
Igor Horvat |

As the title says,
Remove weapon categories.
Give all weapons minimum strength requirement.
If you have required strength you are proficient(+0 bonus),
If you do not have str then you are unproficient(-2 penalty and minimum damage).
Make all melee/thrown weapons use either str or dex on attack and damage bonuses.
Ranged weapons would use dex on attack and damage.
Weapons would go from let's say
str 6 for a dagger or a dart,
to
str 20 for great-ax, pike, or similar 2Handed large weapon.
This way you could also have different kinds of bows.
str 8, d4
str 10, d6
str 12, d8
str 14, d10
str 16, d12
or use it as crossbow reload mechanics
I.E.
str 8, light crossbow, 1d8, reload 3 actions.
but, with str 10 reload 2 actions, str 12 reload 1 action, str 14 reload 0 actions.
Edit bonus:
Racial weapons;
If some race is very familiar with it's favored weapons,
reduce str requirement by 2 for those weapons.

PossibleCabbage |
3 people marked this as a favorite. |

I'm not a fan of gating access to weapons based on strength alone.
Since, like, a whip is a much more difficult weapon to use than a dagger, but neither require much in the way of strength. A rapier, too, is a more difficult weapon to use than a spear, but benefits less from strength. I feel there's something to be said for "proficiency in martial/exotic weapons" to represent training that is independent of one's personal prowess.

Igor Horvat |

I feel there's something to be said for "proficiency in martial/exotic weapons" to represent training that is independent of one's personal prowess.
imho, relic from the past.
I feel that this gives option to use dex for every attack but also forces you to boost str to have access to best weapons.
In HEMA, I used 2handed swords from 1,2kg to 3,5kg.
For larger swords, you really need that extra muscle power, but when you do get that strength it feels quick and agile.
I would say that 1,2kg 2hander is str 10 min and d10 damage and 3,5kg is str 18 and 2d8 damage.

SuperSheep |
2 people marked this as a favorite. |

While I think having two different gating mechanisms is cumbersome, I recognize that making something exotic is basically forcing a feat tax to gain its additional effects. It's an effective way to increase the mechanical cost of superior weapons.

Zman0 |
While I think having two different gating mechanisms is cumbersome, I recognize that making something exotic is basically forcing a feat tax to gain its additional effects. It's an effective way to increase the mechanical cost of superior weapons.
Currently we have 4 exotic weapons. Three of them are race gated. To gain access to them you need the ancestry feat, which makes them martial for you.
The net result is that you need the racial feat and martial weapon proficiency to get the exotic weapon. IMO, any character that wants to use a melee weapon is probably going to have martial proficiency already. I see no problem just moving the racial exotics to uncommon martial weapons. Simple, streamlined.
That leaves one exotic weapon, and it really isn't that good. Just move it to the uncommon list making it DM gated. You've got the sawtooth sabre. It is a d6 slashing agile finesse weapon with the twin quality. Compared to a shortsword you have the twin quality compared to versatile P. Twin is just a restricted forceful quality. It requires two two weapons to function. So, its an inferior single weapon to the shortsword. Used for two weapon fighting, it is only on par with Rapier Shortsword. There is absolutely no reason for sawtooth sabers to be exotic, when they are not mechanically superior. Now, there is reason to make them uncommon and gate them that way. But, there really is in no way enough mechanic reason to make them cost a feat, and cost them +1 to hit for Fighters.
Unless, they start coming out with significantly stronger weapons. exotics just aren't worth it and are mostly race gated anyway. Just make them uncommon martial weapons and be done with it.

SuperSheep |

SuperSheep wrote:While I think having two different gating mechanisms is cumbersome, I recognize that making something exotic is basically forcing a feat tax to gain its additional effects. It's an effective way to increase the mechanical cost of superior weapons.Currently we have 4 exotic weapons. Three of them are race gated. To gain access to them you need the ancestry feat, which makes them martial for you.
The net result is that you need the racial feat and martial weapon proficiency to get the exotic weapon. IMO, any character that wants to use a melee weapon is probably going to have martial proficiency already. I see no problem just moving the racial exotics to uncommon martial weapons. Simple, streamlined.
That leaves one exotic weapon, and it really isn't that good. Just move it to the uncommon list making it DM gated. You've got the sawtooth sabre. It is a d6 slashing agile finesse weapon with the twin quality. Compared to a shortsword you have the twin quality compared to versatile P. Twin is just a restricted forceful quality. It requires two two weapons to function. So, its an inferior single weapon to the shortsword. Used for two weapon fighting, it is only on par with Rapier Shortsword. There is absolutely no reason for sawtooth sabers to be exotic, when they are not mechanically superior. Now, there is reason to make them uncommon and gate them that way. But, there really is in no way enough mechanic reason to make them cost a feat, and cost them +1 to hit for Fighters.
Unless, they start coming out with significantly stronger weapons. exotics just aren't worth it and are mostly race gated anyway. Just make them uncommon martial weapons and be done with it.
The issue is that you don't have to be of a particular race to grab an exotic, race-limited weapon. A Fighter or another player can take weapon proficiency for that particular exotic weapon. At that point they only need to find the weapon either by trading it with another player or asking the GM nicely if you Human Barbarian can have an Orc weapon.
It's cumbersome, but the two separate systems do serve a different purpose. And, we only have 4 exotics for now. That doesn't mean we won't have a ton more down the line. I seem to recall that 1e had a ton. I even took one for my Cleric.

Zman0 |
The issue is that you don't have to be of a particular race to grab gab an exotic race-limited weapon. A Figher or another player can take weapon proficiency for that particular exotic weapon. At that point they only need to find the weapon either by trading it with another player or asking the GM nicely if you Human Barbarian can have an Orc weapon.
It's cumbersome, but the two separate systems do serve a different purpose. And, we only have 4 exotics for now. That doesn't mean we won't have a ton more down the line. I seem to recall that 1e had a ton. I even took one for my Cleric.
How is your example of taking weapon training to be trained in a single exotic weapon feat then nicely asking your DM or to let you trade someone for it different than the default for Uncommon of nicely asking your DM or to let you trade someone for it?
So, it takes a General Feat. Well, we can already do it for a General Feat Adopted Ancestry and an Ancestry Feat Weapon Familiarity. And ironically, this is exactly what you'd have to do to guarantee yourself access to the weapon anyway. Though, it would be particularly harsh for a DM not to give you access to weapons in an exotic proficiency you selected.
Why should it be "easier" to gain access to an uncommon exotic racial weapon than an uncommon martial racial weapon?
It is cumbersome. Sure, we'll get more, but I'm asking is it really worth it? The weapons so far have not been worth the exotic title, either as racial or non racial weapons.

SuperSheep |

SuperSheep wrote:The issue is that you don't have to be of a particular race to grab gab an exotic race-limited weapon. A Figher or another player can take weapon proficiency for that particular exotic weapon. At that point they only need to find the weapon either by trading it with another player or asking the GM nicely if you Human Barbarian can have an Orc weapon.
It's cumbersome, but the two separate systems do serve a different purpose. And, we only have 4 exotics for now. That doesn't mean we won't have a ton more down the line. I seem to recall that 1e had a ton. I even took one for my Cleric.
How is your example of taking weapon training to be trained in a single exotic weapon feat then nicely asking your DM or to let you trade someone for it different than the default for Uncommon of nicely asking your DM or to let you trade someone for it?
So, it takes a General Feat. Well, we can already do it for a General Feat Adopted Ancestry and an Ancestry Feat Weapon Familiarity. And ironically, this is exactly what you'd have to do to guarantee yourself access to the weapon anyway. Though, it would be particularly harsh for a DM not to give you access to weapons in an exotic proficiency you selected.
Why should it be "easier" to gain access to an uncommon exotic racial weapon than an uncommon martial racial weapon?
It is cumbersome. Sure, we'll get more, but I'm asking is it really worth it? The weapons so far have not been worth the exotic title, either as racial or non racial weapons.
It is easier (or at least equally easy) to gain racial weapon familiarity compared to other exotic weapons and you make a fair point. What it does do is make it so that a player can't just take Exotic Weapon proficiency and gain access to non-racial exotic weapons, which I imagine we'll see more of in the future.
And Adopted Ancestry is a bit strange, but it requires a second feat to actually gain the actual weapon familiarity feat. So its still slightly harder to do than a single exotic weapon.