Weapons & Upgrades Fix (for use with 3.5 & Pathfinder)

[Deepbluediver]

This is intended as an alternate set of rules for weaponry in 3.5 or Pathfinder- it is a companion piece to this Armor system. It's intended to work with a few other bits of homebrew I have, but it should be usable fairly easily as a stand-alone piece as well. A lot of this stuff is going to be little tweaks, if you want to see the BIG change, then skip down to HERE.

Historically, the human race tested out every conceivable method of smacking other people with sharp bits of metal, wood, and stone. It is NOT my goal to replicate every single real-world weapon, or re-stat everything found in the Arms & Equipment guide. My intent is to use real-life to inspire rather than limit, and make a weapon-system that is more suitable for a game. The original weapon list in 3.5 is all over the place; I set some basic rules and tried to standardize weaponry so that players have a better idea of what they are getting.

I'll save the rules-changes to combat for another thread, and try to stick to the stuff that is only relevant for how I statted out weapons.

1. The basic unit of damage for a one-handed martial weapon is 1d8, and for a two-handed weapon it's 2d6- everything else is based on this.
2. Light weapons decrease in size by 1 dice, i.e. a one-handed light martial weapon is 1d6.
3. Simple weapons also decrease in size by 1 dice, so a one-handed simple weapon is 1d6, and a light simple weapon is 1d4
4. Unarmed weapons (yes I realize it sounds contradictory) decrease in size by 2 dice, so an unarmed simple weapon is 1d3 because everything stacks.
5. Small and Large weapons also go down or up respectively by 1 dice, so a small one-handed martial weapon is 1d6, and a large weapon of the same type is 1d10.
6. Slashing weapons have their crit-range increased by 1 step (from 20 to 19-20); Piercing weapons have their crit-damage increased by one step (from x2 to x3), and Bludgeoning weapons have their damage increased by 1 size.
7. Any combat maneuver bonus (tripping, feinting, disarming, etc) is +2; dual-wielding two weapons that grant the same bonus does not double the bonus, though you can get the bonus to separate maneuvers if you wield different weapons.
8. There is no distinction between parts of a weapon as far as different damage-types. An axe, for example, deals 100% of it's damage as both bludgeoning and slashing with every attack.

Examples: Putting it all together, A medium-sized simple two-handed bludgening weapon would deal 2d6 damage. A large one-handed martial slashing weapon would deal 1d10 and crit twice as often. A small light martial slashing+piercing weapon would deal 1d3 damage but crit at x3 on a roll of 19-20.


Simple Weapons

Type	Cost	Weight	Small	Medium	Large	Critical	Range	Damage	Special
Unarmed Attacks
Brass Knucles	5 sp	1/2 lb.	1d3	1d4	1d6	x2	—	Bg
Gauntlet	*	1 lb.	1d3	1d4	1d6	x2	—	Bg
Gauntlet, Spiked	+5 gp	1 lb.	1d3	1d4	1d6	x3	—	Bg/Pi
Push Dagger	5 sp	1/2 lb.	1d2	1d3	1d4	x3	—	Pi
Tiger Claws	5 sp	1/2 lb.	1d2	1d3	1d4	19-20/x2	—	Sl
Unarmed Strike	—	—	1d2	1d3	1d4	x2	—	Bg	non-lethal damage only
Light Melee Weapons
Club	5 sp	2 lb.	1d4	1d6	1d8	x2	—	Bg
Dagger	5 sp	1 lb.	1d3	1d4	1d6	x3	—	Pi
Kukri	5 sp	1 lb.	1d3	1d4	1d6	19-20/x2	—	Sl
Sap	5 sp	1 lb.	1d4	1d6	1d8	x2	—	Bg	non-lethal damage only; see text
One-Handed Melee Weapons
Cutlass	10 sp	2 lb.	1d4	1d6	1d8	19-20/x2	—	Sl
Javelin	13 sp	2 lb.	1d4	1d6	1d8	x3	25 ft.	Pi
Mace	10 sp	6 lb.	1d6	1d8	1d10	x2	—	Bg
Two-Handed Melee Weapons
Greatclub	20 sp	8 lb.	2d4	2d6	2d8	x2	—	Bg	Bullrush bonus
Glaive	20 sp	10 lb.	2d3	2d4	2d6	19-20/x2	—	Sl	Reach
Mancatcher	25 sp	10 lb.	2d4	2d6	2d8	19-20x2	—	Bg/Sl	non-lethal damage only; Trip bonus
Quarterstaff	20 sp	5 lb.	2d4	2d6	2d8	x2	—	Bg	Reach
Spear	20 sp	6 lb.	2d3	2d4	2d6	x3	—	Pi	Reach
Ranged Weapons
Blowgun	3 sp	1/2 lb.	1d2	1d3	1d4	x3	10 ft.	Pi	non-lethal damage only; see text
Crossbow, hand	5 gp	2 lb.	1d3	1d4	1d6	x3	10 ft.	Pi
Crossbow, light	10 gp	4 lb.	1d4	1d6	1d8	x3	25 ft.	Pi
Crossbow, heavy	15 gp	2 lb.	2d3	2d4	2d6	x3	60 ft.	Pi
Sling	5 sp	1/2 lb.	1d3	1d4	1d6	x2	25 ft.	Bg
Special
Spiked Armor	+5%	+3 lb.	1d3	1d4	1d6	—	—	Pi	see text

Shields

Type	Cost	Weight	Small	Medium	Large	Critical	Range	Damage	Special
Buckler	3 gp	3 lb.	1d3	1d4	1d6	x2	—	Bg
Shield, Infantry	10 gp	8 lb.	1d4	1d6	1d8	x2	—	Bg
Shield, Tower	20 gp	20 lb.	2d3	2d4	2d6	x2	—	Bg
Shield Spikes	+5 gp	+2 lb.	*	*	*	x3	—	Bg/Pi	see text

Martial Weapons

Type	Cost	Weight	Small	Medium	Large	Critical	Range	Damage	Special
Light Melee Weapons
Tomahawk	11 gp	2 lb.	1d6	1d8	1d10	19-20/x2	10 ft.	Bg/Sl	Sunder bonus
Rapier	7 gp	1.5 lb.	1d4	1d6	1d8	x3	—	Pi	Feint bonus
Sai	9 gp	2.5 lb.	1d6	1d8	1d10	x3	—	Bg/Pi	Disarm bonus
Scimitar	5 gp	2 lb.	1d4	1d6	1d8	19-20/x2	—	Sl
One-Handed Melee Weapons
Battleaxe	13 gp	4 lb.	1d8	1d10	1d12	19-20/x2	—	Bg/Sl	Sunder bonus
Falchion	10 gp	3 lb.	1d6	1d8	1d10	19-20/x2	—	Sl
Flail	13 gp	5 lb.	1d8	1d10	1d12	x2	—	Bg	Ignore shield AC
Longsword	16 gp	4 lb.	1d6	1d8	1d10	19-20/x3	—	Pi/Sl	see text
Morningstar	13 gp	5 lb.	1d8	1d10	1d12	x3	—	Bg/Pi	Sunder bonus
Shortsword	10 gp	3 lb.	1d6	1d8	1d10	x3	—	Pi
Two-Handed Melee Weapons
Greataxe	30 gp	10 lb.	2d6	2d8	2d10	19-20/x2	—	Bg/Sl	Sunder Bonus
Greatsword	20 gp	6 lb.	2d4	2d6	2d8	19-20/x3	—	Pi/Sl
Guisarme	25 gp	10 lb.	2d4	2d6	2d8	19-20/x2	—	Sl	Reach; Trip bonus
Halberd	30 gp	12 lb.	2d4	2d6	2d8	19-20/x3	—	Pi/Sl	Reach; Trip bonus
Lance	25 gp	12 lb.	2d4	2d6	2d8	x3	—	Pi	Reach; see text
Pollaxe	35 gp	10 lb.	2d6	2d8	2d10	19-20/x3	—	Bg/Pi/Sl	Sunder Bonus
Ranseur	20 gp	8 lb.	2d4	2d6	2d8	x3	—	Pi	Reach
Trident	25 gp	7 lb.	2d4	2d6	2d8	19-20/x3	—	Pi	Reach; Disarm bonus
Two-Section Staff	20 gp	8 lb.	2d6	2d8	2d10	x2	—	Bg	Ignore shield AC
Zhua	20 gp	9 lb.	2d6	2d8	2d10	x3	—	Bg/Pi
Ranged Weapons
Shortbow	10 gp	2 lb.	1d6	1d8	1d10	x3	25 ft.	Pi
Throwing Knife	1 gp/3	1/4 lb.	1d3	1d4	1d6	x3	10 ft.	Pi	see text
Atlatl	5 sp	1 lb.	1d4	1d6	1d8	x3	25 ft.	Pi
Boomerang	1 gp	1/2 lb.	1d6	1d8	1d10	x2	60 ft.	Bg
Chakram	1 gp	1/4 lb.	1d3	1d4	1d6	19-20/x2	10 ft.	Sl

Exotic Weapons
There is a jump in damage going from Simple to Martial weapons, but I intentionally avoided a similar increase for exotic weapons. My goal is to have these weapons do something DIFFERENT, and not just be "stuff from the oriental adventures book" or "bigger damage dice".

Type	Cost	Weight	Small	Medium	Large	Critical	Range	Damage	Special
Unarmed Attacks
Siangham	20 gp	1 lb.	1d3	1d4	1d6	x3	—	Pi	Flurry of Blows
Light Melee Weapons
Kama	25 gp	2 lb.	1d4	1d6	1d8	19-20/x2	—	Sl	Disarm Bonus; bonus stacks if used as a pair
Nunchaku	20 gp	3 lb.	1d6	1d8	1d10	x2	—	Bg	Ignore shield AC; see text
War-whip	35 gp	2 lb.	1d4	1d6	1d8	19-20/x2	—	Sl	Reach; Ignore shield AC; Trip bonus; Disarm bonus
One-Handed Melee Weapons
Chain, Spiked	60 gp	7 lb.	1d6	1d8	1d10	19-20/x2	—	Sl	see text
Hooked Sword	60 gp	3 lb.	1d6	1d8	1d10	19-20/x2	—	Sl	Disarm Bonus; Trip bonus; see text
Two-Handed Melee Weapons
Bo-staff	60 gp	3 lb.	2d6	2d8	2d10	x2	—	Bg	Can use both THF and TWF feats simultaneously
Monk's Spade	105 gp	12 lb.	2d6	2d8	2d10	19-20/x3	—	Bg/Pi/Sl	Reach; Can use THF and Reach feats simultaneously
Three-section Staff	90 gp	5 lb.	2d6	2d8	2d10	x2	—	Bg	Reach; Ignore shield AC; Trip bonus; see text
War-scythe	75 gp	8 lb.	2d4	2d6	2d8	19-20/x3	—	Pi/Sl	Reach; see text
RangedWeapons
Bolas	30 gp	3 lb.	1d6	1d8	1d10	x2	25 ft.	Bg	non-lethal damage only; see text
Longbow	60 gp	3 lb.	2d4	2d6	2d8	x3	60 ft.	Pi	see text
Shuriken	3 gp/5	1/4 lb.	1d3	1d4	1d6	19-20/x3	10 ft.	Pi/Sl	see text
Weighted Net	30 gp	5 lb.	—	—	—	—	10 ft.	—	Disarm bonus; see text
Shields
Judicar's Shield	105 gp	30 lb.	2d6	2d8	2d10	x3	—	Bg/Pi	Trip bonus; Bullrush bonus; see text

These charts are huge- I'm sure I've made or will make mistakes somewhere, so if you see anything that looks out of place or seem wrong, please bring it to my attention


Ammunition
WIP

Other Weapons

Spoiler: Arbalest

Show

This was a large, extremely powerful crossbow, usually requiring a winch or crank-system to draw back the cable in readyness for firing. I've seen it described as "a medieval rocket launcher", able to punch through plate armor at huge distances. Which, from other things I've read or seen, is probably at least a little exaggerated. Videos about tests being done with recreated weapons and armor mostly show that a crossbow bolts had difficulty penetrating through solid steel breastplates, because that's where the armor was thickest. Also, the metal used to fashion crossbow tips was often lesser quality than that used in armor, making it softer or more brittle. Anywhere else though, such as limbs or especially joint areas, would be vulnerable, as would anyone in leather or chainmail armor. That's what I've gathered from researching medieval weapons in my entirely amateurish way.

It came up one time in a thread about ranged combat when I was arguing over the maximum effective range of crossbows with another poster, and this was the sort of thing they sited for justifying huge ranges on crossbows. The caveat is that a good rate of fire with such a weapon was 2 shots per minute- it wasn't the kind of thing you wanted to have to stop and reload in the middle of a brawl. Ideally you'd probably prefer to have a castle wall in between you and whoever you were firing at so that no one ran up and melee'd you in the gonads while you reloaded

I haven't statted out an arbalest because it seems at best situational in D&D style combat. Wandering around a dungeon with a loaded crossbow seems like it's just asking for someone to jostle the trigger and shoot their teammate in the ass. Alternatively, I had visions of some player using a bag of holding and the quick-draw feat to turn themselves into a gattling cannon, popping off one shot each from a dozen separate arbalests in every encounter. Plus a heavy-crossbow is already statted like a 2-handed weapon, so unless I want to break my own system, the improvement in damage would likely be minimal.

Spoiler: Repeating Crossbows

Show

AFAICT these are in fact things that existed, however they weren't exactly like they are typically presented in D&D. From my research, they mostly seem to come in two varieties- heavy ones which required at least two hands to operate, meaning you couldn't hold it and work the draw mechanism at the same time. From pictures it seems like they would be mounted on some kind of turret, either on a ship or a castle rampart. Either way, it's not the kind of thing you'd typically cart around the battlefield.
Light repeating crossbows were (again, based on my extremely amateurish knowledge) REALLY light. A crossbow normally makes up for a shorter draw-distance (compared to bows) with higher tension, meaning it needs more strength to pull back. If you want a crossbow that you can rapidly draw and fire you've got to reduce the tension even further, meaning range and power (damage) would be limited. It seemed that these weapons would mainly be effective through force of numbers- it was the kind of thing you could give to peasants who were hiding out in your castle during a siege and send them out to harass the enemy via death by a thousand pinpricks.

As for not including them in my chart, the issue was that I couldn't exactly figure out where I should put them. In the RAW they were both exotic and expensive, I guess to limit players access to them, but that doesn't mesh with that I was trying to accomplish. First, if you want more damage at higher levels, you can now just get a better quality regular crossbow without having to mess about with different rules for reloading clips and working the reload mechanism. Second, I don't want them to be exotic because I don't want exotic weapons to just be about damage- I'd prefer them to do something interesting, and I haven't been able to come up with any good ideas for how to make crossbows interesting. Their whole selling point is based around the simplicity of such a weapon.

If you want to include them though, by all means let me know how you worked it out.

Spoiler: Longspear

Show

Historically, infantry would sometimes use spears, pikes, or other polearms that were as much as 12 to 15 feet in length. This worked out relatively well for massed troop formations because it allowed several rows of weapons to basically stack on one another and form a nigh-impenetrable wall of pointy metal bits. In practice, massed infantry formations frequently ended up just pushing back and forth against one another until one side got tired (or was flanked).

Obviously such a weapon is not intended for 1-on-1 combat. Aside from the difficulty in hauling it around a dungeon with twisting corridors and tight spaces, it's not suited for attacking highly mobile targets. If anything gets past the point of your double-reach weapon, your only real options are to either drop it and draw something else, or try to keep backing up.

Spoiler: Double-sided Weapons

Show

AFAICT, double-sided weapons weren't ever really a thing. Certainly not the way they were presented in D&D at least. The double-sided idea in the PHB might be based on the fact that you occasionally had pole-arms with a metal spike on the back-end that served several purposes. One was as a counterweight, to make controlling the weapon-tip easier in combat. It could also be dug into the ground if you were bracing against a charge, or if your spear-tip broke off you could swing it around and it would be better than a bare stick. But it was in no way a primary weapon. And double-sided swords and axes? Those are right out- any time your trying to jab or swing at the enemy, you've got sharp bits of the weapon pointing right back at you.

Now, none of this is the problem. I am not beholden to realism, and I have no issues building something that runs strictly on rule-of-cool. No, the reason there are no double-weapons in my chart is because I couldn't figure out a good way to make them work. I tried several different versions, and they always ended up either overpowered, too costly in terms of feats, or simply redundant. Sometimes all three at once.

Currently the closest thing I've got is the exotic weapon Bo-staff. That's intended to be used with my Weapon-Style fix which has feat-chains for a bunch of different styles of combat, and lets you use both two-handed and two-weapon feats at once, which is normally impossible. That's very heavy on the feat-tax, but since it's just one weapon I consider it an acceptable option if someone wants to build that way. It's not an entire category of weapons, so most people will probably just ignore it.

[Deepbluediver]

The format for this section is:
Weapon (alternative names) Pic or Video- description


Atlatl video- It's basically a kind of sling that allows you to toss 3-foot long darts at your target.

Battleaxe pic-

Blowgun-

Bolas- This weapon deals non-lethal damage. On a succesful attack your target is entangled; you may also choose to make ranged trip attacks.

Boomerang-

Bo-staff- This weapon is shorter and lighter than a quarterstaff. If you are proficient, you may use both Two-handed Fighting feats and Two-weapon Fighting feats simultaneously.

Brass Knuckles-

Chakram (chakar) video-

Spoiler: Rant

Show

I basically included this just so I'd have a ranged weapon that dealt slashing damage.

Chain, Spiked- A length of bladed chain, which can be used in several different configurations. You may attack with the tips of the chain, wielding it as two light weapons; or you can fold it over itself and wield with one hand as a one-handed weapon; or you can grasp it from one end and wield it as a two-handed weapon with Reach. Additionally, on a critical hit, rather than dealing extra damage you may choose to Entangle your target.
When wielded as two light weapons, the damage becomes 1d6 (assuming medium size) and when wielded as a two-handed weapon it becomes 2d6.

Club (shillelagh)-

Spoiler: Still ranting

Show

This is not a club. That's a stick. An actual club used in war and combat might not be made from metal but they can require just as much effort to craft as a sword or bow.

Crossbow-

Cutlass (kopis, machete) pic1 pic2-

Dagger pic-

Falchion (talwar) pic-

Flail pic- A flail has the unique ability that it can wrap around defenses, allowing you to ignore the AC bonus from any shield your target is wielding.

Gauntlets- Gauntlets are normally considered part of a suit of armor, and are not traditionally sold separately.
Gauntlets, Spiked- spikes added to gauntlets give them the piercing damage-type, increasing crit-damage to x3. If your gauntlets are of at least Superior quality, you can instead add Masterwork spikes for 300 gp. Gauntlet-spikes are not normally produced in other qualities.

Greataxe pic-

Greatclub (maul) pic-

Greatsword (zweihander) pic-

Glaive pic-

Guisarme-

Halberd pic-

Hooked sword Picture - This weapon gives a bonus to Disarm and Trip attempts. Also, if you are dual-wielding (and are proficient) you may use the Whirlwind attack. The price given is for a single weapon, although some smiths give a discount if you buy a matching set.

Javelin (shortspear)-

Judicar's Shield (dueling shield) video pic- A judicar's shield is an oversized shield with spikes and hooks around the edge and sharp ridge down the center. It has two methods of use- first it can be used as a spiked tower-shield that gives a bonus to Trip attempts. Alternatively it can be used as a two-handed weapon that keeps the AC bonus from being a shield, the bonus to Trip attempts, and gives a bonus to Bullrush attempts.

Spoiler: Explanation

Show

I could be mistaken about the name- I still can't find the original webpage I read about this on, and it might possible have been called a judicator's shield or adjudicator's shield or something like that. Most references seem to call it a dueling shield and indicate that it is Germanic in origin. Whatever it was called, it looks pretty crazy- i.e. the perfect thing for an exotic weapon.

Kama- These hooked weapons give a bonus to Disarm attempts. If you are dual-wielding them, you can double the bonus.

Kukri pic-

Lance- A lance is similar to a spear, but it's specialized for use when mounted. When mounted, you can use a lance one-handed. Attempting to use a lance unmounted and/or with two hands causes you to take a non-proficiency penalty.

Longbow- This bow is of significant size and power, and allows you to make ranged Trip, Disarm, and Sunder attempts.

Longsword (bastard-sword, katana)- A longsword is a one-handed weapon, however it can be used with two hands and gain any the associated benefits without the normal penalty (though it's base-damage remains the same).

Mace (warhammer) pic-

Mancatcher (sodegarami) pic-

Monk's Spade pic- This weapon (if proficient) allows the wielder to use Two-handed and Reach feats simultaneously.

Morningstar pic-

Nunchaku- As with flails, this weapon allows you to ignore any bonus to AC from a shield that your target is wielding. In addition, using 1 nunchaku permits you to use Two-weapon fighting feats. If you dual-wield nunchaku, you gain a bonus to feint (combat maneuver) attempts.

Pollaxe pic-

Push Dagger pic-

Quarterstaff video-

Ranseur (pike)-

Rapier pic-

Sai (swordbreaker, jitte) pic link-

Spoiler: Another rant

Show

Most people's first sight of a sai was, I'm assuming, the same as mine- as the favored weapon of Raphael of the TMNT. In that setting, it mostly serves as a kind of 3-tipped dagger. Wikipedia, however, seems to describe this weapon as more like a blunt-tipped truncheon. When I was trying to make something interesting, I said to myself- "why not both?"

Sap (baton)- This weapon is a favorite of town guards who need to deal with drunks and unruly civilians rather than deadly monsters. This weapon deals non-lethal damage only, however on a critical hit the target is Stunned for 1d4 rounds; you must be within 1 size category of your target to gain this benefit.

Scimitar (saber) pic-

Shield-
Shield Spikes- Adding spikes to your shield adds the piercing damage type, increasing crit-damage to x3. It also allows your shield to be enchanted to like a weapon.

Shortbow-

Shortsword (arming sword) pic-

Siangham- These unique weapons look like giant needles, and come as part of a matched set. If you are dual-wielding them (and proficient) you can use Flurry of Blows as a Monk equal to your level. The price given is for a pair.

Sling-

Spear-

Spiked Armor- Adding spikes to you armor (in addition to the fearsome appearence) causes you to deal damage to your target on a successful bullrush, overrun, or grapple check. Spikes can only be added to heavy armor.

Shuriken (throwing stars) pic- Shuriken are small throwing weapons. They can be throw individually, but if you are proficient you can throw several with a single attack. If you do so you do not add your Strength bonus to damage; the number of shuriken you can throw at once is determined by your BAB (6+ = 2, 11+ = 3, 16+ = 4, etc).

Three-section Staff- As with flails, this weapon allows you to ignore any bonus to AC from a shield your target is wielding. Additionally, it gives a bonus to Trip attempts, and it has Reach but allows you to attack targets who are adjacent to you.

Throwing Knife (kunai) pic-

Tiger Claws (bagh nakh) pic-

Tomahawk (hatchet)-

Trident-

Two-section staff (dire flail)- Like a normal flail, a two-section staff allows you to ignore any benefit to AC from a shield that your target is wielding.

Unarmed Strike- attacks with your bare fists deal non-lethal damage

War-scythe- This weapon has Reach. If you are proficient with this weapon, you can also use the Cleave feat; if your BAB if +6 or greater, you can use Greater Cleave.

War-whip (whip-sword) video- This weapon has Reach, gives a bonus to Trip and Disarm attempts, and allows the wielder to ignore shield bonuses to AC (like a flail).

Weighted Net- This weapon does not deal damage, but it grants a bonus to Disarm attempts. If you are proficient with this weapon, on a successful attack your target is Entangled.

Zhua (rake) pic video -

[Deepbluediver]

So here's how this works- weapons can be any one of 7 (SEVEN) different qualities, or grades. "Regular" is what's listed in the chart in the first post. In order to figure out what the appropriate damage for a higher (or lower) quality weapon is, find the damage listed in the Regular column for the weapon and size, and them move horizontally to the appropriate column to find that weapon's damage for that quality.

For example: a medium, regular shortsword would normally deal 1d8 damage; masterwork medium shortsword instead deals 3d8 damage.
Another example: a large regular guisarme normally deals 2d8 damage; an superior large guisarme deals 2d12 damage

Weapon Damage

Crude	REGULAR	Superior	Exceptional	Masterwork	Perfected	Legendwrought
1d1	1d2	1d3	2d2	3d2	4d2	5d3
1d2	1d3	1d4	2d3	3d3	4d3	5d4
1d3	1d4	1d6	2d4	3d4	4d4	5d6
1d4	1d6	1d10	2d6	3d6	4d6	5d8
1d6	1d8	1d12	2d8	3d8	4d8	5d10
1d8	1d10	2d8	2d10	3d10	4d10	6d10
2d2	2d3	2d4	4d3	4d6	5d6	6d8
2d3	2d4	2d6	4d4	4d8	5d8	6d10
2d4	2d6	2d10	4d6	4d10	5d10	7d12
2d6	2d8	2d12	4d8	4d12	6d12	9d12
2d8	2d10	3d10	4d10	5d12	8d10	10d12

I tried to stick to a few basic standards when building this chart. If the damage for a regular weapon is "1" (or 100% if you want to think of it that way) then the multiplier for Superior weapons is 1.5, for Exceptional its 2, for Masterwork it's 3, for Perfected it's 4, and for Legendwrought it's 6. This goes in roughly a +50%>>+33%>>+50%+33%>>+50% pattern, which is the best I could do working with rounded numbers. Also, I tried to keep the number of dice you'd be rolling in check- it would be really easy to get very consistent averages just by using tons of d3 and d4, but IMO that's boring, so I increased the size of the dice when I could, and rounded up a lot.

Spoiler: The damage is to much damage!

Show

There are already some things in the RAW rules that can increase the damage you do with attacks, such as ToB maneuvers, certain feats, that shock-trooper build, special weapon enchantments, etc. A lot of them are non-core, and I get the impression that's because the designers only realized later that they had badly balanced the core melee classes, and they were trying to add in options to compensate. And while damage is powerful and important, IMO it's also extremely straightforward, to the point of becoming boring.
My goal, ultimately, is to concentrate the majority of damage-improvements in weapon quality, and allow players to reserve their class abilities and feats and magic items for other stuff that is more interesting.

For now, I leave it up to other GMs to determine how best to implement this fix (if they choose to use it) in their gameworld. You have a better idea than I do what kinds of shenanigans your players might get up to, and what level you want to allow. If you decide to cap weapon quality at Masterwork, for example, because you think the damage on Perfected and Legendwrought stuff is to high, that's just fine. I'd love to hear how it works out anyway.

Optional Rules

• Combat Maneuver Check Bonus- as a weapons quality increases, so does it's damage but also so does the benefit to combat maneuvers you may make.
• BAB Requirement- if you are concerned about someone in your group arming hordes of peasents with high-quality weapons and sending them off to fight dragons, implement a BAB requirement; anyone who does not have high enough BAB takes a non-proficiency penalty.
• Suggested level- this is about where I think your campaign can utilize this quality of weapon without it drastically unbalancing things. Obviously it will vary a lot by group, and I encourage you to modify this system to fit with your group's playstyle.

Crude	Regular	Superior	Exceptional	Masterwork	Perfected	Legendwrought
Maneuver Bonus
+1	+2	+3	+4	+5	+6	+8
BAB Requirement
+0	+0	+1	+3	+6	+10	+15
Suggested Level
1-5	3-8	6-12	9-16	12-20	16-25	21+

Weapon Cost
I'm gonna take a moment to talk about Crude quality weapons.
Crude represents weapons that were made by unskilled labor, or from inferior materials, or were better weapons that decayed through lack of maintenance. It also represents improvised weapons. A kitchen-knife is not the same as a dagger. A blacksmith's hammer is not the same as a mace. Items intended for combat are specialized with that goal in mind- you shouldn't try to use a warhammer and brass knuckles to replace a carpenter's tools either. But sometimes you don't always have a nearby weaponsmith you can shop from, and you've got to march off to war with whatever sharp or heavy implements you scrounged up from around the farm.
So a kitchen knife can be represented in combat by giving it the stats of a crude dagger. A blacksmith's hammer is a crude mace. A stick you grabbed off the ground is a crude club, a rock is crude brass-knuckles, etc etc etc.

Ok, back to the cost in gold. The value of a crude weapons is 20% of a regular weapon of the same type. A superior weapon is 50 times the cost of regular weapon. After that point though, the individual differences in a weapon start to be less important than the skill and materials required to craft it. So from Exceptional upward, there is a base cost plus modifiers. The modifiers stack addidtively, not in a multiplicative manner, so for example two +50% modifiers make a weapon that is 100% more expensive (or double), rather than 125% more expensive.
[just to clarify, the modifiers would also apply to a regular or superior-quality weapon made from special materials]

QUALITY	COST
Crude	original x 1/5
Regular	default
Superior	original x 50
Exceptional	18,000 gp
Masterwork	56,000 gp
Perfected	172,000 gp
Legendwrought	~500,000 gp*

Modifier	Change
Unarmed	-50%
Light	-25%
Simple	-25%
Exotic	+25%
Two-handed	+50%
Silvered, Cold-iron	+25%
Darkwood, Krystal	+25%
Mithril, Adamantine	+50%

The prices given here are roughly based on 1/4th to 1/3rd of your WBL of the mid-point of the level range when I would suggest start having weapons of that quality appear in your game. However the WBL chart and the economy in general in 3.5 are severely bjorked, and I supplied this section only because when I first did my armor upgrade system some people asked for guidance at pricing gear. I would strongly advise people to use whatever WBL system they find works for them, and figure out ways to give or let players obtain gear as appropriate for the level of challenge the game is presenting.

*A note about Legendwrought weapons
Although there is a value listed for Legendwrought weapons, they are effectively priceless. There simply isn't a market for stuff of this rarity and infamy- it would be like trying to put a price on the Statue of Liberty or some other massively important cultural monument or familial icon. Anyone who possesses a Legendwrought weapon is already so powerful that material wealth is largely irrelevant to them (except, perhaps, as a way to motivate lesser beings). Anyone who comes into possession of a Legendwrought weapons who ISN'T that powerful is very rapidly going to become the target of every being within several plane's distance who IS.


Special Materials
Most weapons are made from iron (or steel) and wood, however high-quality weapons can be made from other materials that have special properties. Weapons crafted from special materials are usually found at Superior quality or better; exceptions might exist though.

Mithril
Mithril is as strong as the finest steel, but lighter, allowing it be worked and shaped more easily. Weapons made of mithril are more accurate, gaining a bonus to attack rolls made with them. This bonus is equal to the combat-manuever bonus some weapons get (i.e. +3 at superior quality, +5 at Masterwork, etc.
Mithril weapons weigh 25% less than an identical steel weapon would.

Adamantine
Adamantine is rare and particularly durable metal- weapons crafted from it can be honed to a sharper edge and a finer point, and deal extra damage on damage rolls. This bonus is +1 for light weapons, and +2 for one-handed weapon, +3 for two-handed weapons, or simply +25%, whichever is greater.
Adamantine weapons weigh 25%more than an identical steel weapon would.

Silvered, Cold-iron
Weapons forged from an alloy of alchemical silver or made using special ore and techniques can overcome damage resistance from certain types of creatures such as outsiders, fey, or werewolves.

Darkwood
Also called "ironwood" in some areas, these special trees can be harvested and treated to make them as tough as stone. Darkwood weapons get the same bonus to hit as mithril weapons.

Krystal
Krystal weapons look like glass but are as strong as steel. Whatever technique or magic was used to craft seems lost to time, making them exceptionally rare. However this material is easier and cheaper to enchant than normal, making them highly valued for both combat as well as their unearthly appearance.

[Deepbluediver]

Reserved for enchantments, maybe, and other miscellaneous rules. Unless I decide enchantments deserve their own thread (along with armor enchants), which I might.

[nonsi]

.
I like the general direction where this is going. A lot.

That being said, there are several issues I picked up at a glance:
1. More 1d<X> and less 2d<X>. More dice rolls = slower game. Save 2d<X> to d6s and higher an medium size. Rolling d3s and d4s is really annoying.
2. You really went overboard with the damage of some of the weapons (e.g. Mancatcher, Quarterstaff, Two/Three-Section Staff)
3. What in the world is Judicar's Shield?... and how does one wield 17 kilo in battle?
4. Some of the special abilities need some work (e.g. where did you get the notion that Nunchaku ignores shields)

[AOKost]

I really love what you've done with weapons! And it goes along beautifully with your modifications to Armor.

You could continue the tiers with Epic, Mithic, Forgotten, Godly, From the dawning of Creation, Apocalyptical, etc... And they should have equally brutal Craft DCs lol

I really appreciate the effort you've put into this. I would love to see how you change other Special Materials to go with this system too!

More dice isn't always bad, especially when you've got electronic dice rollers.

[Deepbluediver]

First, thanks to both of you for the feedback- I appreciate the effort.

1. More 1d<X> and less 2d<X>. More dice rolls = slower game. Save 2d<X> to d6s and higher an medium size. Rolling d3s and d4s is really annoying.

Really? I've never felt that way, but I concede other people might have different experiences. Part of it is that I like 2-handed weapons to deal a minimum of 2 damage- it makes them feel different from 1-handed weapons.

2. You really went overboard with the damage of some of the weapons (e.g. Mancatcher, Quarterstaff, Two/Three-Section Staff)

What exactly do you mean by that? A large part of this fix was aimed at standardizing most of the weapons- everything you mentioned should fit it with everything else in that same category. Part of my issue with the RAW weapons was that there doesn't seem to be ANY rhyme or reason when it comes to assigning weapon-damage and crit chance and crit-multiplier. Or at least I can't figure out what it was.
I'm more concerned about making a balanced and fun system than I am about realism.

My methodology is as follows: the standard damage for a 2-handed weapon is 2d6; bludgeoning weapons get an increase in dice-size, so it goes up to 2d8, or 2d10 for a large creature.

The way I think about it is this- if I reduced basic 2-handed damage to 2d4 then you'd have one handed weapons that deal 1d8 (average 4.5 damage, 4.73 if you include crits) and two-handed weapons that deal 2d4 (average 5, or 5.5 including crits), which seems like a very minor increase- barely above 15%. On the other hand, if I leave 1-handed weapons at 1d6 damage and move two-handed weapons to 2d6, then I end up with one-handed weapons that deal 3.5 (3.85) damage and two-handed weapons that deal 9 (9.45) damage on average- a 270% improvement. So the former setup seems like it has situations where there's not enough difference, while the later seems like there's to much.

I've gone back and forth on this a bunch of times and I'm not sure there's a perfect solution, but if you have specific suggestion(s) I'd be happy to take them into consideration.

3. What in the world is Judicar's Shield?... and how does one wield 17 kilo in battle?

I gave a basic description in the second post- unfortunately I can no long find the webpage I read about it on. If I ever come across it again I'll provide the link.

In the meantime, a tower-shield listed on the Equipment chart in the PHB is 45 lbs or 20.4 kilos, so explain THAT one to me. I'm not set on any of the weights, though. That was one of the things I considered to be least important when it comes to balance- what do you think a more reasonable weight ought to be?

4. Some of the special abilities need some work (e.g. where did you get the notion that Nunchaku ignores shields)

That quality is something I applied to all the flail-like weapons; however I'm not set on anything- if you've got other ideas I'm all ears.

You could continue the tiers with Epic, Mithic, Forgotten, Godly, From the dawning of Creation, Apocalyptical, etc... And they should have equally brutal Craft DCs lol

Crafting needs a fix too, yes, but I've got way less work done on that. In the meantime- just how many tiers do I need? I've already got 6 (7 if you include Crude), 2 of which go into epic gameplay. I think this works for me, but if you want to adjust any of the tiers or subdivide the categories further, be my guest. Feel free to post your own chart and I'll be happy to link it in my original post as another alternative.

I really appreciate the effort you've put into this. I would love to see how you change other Special Materials to go with this system too!

I picked the most common materials because I assumed that's what people would be familiar with. If there's anything specific you'd like me to try and include, give me a name and a source and I'll see what I can come up with.

More dice isn't always bad, especially when you've got electronic dice rollers.

That was my thought, too. In my experience people come in two categories with gaming dice- those people who have exactly one set and have to borrow from someone else or scrounge through boardgames to roll 2d6, and those people who store their dice collection in a bucket, tacklebox, or canvas sack. I don't really expect people to roll 9d12 of course, but once you get to that level it's not significantly different IMO from some of the stuff spellcasters have to calculate.

[nonsi]

Really? I've never felt that way, but I concede other people might have different experiences. Part of it is that I like 2-handed weapons to deal a minimum of 2 damage- it makes them feel different from 1-handed weapons.

2-dice produce marginally higher averages, but at the cost of lower probability of scoring high damage (the bell-curve-roll syndrome).

What exactly do you mean by that? A large part of this fix was aimed at standardizing most of the weapons- everything you mentioned should fit it with everything else in that same category. Part of my issue with the RAW weapons was that there doesn't seem to be ANY rhyme or reason when it comes to assigning weapon-damage and crit chance and crit-multiplier. Or at least I can't figure out what it was.

I actually find most of what they did in RAW very intuitive. My fix for weapons is relatively short. I will admit that if I has more posting space, I would've added some of the weapons mentioned in BECMI that you specified (ah, nostalgia).

I'll just ask you this: If you're about to face an opponent and you can choose whether that opponent would be using a quarterstaff or a longsword, assuming he's equally competent at both, which would you choose?

I'm more concerned about making a balanced and fun system than I am about realism.

Then why work so hard? Simplify to weapon groups and reduce weapons within the groups to character description then. A lot less effort for what you're trying to achieve.

My methodology is as follows: the standard damage for a 2-handed weapon is 2d6; bludgeoning weapons get an increase in dice-size, so it goes up to 2d8, or 2d10 for a large creature.

You're trying to find a symmetry that doesn't exist. In reality, weapons with lower damage yield have special qualities that compensate for the loss.

I gave a basic description in the second post- unfortunately I can no long find the webpage I read about it on. If I ever come across it again I'll provide the link.

In the meantime, a tower-shield listed on the Equipment chart in the PHB is 45 lbs or 20.4 kilos, so explain THAT one to me. I'm not set on any of the weights, though. That was one of the things I considered to be least important when it comes to balance- what do you think a more reasonable weight ought to be?

Notice that "You cannot bash with a tower shield, nor can you use your shield hand for anything else".

4. Some of the special abilities need some work (e.g. where did you get the notion that Nunchaku ignores shields)
That quality is something I applied to all the flail-like weapons; however I'm not set on anything- if you've got other ideas I'm all ears.

Nunchaku used 2-handed could provide Grapple benefits and Feint bonuses. It already provides Disarm bonuses.

[Deepbluediver]

2-dice produce marginally higher averages, but at the cost of lower probability of scoring high damage (the bell-curve-roll syndrome).

Good point- I hadn't thought of it that way. I'll take a look at the chart and see if I want to change anything, but smaller numbers of larger die also make for a less-smooth curve when I need to improve the damage of a weapon.

I actually find most of what they did in RAW very intuitive.

Could you explain it to me then, please.

My fix for weapons is relatively short. I will admit that if I has more posting space, I would've added some of the weapons mentioned in BECMI that you specified (ah, nostalgia).

If I can think of something unique that a weapon adds, I'd be happy to include it- and that can be as minor as a damage-type combination that's not already represented.

But here's the other thing- across the millennia humans have tried pretty much every conceivable version of pointy bits of metal to kill other humans with. If you collected medieval swords I'm sure you could find them in half-inch increments of every size from "fruit knife" to "what are you overcompensating for?!?!?". However, it's not necessary to list every single variant of sword (or other weapon) for a GAME. For example, while I'm sure an expert in medieval weapons can explain to me the difference between a halberd (a chopping blade on a pole with a spear-tip and a hook on the reverse side) and a guisarme (a chopping blade on a pole with a spear-tip and a hook on the reverse side) I don't see a reasonable way to differentiate those items in the game.

I'll just ask you this: If you're about to face an opponent and you can choose whether that opponent would be using a quarterstaff or a longsword, assuming he's equally competent at both, which would you choose?

I assume you mean in the game, but I'm going to go off on a tangent first because I am incapable of giving a short answer (it's a medical condition).
From everything I've read about RL combat, a quarterstaff is definitely NOT an army-type weapon. With soldiers packed into tight formations, a spear or sword was much better. However in a 1v1 situation (or even 1v2, 1v3, etc), where you have room to maneuver and get good lateral motion, a quarterstaff's effectiveness was frequently underestimated (in modern portrayals anyway). Think of how hard someone can swing a baseball bat. Of course if you watch videos of quartestaff combat on youtube people aren't swinging it like a bat, but a quarterstaff is also much longer and you can really get some good momentum going for a powerful strike. Without any knowledge of how to use a sword, me, the real-life person, would probably pick the quarterstaff.

Anyway, back to the topic at hand- a quarterstaff does more damage, yes, but a longsword can be used as a one-handed weapon and paired with a shield or something like a dagger. Also, a quarterstaff has reach, which can be both a benefit or a drawback depending on the situation. I'd say that both items have situational benefits.

Then why work so hard?

Because I prefer to do things right rather than do them quick.

Simplify to weapon groups and reduce weapons within the groups to character description then. A lot less effort for what you're trying to achieve.

Yes, I considered this- making the weapons a lot MORE similar so people can pick whatever they want for fluff reasons. But in the end I thought that was kind of boring. I actually really like the idea that a battleaxe is mechanically different from a longsword, etc.

You're trying to find a symmetry that doesn't exist. In reality, weapons with lower damage yield have special qualities that compensate for the loss.

Ok, good point, but I'm not talking about reality here, I'm building something for a gameworld. I try to use real-world information to inform and inspire my designs, so that most people accept it instead of going "this makes no sense", but I'm not trying to make a system that's 100% accurate. You could do that, if you wanted, with all kinds of weapon-based rock-paper-scissors advantages and such, but I don't think that level of minutia and complexity is beneficial for D&D 3.5.

Notice that "You cannot bash with a tower shield, nor can you use your shield hand for anything else".

Another good point- if I decreased the weight and removed that limitation, do you think people would complain that it's OP or unrealistic or whatever else they might come up with? I've been reading up on the weights of real-world shields and the long-and-short is that they varied highly, but none I've come across so far weighed 40 lbs. One of the largest (heaviest) examples I've read about so far is a Pavise, which is less like a shield and more like a portable wall an archer would carry into combat to provide cover from enemy archers.

Of course, I'm not trying to be 100% realistic, and a giant wall-sized shield is a fantasy trope some people like to play with. When you say "tower shield", there's a lot of people out there who picture less of this:

Spoiler: Roman Shield

Show

And more of this:

Spoiler: Video-game shield

Show

Nunchaku used 2-handed could provide Grapple benefits and Feint bonuses. It already provides Disarm bonuses.

I'm not really seeing how the grapple benefit works unless you're wrapping it around someone's neck in a kind of choke-hold.

[Deepbluediver]

2. You really went overboard with the damage of some of the weapons (e.g. Mancatcher, Quarterstaff, Two/Three-Section Staff)

I've been thinking about this more (my "homebrew" is hardly ever considered finished, I just take breaks from messing with it for a while) and I've come up with a possible change.

We can discuss how much damage is to much damage- but in my experience modifying HP is one of the easiest things you can do to adjust a game. Either use the MM rules for increasing monster HD, or use one of several methods for increasing average HP, or even just turn up the CR a notch or two (and/or delay handing out better weapons- the suggested levels I gave aren't fixed in stone). I think if the weapons are reasonably balanced against each other, most groups will settle down pretty quick into a difficulty curve that works for them.


Anyway, I already went through all my reasons for not changing the damage dice on 2-handed weapons, but earlier today I was turning it over in my head and I was debating the merits of changing the dice for one-handed weapons instead. What if I upped my basic 1-handed dice from a d6 to a d8? And 1-handed bludgeoning weapons get a d10.

That makes the average damage from martial one-hander go from 4.5 to 5.5, while two-handers stay at 7-9. Once you add in crits, the ranges adjust slightly and become 4.95-5.775 and 7.7-9.45. That makes the largest gap a 90% difference and the smallest gap a 33% increase. That's a range I actually feel pretty comfortable with, but before I start messing about with the table (seriously, it's a pain in the ass) I'd love to hear anyone else's thought.


Some people reading this are probably thinking that this is pushing low level encounters into one-shot territory, and to some extent they're right, but maybe not as much as it first appears. First, there's my armor fix; the AC is about on par with the RAW but all the armor gets damage reduction, making hits less lethal. These two pieces where INTENDED to be used in concert and compliment each other.
Second, I know it's partially personal preference but I like to start my games at level 3 (as in, all adult humanoids have a minimum of 3 HD, which for PCs usually means class levels) specifically because it alleviates a lot of the risk of getting one-shot by a dire rat or a random housecat. Not everyone plays that way, but I can't help keep at least SOME of my personal bias of "the best way" from creeping into my homebrew, and design with that in mind.
Finally, if you are starting at level 1 and think Regular damage is to high, feel free to give your players Crude quality weapons, and make them earn their way up.

To conclude, of all the things that can cause problems in a game, I feel like "to much melee damage" is one of the easiest to address and work around.

[nonsi]

Some people reading this are probably thinking that this is pushing low level encounters into one-shot territory, and to some extent they're right, but maybe not as much as it first appears. First, there's my armor fix; the AC is about on par with the RAW but all the armor gets damage reduction, making hits less lethal. These two pieces where INTENDED to be used in concert and compliment each other.

So, you're increasing damage and then offset it w/ DR.
The main problem with armor DR is that it adds calculations to each hit vs. the majority of PCs and roughly 40% of all opponents, slowing down gameflow.

Second, I know it's partially personal preference but I like to start my games at level 3 (as in, all adult humanoids have a minimum of 3 HD, which for PCs usually means class levels) specifically because it alleviates a lot of the risk of getting one-shot by a dire rat or a random housecat. Not everyone plays that way, but I can't help keep at least SOME of my personal bias of "the best way" from creeping into my homebrew, and design with that in mind.

To conclude, of all the things that can cause problems in a game, I feel like "to much melee damage" is one of the easiest to address and work around.

. . . or you could say that everybody starts with something before class levels kick in.
Achieves the same result w/o throwing levels 1 and 2 out the window.

[Deepbluediver]

So, you're increasing damage and then offset it w/ DR.

Ultimately my goal was to develop a better system for upgrading weapons and to give players and GMs more options. With both of these in play, you can equip the party (and your monsters to some extent) with whatever variation suits you.

The main problem with armor DR is that it adds calculations to each hit vs. the majority of PCs and roughly 40% of all opponents, slowing down gameflow.

Only marginally, I think. But that's part of the price you pay for a dice-based system, which I believe most people like. I'm sure we could develop a system where each weapon dealt a fixed amount of damage with every hit, if that was something the group preferred.

. . . or you could say that everybody starts with something before class levels kick in.
Achieves the same result w/o throwing levels 1 and 2 out the window.

Yes, definitely, that looks interesting as well. I particularly liked the Ogre's backstory.

[nonsi]

Ultimately my goal was to develop a better system for upgrading weapons and to give players and GMs more options. With both of these in play, you can equip the party (and your monsters to some extent) with whatever variation suits you.

Ok, I won't argue personal taste.

Only marginally, I think. But that's part of the price you pay for a dice-based system, which I believe most people like. I'm sure we could develop a system where each weapon dealt a fixed amount of damage with every hit, if that was something the group preferred.

No. don't do that. It will kill the element of randomness of battle.

Yes, definitely, that looks interesting as well. I particularly liked the Ogre's backstory.

Credit for the Ogre race goes to Amechra. I took it as his approval and tweaked it to fit into my system.



Btw, I forgot to comment on your proposed weapon quality upgrade.
I don't like it because it further puts emphasis on gear and WBL over char-level.
If you go over my classes, you'll notice that they're significantly more capable than any core class. This was done with the intent of almost eliminating gear dependency as levels go up and freeing players and DM from worrying about WBL. I much prefer level to play a far more significant part than gear in determining a character's worth.

Also, if you put some thought to it, how much sharper and more effective can you really make a weapon by squeezing craft into it?
Weapons are already designed to be effective. even a crude Katana will be at least 1/2 as effective as the best Katana ever crafted in the hands of someone proficient with this type of weapon.

[Deepbluediver]

Credit for the Ogre race goes to Amechra. I took it as his approval and tweaked it to fit into my system.

The rest of it looks pretty good, too.

Btw, I forgot to comment on your proposed weapon quality upgrade.
I don't like it because it further puts emphasis on gear and WBL over char-level.
If you go over my classes, you'll notice that they're significantly more capable than any core class. This was done with the intent of almost eliminating gear dependency as levels go up and freeing players and DM from worrying about WBL. I much prefer level to play a far more significant part than gear in determining a character's worth.

With regards to classes- I totally agree with you. I haven't posted a class-fix in a long time, but for the stuff I still fiddle with on my own that is a definite goal. Fixing the class features that have issues is step one, and then buffing everything at tier 4 and below up to about the tier 3 level is steps two through ten. Giving non-magic-users more power more easily is one part, but also giving them more versatility and more options for various builds. This is a piece of that- if you can get the damage and defense you need from just your armor and your weapons, we can skip the Ring of AC and instead wear a ring that lets you fly, or pass through walls, and sneak-attack ghosts or whatever else if lying around.

I can't homebrew in a vacuum though- I've got to post things one bit at a time. Also, I admitted the WBL system is bjorked; ideally you'd work out a way to give PCs upgrades when they needed it and not just have millions of gold worth of weapons sitting around a shop somewhere.

Also also, in my ideal world spellcasters would have items to spend their gold on that were also important for their effectiveness. Whether your entire party has taken the Vow of Poverty or is lit up likeChristmas trees, so long as everyone does it equally it should work out for game balance.

Also, if you put some thought to it, how much sharper and more effective can you really make a weapon by squeezing craft into it?
Weapons are already designed to be effective. even a crude Katana will be at least 1/2 as effective as the best Katana ever crafted in the hands of someone proficient with this type of weapon.

What exactly do you mean? The RAW rules already allow for Masterwork weapons (i.e. higher quality) and upgrading your gear has long been a trope of fantasy games- I just took those two concepts and ran with them, because the RAW weapons kind of peter out after level 5, except for involving magic.

AFAIK, a "razor-sharp sword" was never actually a thing. A sword honed to such a fine edge would quickly dull and/or chip in battle, rapidly rendering it useless; smiths needed to find a balance between a cutting edge and one capable of taking the beating a sword (or other weapon) was likely to see in battle. In a game where characters are already capable of superhuman feats and outright magic, assume that they've also developed techniques for simultaneously giving weapons the sharpness of a surgical scalpel and the toughness of blacksmith's anvil. I don't think that strains credulity to much, right?

[nonsi]

With regards to classes- I totally agree with you. I haven't posted a class-fix in a long time, but for the stuff I still fiddle with on my own that is a definite goal. Fixing the class features that have issues is step one, and then buffing everything at tier 4 and below up to about the tier 3 level is steps two through ten. Giving non-magic-users more power more easily is one part, but also giving them more versatility and more options for various builds. This is a piece of that- if you can get the damage and defense you need from just your armor and your weapons, we can skip the Ring of AC and instead wear a ring that lets you fly, or pass through walls, and sneak-attack ghosts or whatever else if lying around.

I can't homebrew in a vacuum though- I've got to post things one bit at a time. Also, I admitted the WBL system is bjroked; ideally you'd work out a way to give PCs upgrades when they needed it and not just have millions of gold worth of weapons sitting around a shop somewhere.

Also also, in my ideal world spellcasters would have items to spend their gold on that were also important for their effectiveness. Whether your entire party has taken the Vow of Poverty or is lit up likeChristmas trees, so long as everyone does it equally it should work out for game balance.

I think that going the other way around will make things easier for you to figure out.
You should start with the classes and figure out what you want them to be able to do at which levels. That way you'll be able to play around with everything else and see how the other game elements interact with one another. Figuring things out separately for each game element will most surely force you to go back to the drawing board once you try to put them together.

As for "lit up like Christmas trees"... I don't remember heroes or villains in literature that were like that.
Special items are always pivotal in making a story. If you have hoards of them, then they're not in the least pivotal.

What exactly do you mean? The RAW rules already allow for Masterwork weapons (i.e. higher quality) and upgrading your gear has long been a trope of fantasy games- I just took those two concepts and ran with them, because the RAW weapons kind of peter out after level 5, except for involving magic.

AFAIK, a "razor-sharp sword" was never actually a thing. A sword honed to such a fine edge would quickly dull and/or chip in battle, rapidly rendering it useless; smiths needed to find a balance between a cutting edge and one capable of taking the beating a sword (or other weapon) was likely to see in battle. In a game where characters are already capable of superhuman feats and outright magic, assume that they've also developed techniques for simultaneously giving weapons the sharpness of a surgical scalpel and the toughness of blacksmith's anvil. I don't think that strains credulity to much, right?

I get what you're saying, but upgrading a weapon that does 2d10 to deal 10d12 is:
1. Nuts.
2. Too much WBL-oriented.
3. Will make it problematic to control the power-differences between characters.
4. Will slow down the game because of too many dice rolls.

Just have them mimic magical plusses. +4 to attack and damage practically doubles one's martial prowess, unless the character already had an average of 80%+ hit probability with iterative attacks.
Take it from someone that had some experience in taking things the wrong way (in previous incarnations of my overhaul project).

[Deepbluediver]

I think that going the other way around will make things easier for you to figure out.
You should start with the classes and figure out what you want them to be able to do at which levels. That way you'll be able to play around with everything else and see how the other game elements interact with one another. Figuring things out separately for each game element will most surely force you to go back to the drawing board once you try to put them together.

In some sense, I already have. I haven't posted a class-fix in a long time but I've got lots of stuff saved on my computer (mostly as Excel spreadsheets) so I've got a pretty good idea of where I want to go with a lot of the classes.

Some of my older homebrew is out of date but the Monk, Cleric, Paladin, and the Wizard (this last one needs a little tweaking) are mostly good examples of the kind of thing I'm aiming for.

However I'm not going to say, "PEACH, but read all my other homebrew first." That's just not going to happen. If it helps, assume that the system this is intended for has no classes that are lower than tier 3.

One of my long-term goals is to give martial classes more freedom to spend their resources (choices in special abilities, feats, magic-item slots, gold, etc) to do things other than "hit it really hard with a stick". In order to do that, though, I first need to make sure those classes are competent at their core function (which, lets face it, is frequently "hitting stuff really hard with sticks") without using up every spare feat and copper piece they get a hold of. In my ideal world, the Fighter gets a big boost from his weapon and armor so that doesn't need a Ring of +2 AC and a Belt of Giant's Strength and a Helm of Bonus to Attack Rolls. I want my Fighters and Barbarians and Monks to be able to choose (or be happy with) stuff like a magic ring that lets you use Burning Hands 3 times per day or a belt that lets you phase into and out of the ethereal plane and a helm that gives you free 20's on skill checks and stuff like that.

As for "lit up like Christmas trees"... I don't remember heroes or villains in literature that were like that.
Special items are always pivotal in making a story. If you have hoards of them, then they're not in the least pivotal.

Yes and no. I'm gonna spoil the rest of my answer because it's long and rambling and kind of off topic. The most relevant bit is the last 2 paragraphs.

Spoiler: Game vs. Story

Show

In novels you're not usually treated to an explanation of how the tagonists (pro and an) acquired every bit of bling because it's not necessary or even helpful to advancing the story. It's far more common to have the story about finding THE magic sword of the mystical magical mystery macguffin orb. In a setting where the consumer has no control over the characters and are simply following along, one long sequence of events with a major payout tends to be more satisfying than series of little vignettes.

There are counter-examples though; think of some of the old folktales. The hero often sets out on a journey, doing good deeds for every cute critter and old woman they meet along the way, and each one rewards them with some items or bit of knowledge. So by the time they reach the giant's castle they've got seven-league boots, a pot that produces infinite amounts of food, a magic ring that turns them invisible, a bottle that can hold an entire lake, a sword that transforms into a flock of geese... etc etc etc. And it turns out that every item is the solution for some problem the hero encounters later.

On the other end of the spectrum you've things that are nearly pure game, like Tetris or Super Hexagon. Most "games" though are somewhere in between- IWBTGTG's plot is really just an excuse for a long series of increasingly unfair action sequences, but it sets the scene. RPGs, by contrast, often have half an hour of unskippable custscene before you gain control of your character just long enough to walk out of your house and watch another half-hour of unskippable cutscene. But you keep going because there's the promise of a game in there somewhere.

Tabletop games can have more or less story (4 adventurers meet in front of a dungeon vs. a multi-session campagin, etc) but it ALWAYS has some game elements. No one joins a D&D group to listen to "The Adventures of Skippy the Wondergnome, the GMNPC with a song in his heart and a railroad plot in his pocket". Unlike a novel or even a videogame, the storyteller in a tabletop game DOES NOT have complete control over everything; they form the setting and then let 3-6 murderhobos loose to try and ruin it all. And murderhobos (aka PCs) usually like to feel that as they progress through the gameworld, they are getting more powerful. They want to fight badder and badder enemies and steal more loot which they in turn use to overcome yet-bigger threats, etc etc etc. These improvements can come from class features, or items, or both, but when you're talking about BALANCE, small, incremental improvements are usually easier to work with than rare but huge jumps in power. Particularly when you are dealing with multiple characters at the same time.

And that's what this is- it's a series of incremental improvements. You don't make someone use the exact same longsword from levels 1 to 10, and then at 11 hand them a legendwrought longsword. That is bad for balance and a bad loot-distribution system. Assuming you keep the same type of weapon, each upgrade in quality increases the damage from your weapon by about 30-50%. It says nothing about ability scores or feats or class features, but every couple of levels getting a weapon that hits harder seems like a good system to me. It's the same system that they tried to use in the RAW, just cranked up a bit.

I get what you're saying, but upgrading a weapon that does 2d10 to deal 10d12 is:
1. Nuts.
2. Too much WBL-oriented.
3. Will make it problematic to control the power-differences between characters.
4. Will slow down the game because of too many dice rolls.

Keep in mind that:

1. It's only 6 weapons out of the entire chart, 4 of which are exotic.
2. 2d10 is only for large size weapons and in turn large-size creatures, which not everyone will play.
3. 10d12 damage is literally epic play- the suggested level for legendwrought weapons is, like the drinking age, 21 and over.
4. Dice rolling programs exist and are quite common- you can get them on your phone.
5. The game already has stuff like Meteor Swarm which requires rolling 4x6d6 plus 2d6 for any creatures struck by explosions plus separate saves for each creature for each explosion that creature is caught in.
6. Stuff like the thousands-of-damage-per-turn Shock Trooper build already exists and is legal by RAW; I want to be able to ban or fix that kind of cheese while still allowing my players high-damage options.
7. In my experience, high level characters tend to make full attacks much less often than the designers thought they would (and don't hit with all their attacks when they do).
8. And finally, keep in mind that everything is a SUGGESTION. The "suggested levels" are ranges to allow the GM a measure of control, even if he's following the charts exactly. Masterwork quality stuff goes all the way up to level 20, and if you find your players don't need more damage for the moment, let them keep whatever weapons they've already got.

Just have them mimic magical plusses. +4 to attack and damage practically doubles one's martial prowess, unless the character already had an average of 80%+ hit probability with iterative attacks.
Take it from someone that had some experience in taking things the wrong way (in previous incarnations of my overhaul project).

I appreciate all your feedback, I really do. That's why I reopened this conversation; I was thinking about what you said about the damage and I'm looking for ways to improve it. But the whole point was that the RAW system did not provide a sufficient variety or power for my characters. Doubling a ****ty value still gives you a ****ty value. The RAW system for mundane equipment improvements basically caps out around level 5, and for the next 15 levels it all comes down to magic, which your low-tier martial characters don't have access to on their own.

You were the one who pointed out that taking the dice-rolls out of combat is usually bad, or at least boring. But the RAW system leads to issues where the Fighter spends every resource he has to boost his strength score, and ends the game rolling 1d8+26 for damage.

I do not want a system where the dice-roll is an afterthought.
I do not want a system where the Fighter has to beg the Wizard for an enchantment to stay relevant.

How does your version of the fix address those two problems?

[nonsi]

Some of my older homebrew is out of date but the Monk, Cleric, Paladin, and the Wizard (this last one needs a little tweaking) are mostly good examples of the kind of thing I'm aiming for.

Now I remember that it was your Wizard fix that had inspired mine. My school selection formula is based on the realization that Conjuration and Transmutation are superior to the other schools, so each is worth 2 schools if you choose it as a banned school, and costs you an extra banned school if you focus on it. That seems to me like a reasonable equilibrium between the different arcane specialists.

However I'm not going to say, "PEACH, but read all my other homebrew first." That's just not going to happen. If it helps, assume that the system this is intended for has no classes that are lower than tier 3.

You might wanna consider an overhaul project of your own. That way you won't have to note that things are related to other things and your entire project will be in one place.

One of my long-term goals is to give martial classes more freedom to spend their resources (choices in special abilities, feats, magic-item slots, gold, etc) to do things other than "hit it really hard with a stick".

Just don't have magic-item slots increase with level. That solution is lame IMO.

I want my Fighters and Barbarians and Monks to be able to choose (or be happy with) stuff like a magic ring that lets you use Burning Hands 3 times per day or a belt that lets you phase into and out of the ethereal plane and a helm that gives you free 20's on skill checks and stuff like that.

Ethereal phasing is actually quite powerful.
Free 20's on skill checks is something I'd prefer leaving in the characters' ballpark rather than have magical gear grant.

Game vs. Story
. . .
Most "games" though are somewhere in between- IWBTGTG's plot is really just an excuse for a long series of increasingly unfair action sequences, but it sets the scene. RPGs, by contrast, often have half an hour of unskippable custscene before you gain control of your character just long enough to walk out of your house and watch another half-hour of unskippable cutscene. But you keep going because there's the promise of a game in there somewhere.

Actually, when I installed Might & Magic 6/7/8 a long time ago, it took some time before I skipped the intros. I really liked them.

No one joins a D&D group to listen to "The Adventures of Skippy the Wondergnome, the GMNPC with a song in his heart and a railroad plot in his pocket".

1. I've known some that do.
2. "Railroad" depends on player & DM.

Unlike a novel or even a videogame, the storyteller in a tabletop game DOES NOT have complete control over everything; they form the setting and then let 3-6 murderhobos loose to try and ruin it all. And murderhobos (aka PCs) usually like to feel that as they progress through the gameworld, they are getting more powerful. They want to fight badder and badder enemies and steal more loot which they in turn use to overcome yet-bigger threats, etc etc etc. These improvements can come from class features, or items, or both, but when you're talking about BALANCE, small, incremental improvements are usually easier to work with than rare but huge jumps in power. Particularly when you are dealing with multiple characters at the same time.

If the DM awards XP for:
1. Defeating opponents rather than only killing them.
2. Saving NPCs that need saving even in combat situations (including taking hits when necessary).
3. Diplomatically solving problems.
4. Riddles/puzzles
Then the "murderhobos" syndrome decreases dramatically.

And that's what this is- it's a series of incremental improvements. You don't make someone use the exact same longsword from levels 1 to 10, and then at 11 hand them a legendwrought longsword. That is bad for balance and a bad loot-distribution system. Assuming you keep the same type of weapon, each upgrade in quality increases the damage from your weapon by about 30-50%.

Gear gets damaged/ruined.
Gear gets stolen.
Gear gets lost.
Gear gets confiscated.
If those never happen in a campaign, credibility diminishes and so does the experience of the campaign.

You were the one who pointed out that taking the dice-rolls out of combat is usually bad, or at least boring. But the RAW system leads to issues where the Fighter spends every resource he has to boost his strength score, and ends the game rolling 1d8+26 for damage.

I do not want a system where the dice-roll is an afterthought.
I do not want a system where the Fighter has to beg the Wizard for an enchantment to stay relevant.

You have a point there.
I just came up with an idea. What if Weapon Spec and greater Weapon Spec were to increase damage dice as if you've gained size increase, as well as Weapon Focus granting increasing attack roll bonuses with leveling?
That's more emphasis on character leveling and less on gear... but then how do you make it not a must-have for practically every single fighter?
And now that I think of it, it's not necessarily a bad thing that every fighter puts resources on one or two signature weapons, but merits more overall character-build resources.
My caveat with such an approach is that once again a badass knife fighter is not an option (unless you don't mind shooting yourself in the foot).

[Deepbluediver]

You might wanna consider an overhaul project of your own. That way you won't have to note that things are related to other things and your entire project will be in one place.

I mean, that's kind of what I'm doing, but it's never going to be simple enough to put everything in one place. I'm all for simplifying things like feats, or class features, or special abilities, or subsystems, but that doesn't mean my fixes will be short and simple. Especially since a lot of the class-fixes really call for adding stuff.

Anyway, do you know how some people have project cars? Broken vehicles they'll spend tons of time and hundreds if not thousands of dollars to fix up, and yet they never seem to actually finish working on? That's a bit like me and homebrewing 3.5 (not counting the money). I do it because I find it fun to actively be working on stuff, even if I never reach a point of completion. And I post it because there are lots of other people who have tried to fix the same problems, and reading their responses or seeing what they did often gives me further inspiration.

Just don't have magic-item slots increase with level. That solution is lame IMO.

I'm not exactly sure what that means. I tend to prefer flexible, organic systems where as much as possible is available from the start. I'm NOT looking to put arbitrary limits on how many magic items a player can use or when you open up certain slots, if that's what you're talking about.

Ethereal phasing is actually quite powerful.
Free 20's on skill checks is something I'd prefer leaving in the characters' ballpark rather than have magical gear grant.

Those were just random examples. A better way to put it would be that I want power to come from Armor and Weapons, and everything else to be available to increase versatility. What exactly that means can vary from player to player and group to group....which is kinda the whole point.

If the DM awards XP for:
1. Defeating opponents rather than only killing them.
2. Saving NPCs that need saving even in combat situations (including taking hits when necessary).
3. Diplomatically solving problems.
4. Riddles/puzzles
Then the "murderhobos" syndrome decreases dramatically.

I definitely support all of that- my point was only that PCs want a feeling of agency, and usually the sense that they are improving and getting stronger as the story progresses. For D&D style games, you can have everything from E6 to Exhalted, and I'm not going to make judgement about which is best. There's plenty of flexibility (I think) even within my proposed system for various power levels.

Gear gets damaged/ruined.
Gear gets stolen.
Gear gets lost.
Gear gets confiscated.
If those never happen in a campaign, credibility diminishes and so does the experience of the campaign.

I think we're back to the "power from a class" vs. "power from gear" discussion- this is good, I wanted to comment on this.
If you ask D&D players to picture a fighter, I suspect 9 out of 10 of them would immediately imagine someone with some kind of weapon. Either an axe or a spear or damn-big sword. Most of them would also probably imagine some kind of armor- some might go for the knight in shinning mail archetype, while others might envision more of sellsword in dark leathers, but very few people are going to imagine a buff gymrat in streetclothes.

My point is, your gear IS your character. Or at least part of it anyway. Some classes might not use weapons (monks) and some might not use armor (casters) but having some sort of item(s) that improve what you can do as a participant in the gameworld is pretty standard, AND a good way to adjust balance AND fill in gaps in a class' repertoire AND provide universal access to certain functions. I'm sure you could design a gameworld where gear was entirely inconsequential. Depending on the genre that might be more or less believable to your players, but it's certainly a thing you could do. It's just not my preference.

Anyhow, yes, all of that stuff you mentioned can happen, but you can take it to far the other way as well. If the BBEG has an endless stream of thieves he can send after the wizard's spellbook for no adequately explained reason, if every monster you meet has improved sunder, if every time the party tries to enter a new town they are immediately accused of murder and thrown in jail, it can start to feel vindictive. Challenging your players to not rely on WBL to just brute-force their way through every problem is good, but so is letting them feel powerful and flex their muscle on occasion.

I just came up with an idea. What if Weapon Spec and greater Weapon Spec were to increase damage dice as if you've gained size increase, as well as Weapon Focus granting increasing attack roll bonuses with leveling?
That's more emphasis on character leveling and less on gear... but then how do you make it not a must-have for practically every single fighter?

The concepts isn't bad- there's already a feat (Monkey Grip, I think) that lets you just flat-out wield larger weapons.
The question that this first raises for me though is how do you stretch it over 20 levels? I don't mind players have to occasionally shell out gold to upgrade their gear because (1) gold is far and away the most flexible resource, and (2) it seems reasonable that you give your PCs some avenue to dump their loot into. Having to re-buy what are effectively the same feats over and over again is much harsher (IMO) in terms of leveling up. To me, offering weapon upgrades feels like I'm giving my players options, while doing the same thing with feats feels like a tax. And no one likes taxes.

And now that I think of it, it's not necessarily a bad thing that every fighter puts resources on one or two signature weapons, but merits more overall character-build resources.

Building on that, sinking 100% of your wealth into a single super-good item is always a bad idea. Even beyond that normal perils of adventuring, making your character so dependent on a single variable is like walking about with a giant red button strapped to your back that says "this will hurt me so please don't push it". It's a temptation for GMs (and some other players) to want to push that button.

The fact that you CAN liquidate most of your assets and buy a single super-awesome sword doesn't necessarily mean that it's a good idea to do so. Having one pretty-good sword and a few decent backup weapons might be the smarter plan. And you should feel free to punish any player who makes dumb choices when it comes to gear, just like you should feel free to punish anyone who charges headlong into combat against overwhelming odds without a plan, and expects plot-armor to protect them.
That doesn't mean that you shouldn't make the system available to intelligent (or cautious) players.

My caveat with such an approach is that once again a badass knife fighter is not an option (unless you don't mind shooting yourself in the foot).

What exactly do you mean by that? I like the idea that there are different combat styles with different benefits (two handed=damage, sword-and-board=defensive, dual-wielding=hybrid, etc), but the Fighter class is going to have sufficient weapon proficiency that he can pick better weapons than a dagger. However, I'm not saying that you need to protect players from their own stupidity (or sub-optimal choices). Let them figure it out as they go.

[Deepbluediver]

I wanted to make another post about two separate points which I haven't had the chance to respond to directly much.


First, the price of weapons and relevancy of gold to your character. Let me start by saying I believe the WBL chart and the economy in D&D 3.5 are, by RAW, bjorked. Messy. Broken. Unbalanced. Messed-up. Poorly-designed. And Silly.
If I had to fix it, I'd starty by lopping a zero off everything that's measured in gold pieces and then really delve into it from there. I provided values only because when I posted my armor fix without them originally, at least one person wanted me to list prices as a form of guidance. On top of that, I've never liked the magic-mart style of item distribution. Just because it's listed in a book somewhere doesn't mean you'll be able to buy it in the next city you visit.

As far as quality goes, I'd imagine that regular tier stuff if pretty widely available; the world is a dangerous place afterall. Superior quality weapons can mainly be had in large cities, though it could take a bit of searching- not every weaponshop will be stocked with every variety of weapon, and you might have to settle for something like an axe instead of sword. Beyond that though, it's a tossup. There might be one Exceptional quality weapon in the entire city, provided you know the right guy to give the secret handshake to, and are willing to pay the exorbitant prices the thieve's guild charges. Or it's in possession of a noble family who won't part with it for any price, but might be willing to give it to someone who proved their worth. Etc etc etc.

Higher quality weapons could each involve their own miniquest just to find someone with the skill to craft them. Ditto for anything involving special materials. Of maybe you find some other way to give players an upgrade when the time is right. For example, they are deep in a dungeon-delve and come across the last party to attempt this passage, now slightly more corpse-ified, but with remnants of their gear strewn about. Or the enemy who tore through your party and nearly TPK'd you was wearing some really snazzy armor. Or the demon general you slew had a really cool bow in his warchest and wasn't using it because it's good-aligned and burns the flesh when anyone evil who tries to wield it.

You can expand the same philosophy to almost anything- the PC's don't get a castle because they slew a dragon and looted it's hoard, they'd get one because they earned it through their actions. If the PCs want to build a stronghold, let them spend a session or two negotiating for land, assembling materials, designing plans, and attracting or hiring minions to staff it. That's the sort of junction of story and mechanics I've always liked.



Second- about upgraded weapons. Whenever I picture masterwork quality stuff and other high-damage variants, it's not JUST like-a-normal-sword-but-sharper. Often they can appear weirdly designed or oddly shapped, like this or this or this. I picked pictures of swords because their the easiest to find, but the same thing can apply to spears or axes or bows.

A while back I used to play World of Warcraft, and the top-tier raiding guilds would often have unusual talent-builds on their characters. A common example was using PvP builds for PvE, because going from a 6-ability rotation to a 14-ability rotation (or something like that) allowed them to eke out an extra 1% DPS (damage per second). Then some schlub would read on a website that the PvP build was the "highest DPS build" and they'd try to do it, but because they couldn't manage the timing they'd end up doing way less damage than if they'd just used the normal, intended PvE DPS build. It's the same concept- really high quality weapons have weird, almost nonsensical designs, but a master of weaponscraft can adjust their fighting style to actually benefit in unexpected ways (i.e. deal more damage), where a novice would be completely befuddled (i.e. is non-proficient).

Another way to look at it is this: a level 1 Fighter is fairly realistic in that you can picture him doing stuff that you yourself could theoretically accomplish, with a lot of practice and training. A level 20 fighter is superhuman, which is why he can wield a sword that lets him turn enemies into chunky salsa with a single swing.

[nonsi]

I mean, that's kind of what I'm doing, but it's never going to be simple enough to put everything in one place. I'm all for simplifying things like feats, or class features, or special abilities, or subsystems, but that doesn't mean my fixes will be short and simple. Especially since a lot of the class-fixes really call for adding stuff.

You could break things down to threads by topics (races, skills, feats, houserules etc.)

I'm NOT looking to put arbitrary limits on how many magic items a player can use or when you open up certain slots, if that's what you where talking about.

That.

Those were just random examples. A better way to put it would be that I want power to come from Armor and Weapons

I'm for it to, but I'd prefer it that Mr. Blademaster Joe was awesome with any longsword than radically superior with "my trusty Dragonbite".

I definitely support all of that- my point was only that PCs want a feeling of agency, and usually the sense that they are improving and getting stronger as the story progresses.

Absolutely. I'm all for it to. In fact, if anyone notices a level advancement in any of my classes where the improvement is not obvious and meaningful, I'd sure wanna know about it.

I think we're back to the "power from a class" vs. "power from gear" discussion- this is good, I wanted to comment on this.
If you ask D&D players to picture a fighter, I suspect 9 out of 10 of them would immediately imagine someone with some kind of weapon. Either an axe or a spear or damn-big sword. Most of them would also probably imagine some kind of armor- some might go for the knight in shinning mail archetype, while others might envision more of sellsword in dark leathers, but very few people are going to imagine a buff gymrat in streetclothes.

Ever seen "Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon"?

My point is, your gear IS your character. Or at least part of it anyway.

Of course. I've offered plenty of ways for noncasters to circumvent any dependence upon casters, should that pose an important issue for the player.

Some classes might not use weapons (monks) and some might not use armor (casters) but having some sort of item(s) that improve what you can do as a participant in the gameworld is pretty standard

Just noting that some classes are meant to become gear-independent by definition (e.g. Soulknife).

I'm sure you could design a gameworld where gear was entirely inconsequential.

When this is what a player wants, the option should be available, but I'm equally against imposing gear inconsequentiality.

Anyhow, yes, all of that stuff you mentioned can happen, but you can take it to far the other way as well. If the BBEG has an endless stream of thieves he can send after the wizard's spellbook for no adequately explained reason, if every monster you meet has improved sunder, if every time the party tries to enter a new town they are immediately accused of murder and thrown in jail, it can start to feel vindictive.

I absolutely agree. If the DM is obsessive, it's probably better not to play at all.

To me, offering weapon upgrades feels like I'm giving my players options, while doing the same thing with feats feels like a tax. And no one likes taxes.

You can regard any feat selection as tax, or regard it as inherent improvement.

What exactly do you mean by that? I like the idea that there are different combat styles with different benefits (two handed=damage, sword-and-board=defensive, dual-wielding=hybrid, etc), but the Fighter class is going to have sufficient weapon proficiency that he can pick better weapons than a dagger. However, I'm not saying that you need to protect players from their own stupidity (or sub-optimal choices). Let them figure it out as they go.

But I wanna play a badass unfettered knife fighter. How do I accomplish that successfully with such massive dice disparity or stat shifts?


 

As far as quality goes, I'd imagine that regular tier stuff if pretty widely available; the world is a dangerous place afterall. Superior quality weapons can mainly be had in large cities, though it could take a bit of searching- not every weaponshop will be stocked with every variety of weapon, and you might have to settle for something like an axe instead of sword. Beyond that though, it's a tossup. There might be one Exceptional quality weapon in the entire city, provided you know the right guy to give the secret handshake to, and are willing to pay the exorbitant prices the thieve's guild charges. Or it's in possession of a noble family who won't part with it for any price, but might be willing to give it to someone who proved their worth. Etc etc etc.

What if BAB dictates how far one can practically exploit his weapon's high quality?
Example: you gave 5 weapon-grade improvements (7 grades overall). What if a character couldn't exploit the next level of mastercrafting w/o obtaining +3 BAB increase? That way a 5th level fighter could be sent on a quest to retrieve the legendary legendwrought longsword "Dragonbite", but in his hands it will only function as a superior longsword. Just a thought.
In any case, if you make it constant increments (e.g. +1 to hit and +2 to damage) per quality grade, you'll drastically narrow the gap between a knife fighter and a fullblade executioner As levels go up.

Higher quality weapons could each involve their own miniquest just to find someone with the skill to craft them. Ditto for anything involving special materials. Of maybe you find some other way to give players an upgrade when the time is right. For example, they are deep in a dungeon-delve and come across the last party to attempt this passage, now slightly more corpse-ified, but with remnants of their gear strewn about. Or the enemy who tore through your party and nearly TPK'd you was wearing some really snazzy armor. Or the demon general you slew had a really cool bow in his warchest and wasn't using it because it's good-aligned and burns the flesh when anyone evil who tries to wield it.

You can expand the same philosophy to almost anything- the PC's don't get a castle because they slew a dragon and looted it's hoard, they'd get one because they earned it through their actions. If the PCs want to build a stronghold, let them spend a session or two negotiating for land, assembling materials, designing plans, and attracting or hiring minions to staff it. That's the sort of junction of story and mechanics I've always liked.

You got my vote on this one.

[Deepbluediver]

I'm for it to, but I'd prefer it that Mr. Blademaster Joe was awesome with any longsword than radically superior with "my trusty Dragonbite".

Why not both? My goal is not to make martial classes all about their weapon- even without their gear they will still have a heaping pile of HP, great ability scores, skills, feats, and class abilities (yes, even something like the Fighter needs unique class abilities). Also, they should have sufficient proficiency so that even if they can't get to their weapon of choice, they can fall back on several almost-as-good options.

Maybe Joe wakes up naked in a cell and has to fight was way to freedom. He strangles the first guard to death and steals his sword, and then attacks 15 more guards which would be suicide for any normal person. The difference being that señor Blademaster actually has to fight, whereas if he had Dragonbite he could simply cleave the entire group's top halves from their bottoms with a single swing.

Ever seen "Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon"?

I have- but the Fighter (capital F) as a D&D class does not need to represent every single martial archetype IMO. If you're trying to build a CTHD type of character, maybe what you really want is something more like a Monk, with a dip of Fighter for feats, a dip of Rogue for skills, a dip of Swordsage for the ability to run on water, a dip of whatever else.....etc etc etc.

Also, practically the whole movie was focused around a single really-awesome sword, which seems like a good example of this concept in action. Take this scene for example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9OxQ-2gR1DU
One character is using the super-awesome-cool-anime-legendary-sword-of-destiny, and the other is grabbing whatever she can get a hold of. Bother are concepts I want players to be able to exploit.

Just noting that some classes are meant to become gear-independent by definition (e.g. Soulknife).

There's a difference to my mind between REQUIRING gear to be competent at your core function, benefiting from but not needing gear, and not being able to use any gear that improves you at all. Ideally (IMO) for classes like the Monk* or Soulknife, they might not need weapons or armor but there would be other types of gear that they could sink their share of the loot into. And I'm using the term "gear" VERY loosely here. Maybe the monk spends his money on magical tattoos or the Soulknife hires a bunch of minions to help him out.

When you try to build a class that doesn't gain any kind of benefit from gear, I think it does weird things to balance; especially when placed alongside a class that was designed with the assumption that it would be using a lot of gear. Something like the Vow of Poverty should probably be at least a prestige class, and/or something your character does from a very early stage so you can work it into core gameplay and loot distribution.

Plus, I think that gear is a great way to customize your character. It differentiates you from all the other Monks and Soulknives and whatnot out there.

*My monk fix actually includes options to use weapons and armor for just these reasons.

You can regard any feat selection as tax, or regard it as inherent improvement.

Yes, I suppose, though in this case I prefer to do it via weapons than feats (at least somewhat). Because damage is so straightforward and any character can pick up any weapon at any time, it feels right to me that that's what we focus on for boosting damage. I'd prefer to reserve feats for something like a character's weapon-style, with different benefits to each one. Some weapon-styles, like 2-handed fighting, might gain more benefits to damage from their feats than something like a sword-and-board style, but that makes it a combination of gear and character.

But I wanna play a badass unfettered knife fighter. How do I accomplish that successfully with such massive dice disparity or stat shifts?

I'm still not exactly sure what the problem is- I need more details about your proposed fighting style and why you think it won't work. Are you saying you can't play Fighter (capital F, the class) but use daggers as your weapons because they deal less damage than things like longswords and battleaxes?

What if BAB dictates how far one can practically exploit his weapon's high quality?
Example: you gave 5 weapon-grade improvements (7 grades overall). What if a character couldn't exploit the next level of mastercrafting w/o obtaining +3 BAB increase? That way a 5th level fighter could be sent on a quest to retrieve the legendary legendwrought longsword "Dragonbite", but in his hands it will only function as a superior longsword. Just a thought.
In any case, if you make it constant increments (e.g. +1 to hit and +2 to damage) per quality grade, you'll drastically narrow the gap between a knife fighter and a fullblade executioner As levels go up.

In the third post I've already got a suggestion for a BAB requirement, with anyone who isn't at that level suffering a non-proficiency penalty. You can feel free to tweak that or modify it as necessary.

If you're really worried, your idea would work too I think, but the question to me is if you don't want the Fighter to have that good of a weapon yet, why did you give it to him in the first place?


Also, remember when you where talking about improving damage via the Weapon Focus feats earlier? I had a thought- even if you make the categories really broad, isn't that kind of making your character dependent on his gear anyway? If your character has invested heavily in Weapon Focus: Swords, but he's just broken out of jail and all the guards are carrying spears, you're kind of screwed. Personally I don't really mind- if my character has taken a whole bunch of sword-n-board feats and suddenly has to fight with a halberd for a while for whatever reason, that's ok to me. Sometimes characters are strong and sometimes they have to struggle a bit; it also gives a character an incentive to either retrieve or replace their gear. Maybe your character will decide to improvise with a sewer grate (shield) and candle-stick (club) because it means he can use his feats again, which outweigh the benefits of an actual weapon. But if done right your character shouldn't be forced to sit and wait for rescue just because he doesn't have his favorite sword right this very moment.

You seem to be much more concerned, however, that taking away a character's gear can suddenly make them useless. Just keep in mind that issues with over-specialization can arise from feats and from your build just as easily as they can from gear, and in general replacing your gear is a lot easier than replacing all your feats and class-features.

[Agent 451]

Your Judicar's shild wouldn't happen to be either a lantern shield, or targe, would it?

[Deepbluediver]

Your Judicar's shild wouldn't happen to be either a lantern shield, or targe, would it?

It is not- I still can't find the original webpage I read about them on and it was driving me bonkers, but after many fruitless searches I found something close! A video and a different webpage. I knew I hadn't just imagined this crazy **** at 3 in the morning- apparently it's also called a German dueling shield. Seriously though check it out, those things are nuts.

Edit: And another video!
Once you have the right name, this stuff is easy to find! That being said, I might possibly be mistaken about what the original webpage called it. It could have been a judicator's shield or an ajudicator's shield. When I looked for those though all it turned up was videogame stuff (mainly from Dark Souls I think). Oh well, I found it now!

[nonsi]

Also, practically the whole movie was focused around a single really-awesome sword, which seems like a good example of this concept in action. Take this scene for example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9OxQ-2gR1DU
One character is using the super-awesome-cool-anime-legendary-sword-of-destiny, and the other is grabbing whatever she can get a hold of. Bother are concepts I want players to be able to exploit.

First of all, I want to state that this is my all-time favorite 1-on-1 scene ever. The elder fighter is a goddess. Skillful, graceful and sexy
Second, if you pay close attention, she held back 3 times and gave the younger one time to recover… and you saw how it ended.
Yes, green destiny was indeed legendary, but in the end li-mu-bai didn't need it to dominate the fighting scene – eventually, level and skill mattered more than super-awesome-cool-anime-legendary-sword-of-destiny.

I'd prefer to reserve feats for something like a character's weapon-style, with different benefits to each one. Some weapon-styles, like 2-handed fighting, might gain more benefits to damage from their feats than something like a sword-and-board style, but that makes it a combination of gear and character.

Which requires a set of rules in and on itself.

Are you saying you can't play Fighter (capital F, the class) but use daggers as your weapons because they deal less damage than things like longswords and battleaxes?

By your weapon quality progression and proposed weapons, a masterwork dagger does 3d3 while a masterwork poleaxe does 4d12.
Even wielding 2 daggers, the damage diff is intolerable.

If you're really worried, your idea would work too I think, but the question to me is if you don't want the Fighter to have that good of a weapon yet, why did you give it to him in the first place?

Could be part of the story line, where he serves as a courier.

Also, remember when you where talking about improving damage via the Weapon Focus feats earlier? I had a though- even if you make the categories really broad, isn't that kind of making your character dependent on his gear anyway?

Yes, but again, even though he'd naturally prefer Dragonbite, he'd still be awesome with any arbitrary longsword and longbow.

If your character has invested heavily in Weapon Focus: Swords...

I was talking about one feet that improves with level progression.

But if done right your character shouldn't be forced to sit and wait for rescue just because he doesn't have his favorite sword right this very moment.

My claim exactly. If you check, you'll notice that my Warrior provides a lot of tools to do ok even while improvising.

[Deepbluediver]

First of all, I want to state that this is my all-time favorite 1-on-1 scene ever. The elder fighter is a goddess. Skillful, graceful and sexy
Second, if you pay close attention, she held back 3 times and gave the younger one time to recover… and you saw how it ended.
Yes, green destiny was indeed legendary, but in the end li-mu-bai didn't need it to dominate the fighting scene – eventually, level and skill mattered more than super-awesome-cool-anime-legendary-sword-of-destiny.

I'm sure there are multiple interpretations of the movie (and the bit with the hooked swords was my inspiration for them as an exotic weapon) but I do think it proves that there's room for both awesome classes and awesome weapons.

The damage from a weapon does increase dramatically if you look at the jump from regular weapons to much higher quality ones, but going from one quality directly to the next is much less significant. Also, keep in mind that as you level up your character their abilities and the strength of the enemies they face also increase dramatically. My goal is to keep weapons on-par with class advancement.

Which requires a set of rules in and on itself.

This was my first attempt: http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showt...e-Weapon-PEACH

After testing it out, it needs updating, particularly the TWF, THF, Ranged, and SnB styles, but that's kind of where I'm going. Also to alleviate the feat-tax feel, nearly all martial classes are getting extra weapon-style feats. The Rogue gets 4, the Ranger gets 7, the Barbarian gets 10, etc, and I haven't decided how many the Fighter is actually going to get because I'm still working on that class.

Spoiler: Weapon Styles summary

Show

Two-Handed Combat: extra damage; two-handed weapons are primarily all about the offense
Sword-and-Board: defense, including the ability to aggro (taunt) enemies and force them to attack you
Two-Weapon Fighting: a hybrid style, gaining extra AC (but not as much as with shield) and extra attacks (but not as much damage as THC
Ranged: another sort-of hybrid style that gains it's defense by virtue of not being in range to be hit
Reach: battlefield control, based on Attacks of Opportunity
Eihnhander: an alternative option for gishes

By your weapon quality progression and proposed weapons, a masterwork dagger does 3d3 while a masterwork poleaxe does 4d12.
Even wielding 2 daggers, the damage diff is intolerable.

I've got two entirely separate replies to this!

First, the math. A regular dagger is 1d3, average 2, when dual-wielding that's 4. A regular halberd is 2d8, average 9, or 125% more damage.
A Mstwk dagger is 3d3, averaged and dualed that works out to 12. The same quality Halberd is 4x6.5=26, which means it's only dealing 117% more damage. So on a percentage-basis, the gap is actually narrowing. Also, if I bumped up 1-handed weapons liked I talked about before, the dagger would go back to being 1d4, the same as it is in the RAW, and the gap would narrow further. (I've held off on updating the damage for the moment because I wanted to see if I changed my mind about anything else based on our conversation, and I didn't want to have to redo the chart twice)

Second, and far more important IMO, is the class-based answer. In my last reply I said that the Fighter, as a class, does not need to represent every single martial archetype. The Fighter is built around the assumption that they will have good weapon and armor proficiencies, and that they will want to use them. There is a cost to that proficiency though- I haven't gone into it because I wanted to keep this thread uncluttered, but my ultimate goal is to have it be much more costly to become proficient with a Halberd than with a Dagger. But it's not an expense measured in gold- it's measured in opportunity costs, i.e. what you give up to get something else. If you're not planning on using the Fighter's good weapon proficiencies, then maybe Fighter is not the class you're looking for. There are classes that have other ways to boost their combat damage (Sneak Attack, Skirmish, Rage) or compensate for lower combat proficiency by providing other benefits to the party.

I'm trying to think of some knife-fighters in popular culture and coming up blank beyond Peter Pan; daggers tend to have somewhat villainous connotations in literature and such. Jack Sparrow didn't wear armor though, and neither did Zorro. Maybe instead of a Fighter, the archetype you're looking for is more like Swashbuckler (assuming that class didn't suck in 3.5) or Barbarian.

Could be part of the story line, where he serves as a courier.

I don't know of many couriers who are allowed to use the goods they are transporting, but if that's an issue, do as I suggested and use the BAB requirements. The potential for extra damage would be compensated for, at least partially, by the fact that you miss more attacks.

I was talking about one feat that improves with level progression.

If you can make that work, then by all means let me know. I'm always happy to see what other people do and maybe pick up a new trick or idea for my own homebrew. Even if you don't like the concept of incredibly good weapons, maybe you could still use the chart. Have you feat say something like, "If your BAB is high enough, then instead of 1d6 a weapon deals XdY damage", or something like that.

My claim exactly. If you check, you'll notice that my Warrior provides a lot of tools to do ok even while improvising.

You know what else can provide tools for improvising? Actual tools (or weapons).
My character might favor a longsword and shield, but he's also carrying a bow, some daggers, flasks of alchemists-fire, smoke pellets, a can of grease, lots of rope, etc etc etc....

As a GM though, part of it falls to you to not set up situations that the characters can't resolve. It's entirely possible to have a formerly-trusted friend poison everyone with a sleeping-potion that has a ridiculously high Save, and then they all wake up in separate anti-magic cells, stripped and chained hand-and-foot. The DC to break the restraints or pick the locks is "Ha-ha it's funny that you tried" and everyone has been assigned their own watch-dragon in case they attempt any shenanigans. Saying "look the characters are helpless without their gear" is not a valid comparison here- you can set up any situation where the characters would be helpless even WITH gear. The point is that, if as a GM you've devised a situation where the characters CAN lose their gear, you don't make it so they required their gear to get out of it. Unless you're purposely trying to force the characters to talk their way through it, I guess.

There is a caveat of course- you don't need to protect players from their own mistakes or stupidity. If I've chosen to put all my wealth into one single ultra-awesome weapon and have no backup, that was dumb and if it comes back to bite me in the ass, that's my own fault. But it does not mean the system is flawed. It means I haven't managed to make a system that protects players from acting like idiots.

[Deepbluediver]

9/20 Update: I've changed the damage on the charts and the base number for a one-handed martial weapon is now 1d8. One-handed and light weapons have all been moved up, unarmed and two-handed weapons remained where they were. (ranged weapons were adjusted only if they were stat'ed like one-handed and light weapons)

I'm sure there are people who will think that 1d10 is a lot of damage for a medium-sized one handed weapon; I know I sure did at first. But it's not really new- in the original rules both the Bastard Sword and Dwarven Waraxe could be used as one-handed weapons dealing 1d10 damage. They were exotic weapons, admittedly, but from what I read the Bastard Sword was generally not considered a great investment, being both boring and a modest damage increase for the cost of one of your precious feats.


Edit: Added the Zhua (or Rake) as a 2-handed martial weapon with the Bg/Pi damage type. Now I just need something with Bg/Sl damage to have all the combinations represented in that category. I already turned the Greataxe from RAW into, effectively, my version of the Pollaxe though, so I'd love something else slightly more interesting. I haven't been able to come up with anything better yet, so I just added in a Greataxe for now and tweaked the Pollaxe slightly.

[nonsi]

.
I could live with most of what's in here, even though I think some of the weapons (like Nunchaku) behave differently IRL.
What I would not adopt under any circumstances is the weapon quality progression.
A Legendwrought War-Scythe does 7d12 base damage. On a crit that's 21d12. With Imp. Crit, you're gonna crit on average every 2 out of 3 rounds. At the intended levels, a fighter will probably be hitting 3 out of 4 times per round with all modifiers, making it 35d12. And we're not even taking character build, magical buffs and circumstances into account yet.
No. I wouldn't wanna play like that. With certain 9th level maneuvers that deal approx. +8d8 damage, you're dealing with more than 250 hp per round (with modifiers) before cheese builds get into the equation.
Now check out a large Monk's Spade in the hands of a goliath.
No. A far saner solution would be to grant +1 to hit and +2 to damage per weapon grade. The added damage is still multiplied on a crit, and that's more than enough in my view. That would also allow you to drop the prices to a much saner level.

[nonsi]

Now I just need something with Bg/Sl damage to have all the combinations represented in that category.

Morningstar w/ blades instead of spikes, or Hammer-Axe.

[Deepbluediver]

.
I could live with most of what's in here, even though I think some of the weapons (like Nunchaku) behave differently IRL.
What I would not adopt under any circumstances is the weapon quality progression.
A Legendwrought War-Scythe does 7d12 base damage. On a crit that's 21d12. With Imp. Crit, you're gonna crit on average every 2 out of 3 rounds. At the intended levels, a fighter will probably be hitting 3 out of 4 times per round with all modifiers, making it 35d12. And we're not even taking character build, magical buffs and circumstances into account yet.
No. I wouldn't wanna play like that. With certain 9th level maneuvers that deal approx. +8d8 damage, you're dealing with more than 250 hp per round (with modifiers) before cheese builds get into the equation.
Now check out a large Monk's Spade in the hands of a goliath.
No. A far saner solution would be to grant +1 to hit and +2 to damage per weapon grade. The added damage is still multiplied on a crit, and that's more than enough in my view. That would also allow you to drop the prices to a much saner level.

Ok, I understand someone not liking or not wanting to use a particular piece of homebrew, but I don't really get your reasons here, which I really want to do.

How many of your games actually get into epic-level (21+) play? Because that's what Legendwrought weapons are intended for.
I feel like you're not paying attention to the suggested levels or anything except the extreme far-end of the damage chart and assuming that people get weapons way earlier than I anticipated that they would. It's like saying that powerful magic or items can't be allowed to exist in the game world because you, as the GM, might not be able to prevent players from getting their hands on them.

Regarding crits and such, as I said earlier in my experience high-level players don't usually get to stand still making full attacks round after round. If your party is good at battlefield control, then you might get to make full attacks about half the time. Also, I get the impression that some of the non-core material, such as ToB manuevers, were added specifically because base weapons DIDN'T enhance damage well enough for player's satisfaction. Something like +8d8 to an attack's damage is almost exactly like what I'm doing, just from a different source.
And pointing out potentially broken interactions is good- that will put more stuff in my mind for potential homebrewing later.

For game mechanics, both HP and weapon-damage are adjustable, but IMO HP is the much simpler mechanic, which means it should be the dependent variable. If after I get weapon damage where I like it, if I find that monsters are going down a little quicker than is preferred for dramatic tension, it's really easy to use the creature-improvement stats given in the MM and increase the monster's HD, or add in a few of his friends and tune the encounter CR up a little.

Finally, adding flat numbers doesn't do what I want to do, which is roll dice- why do you think high level characters rolling 1d8+26 for damage is a good system? It also doesn't seem to account for things like different sized or designed (simple vs. martial & exotic) weapons very well, when a Gnome with a dagger and a Minotaur with a halberd are getting the same +2 to damage.


Edit: I use my limited knowledge of real-world weapons and armor to inspire interesting things, but I'm not really wedded to any of it. I designed stuff so that it would be workable and balanced in the game, but if someone made a good explanation for why a weapon should work a different way or suggested something else interesting for the game, I'm happy to adjust the chart or re-homebrew whatever is necessary.

[rferries]

I quite like this; whatever flavour/tradition has been lost from weapons' different damage die (in prior editions) is more than made up for by the streamlining. Legendwrought etc may be powerful but its only keeping things fair compared to 9th-level/epic spells. Bravo to this, and to your armour thread too.