Replace Martial Prof with Weapon Groups? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Replace Martial Prof with Weapon Groups? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Lord Schpungus
04-04-04, 04:08 PM I was thinking about the Martial Proficiency feat and how useless it is since there's at least one exotic weapon variant for every martial weapon and they're typically better. I was thinking to give normal proficiencies as the classes, and then let Martial Weapon Proficiency give proficiency in a martial group instead of just one weapon. Does this make martial weapons more appealing?
Wil_Hyral
04-04-04, 07:09 PM I'll be honest; the only thing that doesn't appeal to me about that is the requirements for existing PrCs. A good deal of them require things like "All martial weapons" basically meaning "fighter."

If you switched to just weapon groups, I'm not sure how said requirements would be met. Of course there are a couple ways but it's still sorta vague to me.

Otherwise, I think i said this a while ago; I love weapon groups. they make 100% more sense than the alternative. But they're hard to incorporate.
danielinthewolvesden
04-04-04, 09:38 PM Any DM will bend those rquirements for the inclusion of this optional rule.
Greyman
04-05-04, 01:30 AM Yes, and it's not so hard to do.

"All martial weapons" means Barbarian, Fighter, Ranger, or Paladin.  Using weapon groups, Fighters gain Basic Weapons plus four other weapon groups, while the other martial classes gain Basic Weapons plus three other groups.

Thuswise the prerequisite becomes, "Weapon Group (Basic Weapons) and at least three other Weapon Groups", or perhaps simply "proficiency with at least four Weapon Groups".

Characters who qualified for such a prestige class under the core ruling, will still qualify when converted.   In addition, classes that grant fewer weapon groups may qualify by taking a feat, or two, rather than needing to multiclass.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Lord Schpungus 04-04-04, 04:08 PM	I was thinking about the Martial Proficiency feat and how useless it is since there's at least one exotic weapon variant for every martial weapon and they're typically better. I was thinking to give normal proficiencies as the classes, and then let Martial Weapon Proficiency give proficiency in a martial group instead of just one weapon. Does this make martial weapons more appealing?
Wil_Hyral 04-04-04, 07:09 PM	I'll be honest; the only thing that doesn't appeal to me about that is the requirements for existing PrCs. A good deal of them require things like "All martial weapons" basically meaning "fighter." If you switched to just weapon groups, I'm not sure how said requirements would be met. Of course there are a couple ways but it's still sorta vague to me. Otherwise, I think i said this a while ago; I love weapon groups. they make 100% more sense than the alternative. But they're hard to incorporate.
danielinthewolvesden 04-04-04, 09:38 PM	Any DM will bend those rquirements for the inclusion of this optional rule.
Greyman 04-05-04, 01:30 AM	Yes, and it's not so hard to do. "All martial weapons" means Barbarian, Fighter, Ranger, or Paladin.  Using weapon groups, Fighters gain Basic Weapons plus four other weapon groups, while the other martial classes gain Basic Weapons plus three other groups. Thuswise the prerequisite becomes, "Weapon Group (Basic Weapons) and at least three other Weapon Groups", or perhaps simply "proficiency with at least four Weapon Groups". Characters who qualified for such a prestige class under the core ruling, will still qualify when converted.   In addition, classes that grant fewer weapon groups may qualify by taking a feat, or two, rather than needing to multiclass.