution is to give masterwork....

Yes, but *why* is magic about combat bonuses? Of these two skills, which sounds like it would me more useful for hurting people?

1) You are amazingly good at crafting weapons, i.e., special-purpose tools whose only function is to hurt people.

2) You have a general power that lets you channel the elements or gods to accomplish a wide variety of strange and exotic tasks.

[Occasional Sage]

Yes, but *why* is magic about combat bonuses? Of these two skills, which sounds like it would me more useful for hurting people?

1) You are amazingly good at crafting weapons, i.e., special-purpose tools whose only function is to hurt people.

2) You have a general power that lets you channel the elements or gods to accomplish a wide variety of strange and exotic tasks.

Sure, fine, but the DMG examples of magic weapons and armor focus on "kill or survive" effects. Rather than recreate the wheel, or muddy the waters by adding non-combat magic swords....

Fluff can explain this very easily. Magic weapons are made to be extra good and hurting people, and armors to protect better. Rather than needing to look good, they need to work well. Masterwork items are made to look good, with stunning displays of craftsmanship in the inlays, etchings, and graceful accents. Rather than battle-tested pieces of functional iron, these are weapons-as-art, made to draw the eye and make the heart soar.

Heck, there's now no reason not to combine "masterwork" and "magic".

[Easy_Lee]

Heck, there's now no reason not to combine "masterwork" and "magic".

I'd go further and say there's no reason to say masterwork necessarily means any one, particular thing. Masterwork means the item is of extremely high quality in some regard, but that does not mean that all masterwork items are masterwork for the same reason. I imagine the particulars of an item, and why it's regarded as a "masterwork" item, are as unique, and likely rare as any magical enchantment.

[Vogonjeltz]

I'm converting more Pathfinder Adventure Paths and Masterwork Weapons/Armor are somewhat common. I'd like to offer a small bonus that makes the PCs inclined to keep these items.

Any suggestions other than a +1 to damage?

1) Make them more valuable (literally worth more gold), give them better AC/higher threshold for purposes of someone trying to break them through sundering.

2) Give them minor qualities from the magical items table. (i.e. Floats in water, made of some exotic materials, etc...).

[acemcjack]

Sorry to revive an old thread, but what about increasing the damage die to the next category instead of adding a flat +1? It's effectively the same bonus on average, but is different than magic.

That means a masterwork dagger would do 1d6 damage instead of 1d4, a short sword would do 1d8, a rapier would do 1d10, a longsword 1d12 (or 2d6 two handed), etc.

[DanyBallon]

So far in my Kingmaker conversion, I have decided that MW items are worth 300 gp more than the base item, have fine details, and are requirements to create a magical item. From time to time I also replace a MW item for a uncommon magic item. Quite simple, nothing game breaking and usually players keeps the item because they look great and with the perspective to be able to enchant them in the future.

[Shining Wrath]

I think Masterwork implies a higher level of craftsmanship and materials. I'd pick a single mechanism to represent that; Mr. Moron belies his name by supplying a good list.

I'd go with "weapon weighs less and that has implications". Light weapons becoming finesse and letting people get the two-handed damage when wielding a versatile weapon one handed sound good. Be careful with letting people use two-handed weapons one handed; a one-handed halberd opens up some serious munchkin opportunities.

[jkat718]

So far in my Kingmaker conversion, I have decided that MW items are worth 300 gp more than the base item, have fine details, and are requirements to create a magical item. From time to time I also replace a MW item for a uncommon magic item. Quite simple, nothing game breaking and usually players keeps the item because they look great and with the perspective to be able to enchant them in the future.

Dany, do you have your Kingmaker conversion online anywhere? I've been looking for one everywhere.

[DanyBallon]

Dany, do you have your Kingmaker conversion online anywhere? I've been looking for one everywhere.

Unfortunately no, I have some handwritten note and wrote down a DC conversion chart so I can do on the fly conversion as we go through the adventure. As for treasure, I try to remove most magical arms and armor except for some significant one as the Stag Lord helm and armor.

[jkat718]

Unfortunately no, I have some handwritten note and wrote down a DC conversion chart so I can do on the fly conversion as we go through the adventure. As for treasure, I try to remove most magical arms and armor except for some significant one as the Stag Lord helm and armor.

Oh, well. Thanks, anyway.