Altered Weapons Table [Archive] - Wizards Community

Altered Weapons Table [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
BinaryProphet
12-11-06, 12:31 AM After a close examination of the default weapons tables used in the PHB I came to the conclusion that the current one was internally inconsistent and could be improved. So, rather than whine about it, I actually went and did what I could to fix it.

The altered table is here (here's hoping the guy who runs the d20srd doesn't sue me before getting my email asking for permission): http://personal.utulsa.edu/~nathan-morse/weaponsTables.html

For those who don't want to click on an external link, here's the breakdown:

I made all of the axes do both bludgeoning and slashing. Reasoning: 1) They really do both. 2) They already have the same disadvantages cited for why the morningstar has two types of damage.

I merged the handaxe and throwing axe so it has a x2 crit, 10 ft. range increment, and costs 8 gp. Reasoning: the redundancy was driving me nuts, and it's not really a stretch. Anyway, the throwing axe had no penalty in melee anyway. Basically, it's just the throwing axe at the handaxe price.

I merged the shortspear and javelin, and made the shortspear a light weapon. Reasoning: the damage curve works better and I didn't care for the redundancy. Also, moving the spear into one-handed was a change I wanted to make. Probably going to be the second most controversial change.

I moved the normal spear into the one-handed category. Reasoning: Damage curve, realism, and making the longspear look slightly more appealing.

I moved the scythe into the simple weapons. Reasoning: Common farm implement, readily accessible. Also fits damage curve nicely for simple weapons. I am currently considering altering the cost.

Introduced a light flail that's made of wood as a simple weapon. Reasoning: I wanted to make a more Wester monk, so I eliminated the nunchaku and essentially moved their stats to a new flail. Input on this especially welcome.

Gave the quarterstaff trip attacks. Reasoning: One might consider this obvious. Helps give armed monks more opportunity to use Improved Trip as well.

I added a swordbreaker to the light exotics. It gives a +4 to opposed sunder checks.

I added a tonfa to the light exotics. When fighting defensively it gives a +1 shield bonus. It may also be used to make trip attempts, though not in the same round as it is used to gain an AC bonus.

Added a 1d10 Greatscimitar to fit the curve and a 1d10 Greatpick as well. Also moved the falchion to exotics in the hand-and-a-half spot to match the bastard sword. I would have added more hand-and-a-half weapons, but they're all covered by non-OGC exotics, mostly from Complete Warrior.

I changed the monk weapons to make it feel slightly more Western. I didn't succeed as well as I would've liked, but there simply are no equivalents of the sai or shuriken that would fit in Western history. The tonfa was added to fill out light exotics after I pillaged them. They are now the sickle, light flail, quarterstaff, sai, shuriken, tonfa, and punching dagger.

I think that about sums it up.

I'm also probably going to redo the weapons group setup at some point to cover all of the old weapons (which it doesn't) and all the new ones as well.

In addition, I'm considering making a set of weapon templates to post on my site for things like basket hilts.

Any feedback at all on this would be greatly appreciated, just try to keep it civil.
RobbyPants
12-11-06, 08:41 AM It seems odd that you'd keep the greatclub as a martial weapon while switching the scythe to a simple weapon. I'd recomend doing the opposite (that's my opinion). The only reason I wouldn't use the scythe (as printed) as a simple weapon is that it's too powerful compared to the others. Pulling the crit back to x3 would keep it from being an overpowered simple weapon.
Mogarth_Warheart
12-11-06, 12:14 PM I wouldn't have moved the Falchion it was fine where it was.
BinaryProphet
12-11-06, 09:16 PM After further review of your comments and working the funky probability math behind them I've determined that, in fact, both of you are probably right.

The falchion is being restored to where it is, with the greatscimitar being removed.

I'm also making the greatclub a simple weapon as it does in fact suck compared to all the other two-handed weapons, even the simple ones.

As for the scythe, a x3 crit would make it fit in with the simple weapons nicely, and I've decided to do so.

I'm also trying to figure out what to do with the greataxe as it doesn't do nearly as much damage over time as either the greatsword or the falchion. It would have the exact same value over time if I gave it either a x4 crit or upped the damage to 2d8 however. If anyone knows more about probability math and can point out how I'm an idiot, now's the time.

Thanks for your input, keep it coming.
RobbyPants
12-12-06, 09:24 AM I'm also trying to figure out what to do with the greataxe as it doesn't do nearly as much damage over time as either the greatsword or the falchion. It would have the exact same value over time if I gave it either a x4 crit or upped the damage to 2d8 however. If anyone knows more about probability math and can point out how I'm an idiot, now's the time.

Thanks for your input, keep it coming.
The greataxe isn't really all that bad. Compared to the great sword, it does fairly simlar damage. There are only two differences when you compare the damage of the two:

The greataxe has a minimum of 1 damage compared to the great sword's 2
The damage of a greataxe will have an equal probabilby of being a 1 or a 12 (or any other number), whereas most of the great sword's damage rolls will hang round middle numbers (5-9).

The only other difference is the crits, and 20x3 is the same as 19-20x2. Basically, figure that a great axe will offer +200% damage 5% of the time, and a great sword will offer +100% damage 10% of the time.

I'd say that improving the greataxe any would make it way too powerful for a martial weapon. About the only improvement I could see would be increasing the crit to 20x4 and making it an exotic weapon.
pres_man
12-12-06, 10:11 AM If you want a one-handed spear, you should just make one, not move the two-handed down. Now it is imbalanced with the other simple weapons, it is effectively better now than the one-handed martial weapons.

Compare your one-handed spear to a battleaxe. Some damage dice and crit, yet your spear can also be thrown, that makes it better than the battleaxe. Comparing it to the trident is even worse. It has a better crit and can be thrown twice as far.

If you want a one-handed spear for simple weapons, I would suggest having both the shortspear and another spear that did 1d8 x2 and isn't meant to be thrown. That would put it on par with the morningstar and heavy mace, so clearly balanced for a simple weapon.

The Scythe is another problem as a simple weapon. Comparing to the longspear, it does better damage (2d4 tends to be better than 1d8), has a better crit, the longspear has reach but the scythe allows trip attacks. The special abilities are about equivalent (reach might be slightly more powerful than trip, but perhaps not), so I would say the scythe is clearly more powerful, thus not a good simple weapon. Now you could make a simple scythe. Perhaps 1d8 x3 with trip, and then that would perhaps be balanced.

I dislike your axe change. It seems to greatly devalue the hammers. The best houserule for this that I have seen is some on suggested putting a smaller weapon on the back of the axe head at extra cost. Thus you could have a weapon where the main part of the head was a (battle)axe and the back of the head was a (light)hammer. Thus the wielder could choose to do 1d8/x3 slashing normally or could switch it around and do 1d6/x2 bludgeoning (you might change that to x3). You could instead put a lighter pick on the back instead of a hammer (or combine a hammer with a pick). That is the best suggestion I have seen.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
BinaryProphet 12-11-06, 12:31 AM	After a close examination of the default weapons tables used in the PHB I came to the conclusion that the current one was internally inconsistent and could be improved. So, rather than whine about it, I actually went and did what I could to fix it. The altered table is here (here's hoping the guy who runs the d20srd doesn't sue me before getting my email asking for permission): http://personal.utulsa.edu/~nathan-morse/weaponsTables.html For those who don't want to click on an external link, here's the breakdown: I made all of the axes do both bludgeoning and slashing. Reasoning: 1) They really do both. 2) They already have the same disadvantages cited for why the morningstar has two types of damage. I merged the handaxe and throwing axe so it has a x2 crit, 10 ft. range increment, and costs 8 gp. Reasoning: the redundancy was driving me nuts, and it's not really a stretch. Anyway, the throwing axe had no penalty in melee anyway. Basically, it's just the throwing axe at the handaxe price. I merged the shortspear and javelin, and made the shortspear a light weapon. Reasoning: the damage curve works better and I didn't care for the redundancy. Also, moving the spear into one-handed was a change I wanted to make. Probably going to be the second most controversial change. I moved the normal spear into the one-handed category. Reasoning: Damage curve, realism, and making the longspear look slightly more appealing. I moved the scythe into the simple weapons. Reasoning: Common farm implement, readily accessible. Also fits damage curve nicely for simple weapons. I am currently considering altering the cost. Introduced a light flail that's made of wood as a simple weapon. Reasoning: I wanted to make a more Wester monk, so I eliminated the nunchaku and essentially moved their stats to a new flail. Input on this especially welcome. Gave the quarterstaff trip attacks. Reasoning: One might consider this obvious. Helps give armed monks more opportunity to use Improved Trip as well. I added a swordbreaker to the light exotics. It gives a +4 to opposed sunder checks. I added a tonfa to the light exotics. When fighting defensively it gives a +1 shield bonus. It may also be used to make trip attempts, though not in the same round as it is used to gain an AC bonus. Added a 1d10 Greatscimitar to fit the curve and a 1d10 Greatpick as well. Also moved the falchion to exotics in the hand-and-a-half spot to match the bastard sword. I would have added more hand-and-a-half weapons, but they're all covered by non-OGC exotics, mostly from Complete Warrior. I changed the monk weapons to make it feel slightly more Western. I didn't succeed as well as I would've liked, but there simply are no equivalents of the sai or shuriken that would fit in Western history. The tonfa was added to fill out light exotics after I pillaged them. They are now the sickle, light flail, quarterstaff, sai, shuriken, tonfa, and punching dagger. I think that about sums it up. I'm also probably going to redo the weapons group setup at some point to cover all of the old weapons (which it doesn't) and all the new ones as well. In addition, I'm considering making a set of weapon templates to post on my site for things like basket hilts. Any feedback at all on this would be greatly appreciated, just try to keep it civil.
RobbyPants 12-11-06, 08:41 AM	It seems odd that you'd keep the greatclub as a martial weapon while switching the scythe to a simple weapon. I'd recomend doing the opposite (that's my opinion). The only reason I wouldn't use the scythe (as printed) as a simple weapon is that it's too powerful compared to the others. Pulling the crit back to x3 would keep it from being an overpowered simple weapon.
Mogarth_Warheart 12-11-06, 12:14 PM	I wouldn't have moved the Falchion it was fine where it was.
BinaryProphet 12-11-06, 09:16 PM	After further review of your comments and working the funky probability math behind them I've determined that, in fact, both of you are probably right. The falchion is being restored to where it is, with the greatscimitar being removed. I'm also making the greatclub a simple weapon as it does in fact suck compared to all the other two-handed weapons, even the simple ones. As for the scythe, a x3 crit would make it fit in with the simple weapons nicely, and I've decided to do so. I'm also trying to figure out what to do with the greataxe as it doesn't do nearly as much damage over time as either the greatsword or the falchion. It would have the exact same value over time if I gave it either a x4 crit or upped the damage to 2d8 however. If anyone knows more about probability math and can point out how I'm an idiot, now's the time. Thanks for your input, keep it coming.
RobbyPants 12-12-06, 09:24 AM	I'm also trying to figure out what to do with the greataxe as it doesn't do nearly as much damage over time as either the greatsword or the falchion. It would have the exact same value over time if I gave it either a x4 crit or upped the damage to 2d8 however. If anyone knows more about probability math and can point out how I'm an idiot, now's the time. Thanks for your input, keep it coming. The greataxe isn't really all that bad. Compared to the great sword, it does fairly simlar damage. There are only two differences when you compare the damage of the two: The greataxe has a minimum of 1 damage compared to the great sword's 2 The damage of a greataxe will have an equal probabilby of being a 1 or a 12 (or any other number), whereas most of the great sword's damage rolls will hang round middle numbers (5-9). The only other difference is the crits, and 20x3 is the same as 19-20x2. Basically, figure that a great axe will offer +200% damage 5% of the time, and a great sword will offer +100% damage 10% of the time. I'd say that improving the greataxe any would make it way too powerful for a martial weapon. About the only improvement I could see would be increasing the crit to 20x4 and making it an exotic weapon.
pres_man 12-12-06, 10:11 AM	If you want a one-handed spear, you should just make one, not move the two-handed down. Now it is imbalanced with the other simple weapons, it is effectively better now than the one-handed martial weapons. Compare your one-handed spear to a battleaxe. Some damage dice and crit, yet your spear can also be thrown, that makes it better than the battleaxe. Comparing it to the trident is even worse. It has a better crit and can be thrown twice as far. If you want a one-handed spear for simple weapons, I would suggest having both the shortspear and another spear that did 1d8 x2 and isn't meant to be thrown. That would put it on par with the morningstar and heavy mace, so clearly balanced for a simple weapon. The Scythe is another problem as a simple weapon. Comparing to the longspear, it does better damage (2d4 tends to be better than 1d8), has a better crit, the longspear has reach but the scythe allows trip attacks. The special abilities are about equivalent (reach might be slightly more powerful than trip, but perhaps not), so I would say the scythe is clearly more powerful, thus not a good simple weapon. Now you could make a simple scythe. Perhaps 1d8 x3 with trip, and then that would perhaps be balanced. I dislike your axe change. It seems to greatly devalue the hammers. The best houserule for this that I have seen is some on suggested putting a smaller weapon on the back of the axe head at extra cost. Thus you could have a weapon where the main part of the head was a (battle)axe and the back of the head was a (light)hammer. Thus the wielder could choose to do 1d8/x3 slashing normally or could switch it around and do 1d6/x2 bludgeoning (you might change that to x3). You could instead put a lighter pick on the back instead of a hammer (or combine a hammer with a pick). That is the best suggestion I have seen.