Heavy Weapon Property

[Sparky McDibben]

Why is this a thing? Is this just for verisimilitude? Did the Small races need a debuff? I'm asking because a player'd like to make a cavalier goblin able to use reach weapons, but all the reach weapons except the whip are heavy.

So, why is the heavy property a thing and will it break anything if I sort of ignore it?

[Lunali]

Small races typically get good racial abilities, but nothing gets horribly broken by ignoring the heavy property except realism.

[JackPhoenix]

Lance also isn't heavy. It got disadvantage against adjecent targets, but cavalier goblin sounds like he wants to play mounted character, and it shines there, as you can use it one-handed.

[Contrast]

Probably the biggest issue with totally ignoring references to heavy is actually the reverse - enabling Great Weapon Master on non-heavy weapons.

Personally rather than ignoring heavy I feel the simpler solution it to just create a new weapon. Alternatively - if he's a cavalier, why not use a lance? (edit - ninjad :smallbiggrin:)

[greenstone]

As an alternative, you could replace the light, heavy and two-handed tags by giving weapons a size - tiny, small, medium, lerge, huge - and saying that a creature can dual-wield <smaller than its size>, 1H wield <its size>, 2H wield <its size +1>, and not use at all <its size +2 and bigger>.

[JackPhoenix]

As an alternative, you could replace the light, heavy and two-handed tags by giving weapons a size - tiny, small, medium, lerge, huge - and saying that a creature can dual-wield <smaller than its size>, 1H wield <its size>, 2H wield <its size +1>, and not use at all <its size +2 and bigger>.

Which would suck even more for small characters, as instead of being able to use heavy weapon at disadvantage, they wouldn't be able to use any 2h weapon at all, as 2h weapon for medium characters would be large.

[stoutstien]

As an alternative, you could replace the light, heavy and two-handed tags by giving weapons a size - tiny, small, medium, lerge, huge - and saying that a creature can dual-wield <smaller than its size>, 1H wield <its size>, 2H wield <its size +1>, and not use at all <its size +2 and bigger>.

The new UA rune warrior would love this.

[Sparky McDibben]

The new UA rune warrior would love this.

And I love the new rune knight. He's a big ol' cuddly boy.

[Dimers]

As an alternative, you could replace the light, heavy and two-handed tags by giving weapons a size - tiny, small, medium, lerge, huge - and saying that a creature can dual-wield <smaller than its size>, 1H wield <its size>, 2H wield <its size +1>, and not use at all <its size +2 and bigger>.


Which would suck even more for small characters, as instead of being able to use heavy weapon at disadvantage, they wouldn't be able to use any 2h weapon at all, as 2h weapon for medium characters would be large.

If greenstone is suggesting what 3.5 ended up using, there'd be greataxes and pikes and such made to be wielded by Small creatures. Like, a pike for a Small creature is a Medium weapon, and maybe it inflicts less damage than the book-standard pike, but it retains the heavy and reach qualities.

[Mith]

If greenstone is suggesting what 3.5 ended up using, there'd be greataxes and pikes and such made to be wielded by Small creatures. Like, a pike for a Small creature is a Medium weapon, and maybe it inflicts less damage than the book-standard pike, but it retains the heavy and reach qualities.

Just do it that a weapon of X size shifts in how it functions based on size. Think of Sting in LotR: a human dagger is a hobbut's short sword. Damage die stays the same but use becomes different.

[diplomancer]

Balance wise it doesn't break anything. It does break verisimilitude, but no more than carrying capacity does. If you are ok with a 3', 40 pounds halfling with 20 str easily carrying on his shoulders a 280 pound lioness, there is no reason to say "yes, but there's no way he would manage to wield a 6 pounds greatsword",

[KorvinStarmast]

Why is the heavy property a thing and will it break anything if I sort of ignore it?
1. Verisimilitude.
2. Heavy Weapons Mastery
3. To make choices have consequences.

[Sparky McDibben]

1. Verisimilitude.
2. Heavy Weapons Mastery
3. To make choices have consequences.

1. I mean, the guy wants to make a wolf-riding goblin carrying a halberd. So I think we're about done with verisimilitude.
2. This is a good call, actually, Korvin, from you and Contrast both. I'd have to make sure I called out to the rest of the players that I've allowed one to ignore the heavy property on a single weapon. I might also make that the cost of the adjustment. In other words, "you've trained to use a human-sized reach weapon, but you'll never have the leverage and muscle to put behind it to enable Great Weapon Master; this feat is unavailable to you."
3. I guess this is what bugs me about this. Why did this particular choice (to play a Small character) have to have this particular consequence? I guess I don't understand. You'd expect there to be flip-side, like Small characters can use light weapons with advantage or something. What was the game necessity for this cost? Is this an attempt to avoid the 3.5 thing where there were different sizes per weapon and each size had a different damage die?

I've seen a couple people call out lances, which is a good suggestion, but not what the player is looking for. The cavalier's 10th level feature "Hold the Line" allows him to make opportunity attacks against anyone who moves inside his reach. He's looking to maximize his reach and lock down enemies, forcing them to stick to him, while also leveraging a wolf mount for mobility. A lance has disadvantage against adjacent targets, which means they're giving up a lot of utility from their abilities.

[tieren]

Just give the goblin access to shillelagh and a quarter staff, tuck one end of the staff under his arm and ride around poking things with the other end.

[stoutstien]

1. I mean, the guy wants to make a wolf-riding goblin carrying a halberd. So I think we're about done with verisimilitude.
2. This is a good call, actually, Korvin, from you and Contrast both. I'd have to make sure I called out to the rest of the players that I've allowed one to ignore the heavy property on a single weapon. I might also make that the cost of the adjustment. In other words, "you've trained to use a human-sized reach weapon, but you'll never have the leverage and muscle to put behind it to enable Great Weapon Master; this feat is unavailable to you."
3. I guess this is what bugs me about this. Why did this particular choice (to play a Small character) have to have this particular consequence? I guess I don't understand. You'd expect there to be flip-side, like Small characters can use light weapons with advantage or something. What was the game necessity for this cost? Is this an attempt to avoid the 3.5 thing where there were different sizes per weapon and each size had a different damage die?

I've seen a couple people call out lances, which is a good suggestion, but not what the player is looking for. The cavalier's 10th level feature "Hold the Line" allows him to make opportunity attacks against anyone who moves inside his reach. He's looking to maximize his reach and lock down enemies, forcing them to stick to him, while also leveraging a wolf mount for mobility. A lance has disadvantage against adjacent targets, which means they're giving up a lot of utility from their abilities.

One of the big things with cavaliers is mark only working within 5 ft so reach can actually be counterproductive.

Hold the line is a funny one, With a reach weapon you do gain additional range of potential lock down but if they can't reach you now they will probably target someone else which is counterintuitive to the goal this is really obvious once you start fighting large + foes that have reach.

Nothing wrong with PaM but I'd forget reach to make sure they have the down effects of marking which is the real taunt here.

[Sparky McDibben]

Just give the goblin access to shillelagh and a quarter staff, tuck one end of the staff under his arm and ride around poking things with the other end.

Interesting, thanks!


One of the big things with cavaliers is mark only working within 5 ft so reach can actually be counterproductive.

Hold the line is a funny one, With a reach weapon you do gain additional range of potential lock down but if they can't reach you now they will probably target someone else which is counterintuitive to the goal this is really obvious once you start fighting large + foes that have reach.

Nothing wrong with PaM but I'd forget reach to make sure they have the down effects of marking which is the real taunt here.

That's a really good call out. I think he's more interested in the battlefield control side of it, but you're correct to point out that just locking down a Large creature with 10' reach still means they can hit people way over from him.

Thanks, all!