Is there a better alternative to Weapon Proficiencies?

[Droopy McCool]

So... is there?

My one idea was to make every weapon have an ability score requirement of sorts, much like how video games do it. I just don't get why a rogue with an 18 strength (I don't know why, just roll with it) can't use a greatsword, while a fighter with a 10 strength could. I guess it's supposed to be how much time a character of that vocation has spent learning to use certain weapons, but it still bugs me. A couple parting queries then.

1. Is weapons with ability score requirements a good idea to replace weapon proficiencies?
2. Is weapons with ability score requirements a good idea to add to weapon proficiencies?
3. Is there something besides weapon proficiencies someone has that works better than either of the above?
4. Am I crazy and weapon proficiencies are good the way they are?

Thanks for the input.

McCool

[Grod_The_Giant]

An ability score requirement seems too video game-y, honestly. The game already punishes you if you don't have the stats to use a weapon properly-- it's called a lower attack and damage bonus. At the same time, it's not like the current proficiency system is tremendously more realistic-- warrior classes are proficient with everything under the sun, somehow. But it does work.

If you really wanted to change it, I'd link it to BAB-- the one measure we have of fighting ability. One or two non-simple weapons per point of BAB, perhaps. Or martial weapons at BAB +1 and an exotic weapon every two points thereafter or something.

[Necroticplague]

1. Is weapons with ability score requirements a good idea to replace weapon proficiencies?
2. Is weapons with ability score requirements a good idea to add to weapon proficiencies?
3. Is there something besides weapon proficiencies someone has that works better than either of the above?
4. Am I crazy and weapon proficiencies are good the way they are?


1.no
2.no
3.yes
4.I can't vouch for your craziness, but weapon profeciencies aren't that good the way they are.

[Droopy McCool]

An ability score requirement seems too video game-y, honestly.

This was my thought too, but I needed something.


If you really wanted to change it, I'd link it to BAB-- the one measure we have of fighting ability. One or two non-simple weapons per point of BAB, perhaps. Or martial weapons at BAB +1 and an exotic weapon every two points thereafter or something.

Not a bad idea, but players would just pick the one weapon they want at first level, and that's it. Afterwards, it wouldn't matter, because the fighter picked greatsword, the rogue picked short sword, and after picking maybe two weapons would stop caring.

I could see possibly giving classes with full BAB 4 free weapon proficiency feats at 1st level, 3/4 BAB 3 of them, and 1/2 BAB 2 of them. Multiclassing would just get you up to 4 weapons with a full BAB class. Is this an idea worth expanding?


1.no
2.no
3.yes
4.I can't vouch for your craziness, but weapon profeciencies aren't that good the way they are.

You said yes to 3, but what is it?
Also I guess I'm crazier than the average bear, but not enough to worry about. :smallsmile:

McCool

[Zaq]

Not a bad idea, but players would just pick the one weapon they want at first level, and that's it. Afterwards, it wouldn't matter, because the fighter picked greatsword, the rogue picked short sword, and after picking maybe two weapons would stop caring.

Why is that a problem? It's basically how things work anyway. You get whatever proficiency you need ASAP, and then you just use your weapon of choice unless/until the GM forcibly takes it away from you (the clichéd "prison break without your gear" episode—or perhaps a dungeon with too many rust monsters in it, defined as a dungeon containing one or more rust monsters).

There isn't a whole lot of reason to care about proficiencies with weapons other than your go-to primary weapon (and your secondary weapon that's the opposite of your primary on the ranged/melee issue). First, you generally can't afford nice magic on more than one weapon, so anything that isn't your primary is likely to have a disadvantage on the magical front. Second, plenty of feats and/or class features require some degree of specialization as far as weapons go—and I'm not even talking about crap like Weapon Focus and Weapon Specialization. Power Attack can't use a light weapon and really wants a two-hander. Weapon Finesse and TWF need light weapons. Improved Trip needs a weapon that can be used to trip. AoO monkeys with Combat Reflexes and/or Thicket of Blades need something with reach. And so on.

Weapon-switching is most valuable at low levels—you're most likely to have to have problems with DR requiring specific damage types at low levels, and you can't afford good magic weapons yet, so you have less to lose by swapping. But if you phase in proficiencies slowly with BAB, you hamstring weapon-swapping at the part of the game where you need it most.

I honestly don't think it would make a huge difference to get rid of proficiencies entirely. PCs are exceptional. Why should it matter what kinds of weapons they use? It's a small power boost, but it mostly helps the classes who need it most (so the BSF saves one feat getting a spiked chain—who cares?). Without investing feats and features and magic in a weapon, you still won't be as good with it as someone who puts effort into it, so why add additional red tape to the matter?

[Telonius]

So... is there?

My one idea was to make every weapon have an ability score requirement of sorts, much like how video games do it. I just don't get why a rogue with an 18 strength (I don't know why, just roll with it) can't use a greatsword, while a fighter with a 10 strength could. I guess it's supposed to be how much time a character of that vocation has spent learning to use certain weapons, but it still bugs me. A couple parting queries then.


A Rogue with 18 Strength can use a Greatsword. He's just not particularly skilled at it. Swordsmanship is about more than just being strong enough to pick up a weapon. As long as the weapon doesn't put you over your maximum carrying capacity, anybody can wield it. Proficiencies aren't supposed to model whether or not you're physically capable of picking up the weapon. They're supposed to model the fact that you've received some training in the weapon beyond "pointy end goes in the other guy."

You might consider Unearthed Arcana's Weapon Group Feats (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/buildingCharacters/weaponGroupFeats.htm), if you'd like to model a Rogue having received training in some weapons that they ordinarily wouldn't.

[Psyren]

I just don't get why a rogue with an 18 strength (I don't know why, just roll with it) can't use a greatsword, while a fighter with a 10 strength could.

Well actually, the rogue can use the sword, and in fact he'll be nearly equal to your fighter (+4 strength mod -4 nonproficient = effectively 10 Str, except he'll actually do more damage and qualifies for Power Attack too.) Depending on their level though the BAB difference could be a small or large factor.

I don't like the video game requirement because it's really wonky from a verisimilitude standpoint. It means the rogue wouldn't be able to even wield it, which prevents clever scenarios like this (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0904.html). That to me diminshes one of tabletop's greatest strengths, i.e. the ability to explore situations that a video game's code can't account for.

[Necroticplague]

You said yes to 3, but what is it?

Making everyone proficient with everything. Weapon Profeciencies are nothing but an annoying tax, and don't really add much to the game as-is. It'd be better to just have what weapons what archetype uses come organically from the benefits of such (i.e, assassins don't use daggers because it's the best they're profecient with, they use them because they're finessable and easy to conceal.). If you're dead-set on keeping the casters from normally using weapons, introduce something else for them to do with their hands instead (like a 4e-style implement).

[Blackhawk748]

There are Weapon Group Proficiencies in Unearthed Arcana, and those at least behave in a more realistic manner. Though id still give everyone Simple Weapon Prof, mostly because ive always found it silly that some people apparently cant use a Morningstar. I mean, come on, its just a spiky club.

[Droopy McCool]

A Rogue with 18 Strength can use a Greatsword. He's just not particularly skilled at it. Swordsmanship is about more than just being strong enough to pick up a weapon. As long as the weapon doesn't put you over your maximum carrying capacity, anybody can wield it. Proficiencies aren't supposed to model whether or not you're physically capable of picking up the weapon. They're supposed to model the fact that you've received some training in the weapon beyond "pointy end goes in the other guy."

You might consider Unearthed Arcana's Weapon Group Feats (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/buildingCharacters/weaponGroupFeats.htm), if you'd like to model a Rogue having received training in some weapons that they ordinarily wouldn't.

Just quoting you because everyone said basically the same thing. I guess it wasn't clear that my point was "why isn't everyone proficient with everything?" strength aside. I'm not sold on the idea of getting rid of weapon proficiencies, but maybe give every half caster class and martial class all weapon proficiencies. I'll figure it out.

McCool

P.S. Psyren, to be fair she didn't actually use the greatsword. :smallamused:

[LTwerewolf]

In some games I give everyone their normal proficiencies, and then every BAB they get another proficiency, whether that be weapon, shield, or armor. There are a couple more rules to it though. You can't jump from light to heavy armor, you have to get a medium armor first. You can't jump straight from simple weapons only to an exotic weapon, you have to have a similar martial weapon first. So in order to get full plate, you need to have proficiency with at least one of the following: hide, scale, chain mail, or breastplate. If you want bastard sword proficiency, you'll need to have proficiency with a longsword. For these purposes, heavy shields count as medium armor, and light shields as light armor.

[martixy]

Well, people already mentioned the common fixes.

I just combine both: Weapon groups + buying proficiencies with BAB. That sounds the most reasonable. The rates I put in are: Simple Weapon = 1, Martial Weapon = 2, Exotic Weapon = 3, Weapon Group = 5, Armor = 2, Shield = 2, Tower shield = 3.

One other idea I had is Weapon Focus / Specialization as normal for entire groups, but also the option to take both as a single feat, but for a single weapon type.