I might have fixed all weapons with a single sentence

[Eric Diaz]

I've psoted this elsewhere but had no responses...

Anyway, I think I might have fixed all weapons with a single sentence:

"If you score a critical hit, you also add the weapon's weight to the damage (maximum 10)".

Apparently this "fixes" (or at least enhances) the greatclub, greataxe for non-barbarians, maul, trident, and pike. Also strengthens champions and makes barbarians more likely to pick heavy weapons - both good things IMO.

I discuss the issue at length here (http://methodsetmadness.blogspot.com.br/2018/05/slashingpiercingbludgeoning-hacking.html), along with a bunch of other stuff.

What I want to know is: any balance issues or unintended consequences I might be missing?

EDIT: mace is still a problem... sigh. The title is exaggerated, I had misread the quarterstaff's weight.

[fbelanger]

Critical hit is a goodie.
player will rarely try to optimize them even a champion.

[Marcloure]

It may be a buff, yes. But I don't think dealing 5 or so more damage every 20 attacks is enough to balance weapons.

[JackPhoenix]

Can you explain what problem exactly do you think your rule fixes? Because I can't imagine any this would help with.

Besides the "People are selecting the weapons they like, because there isn't a clear best choice between, say, longsword, warhammer, battleaxe, morningstar and flail if you want to use a shield".

[Eric Diaz]

Critical hit is a goodie.
player will rarely try to optimize them even a champion.


It may be a buff, yes. But I don't think dealing 5 or so more damage every 20 attacks is enough to balance weapons.

Yes, but consider I'm trying to boost greatclubs and mauls - each weighting 10 pounds - and making them more enticing to barbarians and champions - who crit about 10% of their attacks, with many attacks per round.

I agree the boosts to axes and tridents are really small, but at least they are getting boosted, a +0.1 damage to greataxe combined with barbarian feats will make it closer to the greatsword (ordinarily +0.5 damage than the greataxe).

Sure, I'd prefer rewriting a few weapons, but without changing the weapon list it seems like a good idea.

[Eric Diaz]

Can you explain what problem exactly do you think your rule fixes? Because I can't imagine any this would help with.

Besides the "People are selecting the weapons they like, because there isn't a clear best choice between, say, longsword, warhammer, battleaxe, morningstar and flail if you want to use a shield".

Mostly a small boost for suboptimal weapons such as greatclub, trident, pike, etc., not the ones you mentioned.

EDIT: my idea became a lot less impressive once I realized the mace has the same weight as the quarterstaff... I had misread it. :smallsmile:

[JackPhoenix]

Mostly a small boost for suboptimal weapons such as greatclub, trident, pike, etc., not the ones you mentioned.

EDIT: my idea became a lot less impressive once I realized the mace has the same weight as the quarterstaff... I had misread it. :smallsmile:

But that's the point: by "fixing" a problem (not really, pike is still worse than glaive or halberd, 4 points of extra damage 5% of time won't make up for not being compatible with PM), you make lot of other weapons "suboptimal" (again, the difference isn't that big, but why would anyone use longsword, if battleaxe is straight up better?)

[ZorroGames]

Mostly PHB based comments.

Not sure what “needs fixed” because honestly, besides “suboptimal” aspects and Player choice?

“Simple” weapons are not for professionals as a best choice by design.

By professionals I refer to Barbarians, Fighters, (note the absence of Monk - gifted amateurs I guess is my description of that class - Paladins, Rangers, and maybe Rogues (see Bard below.). Generally but not exclusively this relates to => 1D8 damage.

Bards and Rogues do get hand crossbows (really not a martial weapon in many ways but “counts as” in the hands of a specialist in this case,) Long Swords, Rapiers, and Short Swords. Given Bards D&D history and Rogue Assassin flavoring in past editions this is ‘fantasy history’ appropriate. 🤓

Clerics get simple weapons because they represent a class that is “semi-professional” ( Tempest, War, etc., do get martial weapons but they are borderline combat professional in most cases.)

Druids, scimitars is a class anomaly IMO.

Monks gain more eventually from unarmed combat than most of their choices. Only Greatclub, Two handed Versatile, and Light Cross Bow (not really a Monk weapon) get into 1D8 capability.

Sorcerer (all simple weapons) requires creative work to be combat effective. Doable not not a martial class weapon set initially since their thing is spells. Warlocks outside of Pact of the Blade ditto. Wizards even more so.


What needs “fixed”?

[spartan_ah]

What is the weight of a fire bolt?

[ZorroGames]

But that's the point: by "fixing" a problem (not really, pike is still worse than glaive or halberd, 4 points of extra damage 5% of time won't make up for not being compatible with PM), you make lot of other weapons "suboptimal" (again, the difference isn't that big, but why would anyone use longsword, if battleaxe is straight up better?)

Battle Axe - 1D8/1D10 Versatile slashing.

Long Sword - 1D8/1D10 Versatile slashing.

What makes Battle Axe better?

Other than to a Dwarf...

[Eric Diaz]

What is the weight of a fire bolt?

0.

(and all projectiles I guess).

[ZorroGames]

What is the weight of a fire bolt?

Based on damage, 🙃 same as a Glaive or Halberd? Oh wait, Pike... Heavy Crossbow Bolt... okay, no clue.

[Eric Diaz]

But that's the point: by "fixing" a problem (not really, pike is still worse than glaive or halberd, 4 points of extra damage 5% of time won't make up for not being compatible with PM), you make lot of other weapons "suboptimal" (again, the difference isn't that big, but why would anyone use longsword, if battleaxe is straight up better?)

Battleaxe isn't straight up better.

It's 0.1 extra damage in the hands of a barbarian or champion. For everyone else, the battleaxe is just a slightly heavier longsword that will increase your DPR by less than 1%.

But, then again, I am more concerned about greatclub, trident and pike. Not that the trident is "fixed" by any stretch of the imagination...


What needs “fixed”?

Nothing NEEDS fixing. What I WANT to fix, as mentioned above, it the mace, greatclub, and pike.

[ZorroGames]

Battleaxe isn't straight up better.

It's 0.1 extra damage in the hands of a barbarian or champion. For everyone else, the battleaxe is just a slightly heavier longsword that will increase your DPR by less than 1%.

But, then again, I am more concerned about greatclub, trident and pike. Not that the trident is "fixed" by any stretch of the imagination...



Nothing NEEDS fixing. What I WANT to fix, as mentioned above, it the mace, greatclub, and pike.

Okay, Mace 1D8 in the hands of a Martial. Not sure Greatclub is that big a deal. YMMV. Pike... well that is a mass formation weapon historically when it was most effective despite Pike Duels actually happening. 🤓 🙄

[Eric Diaz]

Okay, Mace 1D8 in the hands of a Martial. Not sure Greatclub is that big a deal. YMMV. Pike... well that is a mass formation weapon historically when it was most effective despite Pike Duels actually happening. 🤓 🙄

Yeah, I mostly agree... let's see.

The mace I'd make versatile.

https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-ijL_wa2thH0/WvdHgfSEhjI/AAAAAAAABis/9fyQxfjYLf8bvgQRH92r5xjZnRbXl6cewCK4BGAYYCw/s640/668e6cff27dd962114f443769a6d4f56.jpg

A "military" mace is a good idea too.

Greatclub, 1d10. Easy to fix.

Quarterstaff, two-handed.

Pike... completely agree with what you said... What I did in my "manual of arms" is give it 15' feet range, disadvantage if used within 5'.

[sambojin]

"Blunt weapons and weapons being used in two hands get +1 to-hit against foes wearing heavy armour."

Fixes absolutely nothing, nor does it work against naturally high-AC foes, but something like this might be handy for what you're looking for. Maybe.

It's kind of the point of blunt weapons and two handed weapons though. You want to hit things in armour really, really hard. And it does make shields seen a little worse (considering they can give up to +5AC as a +3 magic shield, which is insanely good compared to minor damage increases from bigger weapons).

[CTurbo]

I usually fluff the uncommon weapons to make them appeal more. For example, the Morningstar in my games deal 1d4 bludgeoning and 1d4 piercing damage. The is also a Great Morningstar which shares the same stats as the Maul except it deals 1d6 bludgening and 1d6 piercing damage. A Trident shares it's stats with a Spear but the Trident crits on a 19 or 20.

Also in one game, all of the first magic weapons the group found were odd. The Rogue used a +1 Sickle for a long time, The Cleric used a +1 Flail, the Fighter used a +1 Pike, and the Monk used a +1 Trident.

[ZorroGames]

I usually fluff the uncommon weapons to make them appeal more. For example, the Morningstar in my games deal 1d4 bludgeoning and 1d4 piercing damage. The is also a Great Morningstar which shares the same stats as the Maul except it deals 1d6 bludgening and 1d6 piercing damage. A Trident shares it's stats with a Spear but the Trident crits on a 19 or 20.

Also in one game, all of the first magic weapons the group found were odd. The Rogue used a +1 Sickle for a long time, The Cleric used a +1 Flail, the Fighter used a +1 Pike, and the Monk used a +1 Trident.

This, IMO, is an excellent idea. YMMV.

[Eric Diaz]

I usually fluff the uncommon weapons to make them appeal more. For example, the Morningstar in my games deal 1d4 bludgeoning and 1d4 piercing damage. The is also a Great Morningstar which shares the same stats as the Maul except it deals 1d6 bludgening and 1d6 piercing damage. A Trident shares it's stats with a Spear but the Trident crits on a 19 or 20.

Also in one game, all of the first magic weapons the group found were odd. The Rogue used a +1 Sickle for a long time, The Cleric used a +1 Flail, the Fighter used a +1 Pike, and the Monk used a +1 Trident.

I love the 1d4/1d4 morningstar!

Trident is cool but crit on a 19-20 steps on the champion's toes... maybe +3 damage on a crit instead?

[CTurbo]

I love the 1d4/1d4 morningstar!

Trident is cool but crit on a 19-20 steps on the champion's toes... maybe +3 damage on a crit instead?

I don't really see a Champion using a Trident, but sure I'd be willing to change the fluff. I'd even be willing to let it add an extra die damage on a crit.

[JackPhoenix]

I don't really see a Champion using a Trident, but sure I'd be willing to change the fluff. I'd even be willing to let it add an extra die damage on a crit.

I don't see anyone using a trident, it's a gimmick, not a proper weapon. It's fitting that it's worse than a spear.

[Angelalex242]

I don't see anyone using a trident, it's a gimmick, not a proper weapon. It's fitting that it's worse than a spear.

With Tridents, I'd say, "You have advantage on attack rolls when using this weapon underwater."

Boom, point to Tridents.

[JoeJ]

With Tridents, I'd say, "You have advantage on attack rolls when using this weapon underwater."

Boom, point to Tridents.

They can also be used to spear flying parademons and ride their bodies down to the ground.

[napoleon_in_rag]

With Tridents, I'd say, "You have advantage on attack rolls when using this weapon underwater."

Boom, point to Tridents.

Do Tridents work better underwater? People who spearfish underwater use spears or projectile points, not tridents.

[Grear Bylls]

Battle Axe - 1D8/1D10 Versatile slashing.

Long Sword - 1D8/1D10 Versatile slashing.

What makes Battle Axe better?

Other than to a Dwarf...

5 gp is what makes it better

[ZorroGames]

I don't see anyone using a trident, it's a gimmick, not a proper weapon. It's fitting that it's worse than a spear.

Pretty much for a entertainer background gladiator. Or a Triton?

[ZorroGames]

5 gp is what makes it better

After first level that is a trivial difference at best.

[Grear Bylls]

After first level that is a trivial difference at best.

I know, but that's what makes it "better"

[ZorroGames]

I know, but that's what makes it "better"

Missed the sarcasm. Oops.

[Grear Bylls]

Missed the sarcasm. Oops.

Yeah, I'm still new. Don't know how to make stuff blue

[JackPhoenix]

Battle Axe - 1D8/1D10 Versatile slashing.

Long Sword - 1D8/1D10 Versatile slashing.

What makes Battle Axe better?

Other than to a Dwarf...

In normal game? Nothing. With OP's rule? Battleaxe is heavier, and thus would do better damage on a crit. The 1 damage difference (translated to 0.05 increase in average damage) is marginal at best, but it does technically makes battleaxe better than longsword.


Do Tridents work better underwater? People who spearfish underwater use spears or projectile points, not tridents.

Multiple prongs make trident better at hitting fishes when you take light refraction between water and air into account. For combat underwater, trident suffers greater resistance in water compared to a spear or harpoon, making it worse for throwing, for larger targets, while multiple prongs improve the chance of hitting something vital, the force of the strike is spread out between them, and there's greater chance they'll get stuck to something (like whatever the opponent uses to defend himself, or his bones if you do manage to stab him), and they are much worse than spear against proper armor, because you can't really aim for gaps... even if you would hit the gap with one point, the others would get stopped by armor and prevent you from getting any penetration. It's also harder and more expensive to make, and the extra weight may cause balance issues compared to a spear.

Trident is a bad weapon against fellow human(oids), but then, professional gladiators weren't really out to kill each other.

[sambojin]

Do Tridents work better underwater? People who spearfish underwater use spears or projectile points, not tridents.

Several stabby bits instead of one stabby bit. Kind of like how spearfishermen also use "pranger heads", which is a group of 6-8 barbed mini-spear-points in a slightly outward pointing cone on top of the spear shaft. Think barbed, sharp knitting needles. They're sometimes called multibarbs, multiprongs or multiheads in some US spearfishing terminology I think, but we've always referred to them as prangas here in Oz.

Stops overpenetration with smaller fish (or into coral reefs when you totally miss, or when you miss the spine/head so they just rip themselves off the spear, bleed and quiver heaps, and draw in sharks), and more stabby bits means more chances to hit a vital spot or put the fish into instant shock-death (even though they're not as hydrodynamic as a centrepoint head, thus lose speed and range when fired from a speargun).

So a trident has more stabby bits, and they can be used to capture a weapon a bit as well (think an eastern sai on a stick. It's not a great concept, but it kinda works on a stick, as long as they're actually sharp and pointy, unlike a sai).

[Eric Diaz]

In normal game? Nothing. With OP's rule? Battleaxe is heavier, and thus would do better damage on a crit. The 1 damage difference (translated to 0.05 increase in average damage) is marginal at best, but it does technically makes battleaxe better than longsword.

RAW you're supposed to track encumbrance (and the variant is really harsh). Of course, the 1-pound different is marginal at best, but it does technically makes longsword better than battleaxe in this regard.

But yeah, maybe the rule only applies to 2-handed weapons, or something, making the greatlub, pike, greataxe and maul a bit better.

More importantly, it makes the champion a bit better.

Ultimately, I agree with you - which is why I allowed to either add weight or margin of success to crits - so a battleaxe will only make a (very small) difference against foes in heavy armor.

[Eric Diaz]

Several stabby bits instead of one stabby bit. Kind of like how spearfishermen also use "pranger heads", which is a group of 6-8 barbed mini-spear-points in a slightly outward pointing cone on top of the spear shaft. Think barbed, sharp knitting needles. They're sometimes called multibarbs or multiheads in some US spearfishing terminology I think, but we've always referred to them as prangas here in Oz.

Stops overpenetration with smaller fish (or into coral reefs when you totally miss, or when you miss the spine/head so they just rip themselves off the spear, bleed and quiver heaps, and draw in sharks), and more stabby bits means more chances to hit a vital spot or put the fish into instant shock-death (even though they're not as hydrodynamic as a centrepoint head, thus lose speed and range when fired from a speargun).

So a trident has more stabby bits, and they can be used to capture a weapon a bit as well (think an eastern sai on a stick. It's not a great concept, but it kinda works on a stick, as long as they're actually sharp and pointy, unlike a sai).

What I did in my "Manual of Arms" house rules is to make the trident better at "maneuvers" such as trip, disarm, etc. It's something that 3e used IIRC and makes sense, or at least looks cool IMO.

But "better crits" seems to be a good concept to go with "more chances to hit a vital spot".

[sambojin]

What I did in my "Manual of Arms" house rules is to make the trident better at "maneuvers" such as trip, disarm, etc. It's something that 3e used IIRC and makes sense, or at least looks cool IMO.

But "better crits" seems to be a good concept to go with "more chances to hit a vital spot".

The "better at manoeuvres" thing works really well, being closer to how tridents were used in gladiatorial combat AFAIK. But 5e only really has two manoeuvres, push and shove-prone, everything else is a class/sub-class or feat skill, so bugger.

I guess a +1 or +2 to contested athletics/acrobatics checks might work, but it feels weird. So yeah, better crits it is. Or maybe even a "re-roll a 1 to-hit or on contested shoves" to show the lack of over-stabbiness while having wider stabs, and its actual combat use at the same time which was disarming/proning/getting the opponent to surrender because otherwise you'd keep poking them on the ground from 7' away. Or while they were standing, while they now only had the option to try and tackle/wrestle you as you poked them. Not "better" than other weapons at stuff, just "less bad/harder to screw it up", to show its intended use.

I know 5e is meant to be simple, but I think there's plenty of room for diversity in weapon types beyond damage type and 1/2-handed, heavy, reach, simple and finesse. Even gimmicks that don't come up often, but that add a bit of flavour to underused weapon types. It would make for a fine UA or homebrew I think. Blanket rules rarely work on top of an already dull or broken system, whereas little gimmicky things that usually don't change game pace at all actually feel kinda cooler.

Tridents and nets tended to be used by big burly bastards in the arena, not only because of the weight of their arm/head armour, but because they were using a fairly long front-heavy weapon that required a fair bit of strength to use accurately, but that was meant to be held out at length to fend off attacks with short stabs and weapon/limb locks. This is amazingly tiring if you didn't know, and requires quite a lot of strength. And being a big bugger tends to make you slightly better at wrestling anyway. So even if you can't force the trope of needing to be a big bugger to use a trident (little wiry guys who are good at jujitsu are also good at wrestling, or in 5e's version, shoving prone. But there are lighter/shorter and heavier/longer tridents, the weapon is matched to the person's ability to use it), the weapon would be cooler with a "reroll 1's to-hit or on contested shove checks" to show the weapons real strengths.