I would have said base damage 3d2 to satisfy any “three points!” Ppl (minimum 3 dmg) but then what you gonna do for the versatile damage that makes sense compared to the base damage :/
A way to improve the trident significantly is to have it roll an additional damage dice against foes with no armor. This justifies its inclusion as a martial weapon.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
A fool pulls the leaves. A brute chops the trunk. A sage digs the roots.
A way to improve the trident significantly is to have it roll an additional damage dice against foes with no armor. This justifies its inclusion as a martial weapon.
The problem is that there are way too many monsters that do not wear armor. And then consider the many instances where the DM would have to make a judgement call on whether natural armor counts as "armor." See the Bulette, Ankylosaurus, Giant Snapping Turtle, etc. What about the exoskeleton of a Giant Ant or Giant Wasp? There is too much ambiguity. That makes it inconvenient at the table because there are no official rules concerning natural armor while it makes the trident very powerful against certain monsters, creating an incentive for players to argue with the DM over this.
A way to improve the trident significantly is to have it roll an additional damage dice against foes with no armor. This justifies its inclusion as a martial weapon.
The problem is that there are way too many monsters that do not wear armor. And then consider the many instances where the DM would have to make a judgement call on whether natural armor counts as "armor." See the Bulette, Ankylosaurus, Giant Snapping Turtle, etc. What about the exoskeleton of a Giant Ant or Giant Wasp? There is too much ambiguity. That makes it inconvenient at the table because there are no official rules concerning natural armor while it makes the trident very powerful against certain monsters, creating an incentive for players to argue with the DM over this.
This wasn't a finished idea, and the definition of natural armor is fairly ambiguous. The reason why I suggested it is because, if you not wearing armor, being impaled in three different places is likely to be more damaging than one. (Greater chance of hitting vital organs, more bleeding.) If you are wearing armor, the force is spread out over the three tines, so it would be less effective against that (it wouldn't pierce as well as a spear). I honestly don't know how this would work against natural armor in real life, so I don't know how to call the rule. (I was trying to give a more 'realistic' reason that a trident would be more effective against a spear, and I can't really think of any other reasons why you would want to use a trident instead of a spear.)
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
A fool pulls the leaves. A brute chops the trunk. A sage digs the roots.
Maybe instead of wearing armor, it deals more damage to creatures with an AC below a certain number, say 16?
(I don't agree with the premise, but I was just suggesting something)
This would work surprisingly well. Come to think of it, most manufactured armors below ac 16 could probably be pierced by a trident, and it solves the natural armor problem as well. Thank you.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
A fool pulls the leaves. A brute chops the trunk. A sage digs the roots.
Maybe instead of wearing armor, it deals more damage to creatures with an AC below a certain number, say 16?
(I don't agree with the premise, but I was just suggesting something)
This would work surprisingly well. Come to think of it, most manufactured armors below ac 16 could probably be pierced by a trident, and it solves the natural armor problem as well. Thank you.
No problem.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Maybe instead of wearing armor, it deals more damage to creatures with an AC below a certain number, say 16?
(I don't agree with the premise, but I was just suggesting something)
This would work surprisingly well. Come to think of it, most manufactured armors below ac 16 could probably be pierced by a trident, and it solves the natural armor problem as well. Thank you.
Wouldn't that make it get less effective as people level up? Higher CR monsters have higher AC's, so it's doing less damage when you need it to be doing more.
Maybe instead of wearing armor, it deals more damage to creatures with an AC below a certain number, say 16?
(I don't agree with the premise, but I was just suggesting something)
This would work surprisingly well. Come to think of it, most manufactured armors below ac 16 could probably be pierced by a trident, and it solves the natural armor problem as well. Thank you.
Wouldn't that make it get less effective as people level up? Higher CR monsters have higher AC's, so it's doing less damage when you need it to be doing more.
Yes, other weapons don't scale, and it would become less effective. Maybe have the AC be 14 + your proficiency bonus, but only if proficient in the weapon.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
It would still be better than the spear, and other weapons don't scale.
But this would scale backwards. A 10th level character fighting a beholder would do less damage with the same weapon than a 1st level character fighting a kobold.
Seems like the easy answer is to just make it identical to a spear. Glaive and Halberd are mechanically identical, and no one seems to get bent out of shape about that. Sometimes the difference can just be flavor, and that's OK, too.
It would still be better than the spear, and other weapons don't scale.
Seems like the easy answer is to just make it identical to a spear. Glaive and Halberd are mechanically identical, and no one seems to get bent out of shape about that. Sometimes the difference can just be flavor, and that's OK, too.
But glaives and halberds are both martial weapons, cost the same amount, and are both eligible for Pole Arm Master.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Exactly. So like I’m saying make it the same as the spear, across the board. Mechanically identical. It’s got extra points, but that also means more weight so less well balanced. So say those cancel each other out, and say it’s exactly a spear, just different for flavor.
It would still be better than the spear, and other weapons don't scale.
But this would scale backwards. A 10th level character fighting a beholder would do less damage with the same weapon than a 1st level character fighting a kobold.
Seems like the easy answer is to just make it identical to a spear. Glaive and Halberd are mechanically identical, and no one seems to get bent out of shape about that. Sometimes the difference can just be flavor, and that's OK, too.
I don't like that the glaive and halberd are mechanically identical either. Also, I found the place with a weapon that deals extra damage against unarmored foes. Its a weapon wielded by water cultists in the Princes of the Apocalypse adventure:
(from Crushing Wave Reaver actions section)
Sharktoothed Longsword. Melee Weapon Attack +4 to hit, reach 5ft. one target. Hit 1d8+2 slashing damage if used with on hand, 1d10+2 is used with two hands. Against a target wearing no armor, the reaver deals an additional die of damage with this sword.
I made a separate thread about overhauling other weapons.
I would have said base damage 3d2 to satisfy any “three points!” Ppl (minimum 3 dmg) but then what you gonna do for the versatile damage that makes sense compared to the base damage :/
Well if you're gonna have a half die like d2 (yeah it's a coin but not a classic dnd dice) you may as well have d3. 3d3 for the versatile has a max of 9 instead of 8 but that seems fine for a martial variant of a simple weapon.
I don't necessarily approve the 3d2 idea in general but there is an answer that makes sense compared to the base damage.
Another idea, 4d2-1 results in a max 7 for those which also want the trident to be worse than the spear, but that strays from convention even more by having math in a basic weapon's base damage, so not great for an actual change, but fine for individual group homebrew.
So if I were running a game and wanted to rework the trident... I think I'd actually just go 4d2-1, no versatile, it'd be the more consistent but lower max damage version of the spear, taking out versatile to free up a little complexity budget on the math of 4d2-1 (if I really wanted the min 3 damage).
But that's just me, I certainly wouldn't try to push anyone else to do this. And even after writing all that I really don't like the use of d2s for something that would be used so frequently.
Ignore the fact I've quoted what seems like an invisible post of mine, new to posting in the forums did a bit of learning the hard way.
It would still be better than the spear, and other weapons don't scale.
Sharktoothed Longsword. Melee Weapon Attack +4 to hit, reach 5ft. one target. Hit 1d8+2 slashing damage if used with on hand, 1d10+2 is used with two hands. Against a target wearing no armor, the reaver deals an additional die of damage with this sword.
I made a separate thread about overhauling other weapons.
(It's in general, is there a way to move it to rules and game mechanics?)
A weapon that deals more damage to creatures without armor makes more sense in the hands of an NPC because most races do not come with natural armor. Legal playable races are humanoid with maybe just one exception. Putting a regular weapon with this capability in a shop where any PC can buy one will just create problems at the table.
Also, @Xalthu, it makes sense that the trident would NOT do as much damage to higher AC creatures. It's a weapon made for spearing run-of-the-mill fish, not for killing beholders or xorns.
Also, @Xalthu, it makes sense that the trident would NOT do as much damage to higher AC creatures. It's a weapon made for spearing run-of-the-mill fish, not for killing beholders or xorns.
Considering it’s a martial weapon, I’d imagine is a re-enforced version designed for combat, much like a war hammer is different from the hammer you use to build a house, and a battle axe is different from what you use to chop down a tree.
Also, @Xalthu, it makes sense that the trident would NOT do as much damage to higher AC creatures. It's a weapon made for spearing run-of-the-mill fish, not for killing beholders or xorns.
Considering it’s a martial weapon, I’d imagine is a re-enforced version designed for combat, much like a war hammer is different from the hammer you use to build a house, and a battle axe is different from what you use to chop down a tree.
True, but when comparing a trident to a spear for example, because the force of impact is spread over three times the surface area (three points as opposed to one) it will inevitably not pierce as deeply. Like the difference between stepping on a nail vs. laying on a bed of nails. It’s just physics.
Also, @Xalthu, it makes sense that the trident would NOT do as much damage to higher AC creatures. It's a weapon made for spearing run-of-the-mill fish, not for killing beholders or xorns.
Considering it’s a martial weapon, I’d imagine is a re-enforced version designed for combat, much like a war hammer is different from the hammer you use to build a house, and a battle axe is different from what you use to chop down a tree.
True, but when comparing a trident to a spear for example, because the force of impact is spread over three times the surface area (three points as opposed to one) it will inevitably not pierce as deeply. Like the difference between stepping on a nail vs. laying on a bed of nails. It’s just physics.
Then again, you are also more likely to hit a vital organ.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
A fool pulls the leaves. A brute chops the trunk. A sage digs the roots.
Easy, very simple, very minute change to differentiate the trident from the spear without doing much of anything;
1d6 piercing, versatile (2d4 piercing)
very simple change, all it does is increase the minimum two handed damage to 2 instead of 1. Just like a great sword to a great axe.
Very nearly pointless.
I would have said base damage 3d2 to satisfy any “three points!” Ppl (minimum 3 dmg) but then what you gonna do for the versatile damage that makes sense compared to the base damage :/
A way to improve the trident significantly is to have it roll an additional damage dice against foes with no armor. This justifies its inclusion as a martial weapon.
A fool pulls the leaves. A brute chops the trunk. A sage digs the roots.
My Improved Lineage System
The problem is that there are way too many monsters that do not wear armor. And then consider the many instances where the DM would have to make a judgement call on whether natural armor counts as "armor." See the Bulette, Ankylosaurus, Giant Snapping Turtle, etc. What about the exoskeleton of a Giant Ant or Giant Wasp? There is too much ambiguity. That makes it inconvenient at the table because there are no official rules concerning natural armor while it makes the trident very powerful against certain monsters, creating an incentive for players to argue with the DM over this.
Maybe instead of wearing armor, it deals more damage to creatures with an AC below a certain number, say 16?
(I don't agree with the premise, but I was just suggesting something)
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
This wasn't a finished idea, and the definition of natural armor is fairly ambiguous. The reason why I suggested it is because, if you not wearing armor, being impaled in three different places is likely to be more damaging than one. (Greater chance of hitting vital organs, more bleeding.) If you are wearing armor, the force is spread out over the three tines, so it would be less effective against that (it wouldn't pierce as well as a spear). I honestly don't know how this would work against natural armor in real life, so I don't know how to call the rule. (I was trying to give a more 'realistic' reason that a trident would be more effective against a spear, and I can't really think of any other reasons why you would want to use a trident instead of a spear.)
A fool pulls the leaves. A brute chops the trunk. A sage digs the roots.
My Improved Lineage System
This would work surprisingly well. Come to think of it, most manufactured armors below ac 16 could probably be pierced by a trident, and it solves the natural armor problem as well. Thank you.
A fool pulls the leaves. A brute chops the trunk. A sage digs the roots.
My Improved Lineage System
No problem.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
Wouldn't that make it get less effective as people level up? Higher CR monsters have higher AC's, so it's doing less damage when you need it to be doing more.
It would still be better than the spear, and other weapons don't scale.
A fool pulls the leaves. A brute chops the trunk. A sage digs the roots.
My Improved Lineage System
Yes, other weapons don't scale, and it would become less effective. Maybe have the AC be 14 + your proficiency bonus, but only if proficient in the weapon.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
But this would scale backwards. A 10th level character fighting a beholder would do less damage with the same weapon than a 1st level character fighting a kobold.
Seems like the easy answer is to just make it identical to a spear. Glaive and Halberd are mechanically identical, and no one seems to get bent out of shape about that. Sometimes the difference can just be flavor, and that's OK, too.
But glaives and halberds are both martial weapons, cost the same amount, and are both eligible for Pole Arm Master.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
Exactly. So like I’m saying make it the same as the spear, across the board. Mechanically identical.
It’s got extra points, but that also means more weight so less well balanced. So say those cancel each other out, and say it’s exactly a spear, just different for flavor.
I don't like that the glaive and halberd are mechanically identical either. Also, I found the place with a weapon that deals extra damage against unarmored foes. Its a weapon wielded by water cultists in the Princes of the Apocalypse adventure:
(from Crushing Wave Reaver actions section)
Sharktoothed Longsword. Melee Weapon Attack +4 to hit, reach 5ft. one target. Hit 1d8+2 slashing damage if used with on hand, 1d10+2 is used with two hands. Against a target wearing no armor, the reaver deals an additional die of damage with this sword.
I made a separate thread about overhauling other weapons.
https://www.dndbeyond.com/forums/d-d-beyond-general/general-discussion/69118-weapons-overhaul
(It's in general, is there a way to move it to rules and game mechanics?)
A fool pulls the leaves. A brute chops the trunk. A sage digs the roots.
My Improved Lineage System
Ignore the fact I've quoted what seems like an invisible post of mine, new to posting in the forums did a bit of learning the hard way.
A weapon that deals more damage to creatures without armor makes more sense in the hands of an NPC because most races do not come with natural armor. Legal playable races are humanoid with maybe just one exception. Putting a regular weapon with this capability in a shop where any PC can buy one will just create problems at the table.
Also, @Xalthu, it makes sense that the trident would NOT do as much damage to higher AC creatures. It's a weapon made for spearing run-of-the-mill fish, not for killing beholders or xorns.
Considering it’s a martial weapon, I’d imagine is a re-enforced version designed for combat, much like a war hammer is different from the hammer you use to build a house, and a battle axe is different from what you use to chop down a tree.
True, but when comparing a trident to a spear for example, because the force of impact is spread over three times the surface area (three points as opposed to one) it will inevitably not pierce as deeply. Like the difference between stepping on a nail vs. laying on a bed of nails. It’s just physics.
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Epic Boons on DDB
Then again, you are also more likely to hit a vital organ.
A fool pulls the leaves. A brute chops the trunk. A sage digs the roots.
My Improved Lineage System