I partially agree with Op and Mdhe (pronun?) that weapon damage types should matter more in the game if they are to matter at all. That's why weapon masteries make sense and improve the game for martials (except Monks, b/c evidently they eat dirt and enjoy it). I also agree that certain weapons should have special properties. Flails, for example, should be able to negate shields and spears should be able to do extra die of damage against charging opponents as part of a Readied action. The main issue I think a lot of DMs, including myself, have is that adding a lot of extra rules to weapons can feel intimidating to new players and most martials are built to be easier to play than casters. So I feel like most special weapon properties should be phased in at the DM's discretion rather than as part of default rules.
I find that extra rules like that are inherently optional. I just remind the players when they become relevant. "By the way, they have a shield, so your flail basically gets +2". Just like Attacks of Opportunity - I just remind new players that it's a possibility as it comes up.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
I partially agree with Op and Mdhe (pronun?) that weapon damage types should matter more in the game if they are to matter at all. That's why weapon masteries make sense and improve the game for martials (except Monks, b/c evidently they eat dirt and enjoy it). I also agree that certain weapons should have special properties. Flails, for example, should be able to negate shields and spears should be able to do extra die of damage against charging opponents as part of a Readied action. The main issue I think a lot of DMs, including myself, have is that adding a lot of extra rules to weapons can feel intimidating to new players and most martials are built to be easier to play than casters. So I feel like most special weapon properties should be phased in at the DM's discretion rather than as part of default rules.
(I usually just say all the letters but however you're pronouncing it in your head is fine)
Agreed that phasing in advanced weapon rules over time would be the best way to do it. 5e's biggest strength is how easy it is to pick up, and I wouldn't want to compromise that. But on the other hand, the simplicity that makes the game easy to learn does work against it for long-term replay value. Having an established set of Advanced Weapon Rules ready to be phased in at the DM's and players' discretion seems like the best balance between accessibility and longevity.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I partially agree with Op and Mdhe (pronun?) that weapon damage types should matter more in the game if they are to matter at all. That's why weapon masteries make sense and improve the game for martials (except Monks, b/c evidently they eat dirt and enjoy it). I also agree that certain weapons should have special properties. Flails, for example, should be able to negate shields and spears should be able to do extra die of damage against charging opponents as part of a Readied action. The main issue I think a lot of DMs, including myself, have is that adding a lot of extra rules to weapons can feel intimidating to new players and most martials are built to be easier to play than casters. So I feel like most special weapon properties should be phased in at the DM's discretion rather than as part of default rules.
I find that extra rules like that are inherently optional. I just remind the players when they become relevant. "By the way, they have a shield, so your flail basically gets +2". Just like Attacks of Opportunity - I just remind new players that it's a possibility as it comes up.
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
(I usually just say all the letters but however you're pronouncing it in your head is fine)
Agreed that phasing in advanced weapon rules over time would be the best way to do it. 5e's biggest strength is how easy it is to pick up, and I wouldn't want to compromise that. But on the other hand, the simplicity that makes the game easy to learn does work against it for long-term replay value. Having an established set of Advanced Weapon Rules ready to be phased in at the DM's and players' discretion seems like the best balance between accessibility and longevity.