I'm thinking of incorporating some new weapons and new rules into a future campaign. I had a few ideas about some ranged weapons that I would like your feedback on. At this point, I'm just curious to know whether they seem balanced against one another--not against existing ranged weapons.
These three ranged weapons would all be two handed. Weapons 1 and 3 would require a feat to become proficient with.
Prof. Bonus Damage Range Load Special
Wpn1: +2 1d8/2d8 Brutal 1 6/12 Minor per die of damage --
Wpn2: +3 2d6 20/40 Free Hi Crit
Wpn3: +2 3d8 2/4 Standard Reckless,Pwrful
Reckless: Using this weapon causes the user to grant combat advantage until the start of his/her next turn.
Powerful: Scoring a critical hit with this weapon causes the target to be knocked prone.
Thanks for any help or feedback! I'm early in the brainstorming process, so please forgive me if some of the ideas are silly, heh.
If you balance them against each other... 2 is definately a lot better then 1, way bigger range, load free, hi crit, better prof bonus and all at the cost of about 2 or 3 damage, depening on whether the user of the other weapon would like to move.
3 is totally unbalanced, it's only useful to deliver Dailies (which can probably kill an Elite in one shot) but even with 3d8 attacking once per two turns isn't worth it; it's a back-up kind of Weapon that smart players would use to insta-gib your big bad boss, because 5 dailes x 3[w] x 3d8 = a crapton of damage.
Each of these will completely obliviate any other weapon and any non-weapon attack... so I hope that's your design goal 'cause it's what you're going to get.
If you balance them against each other... 2 is definately a lot better then 1, way bigger range, load free, hi crit, better prof bonus and all at the cost of about 2 or 3 damage, depening on whether the user of the other weapon would like to move.
3 is totally unbalanced, it's only useful to deliver Dailies (which can probably kill an Elite in one shot) but even with 3d8 attacking once per two turns isn't worth it; it's a back-up kind of Weapon that smart players would use to insta-gib your big bad boss, because 5 dailes x 3[w] x 3d8 = a crapton of damage.
Thanks Pluisjen!
My goal is definitely to try introducing some new things.
In regards to 2 being better than 1, I see your points. My goal was to make 1 significantly more damaging to offset it's loss of range and its reload. I was thinking that the difference of 2-3 average damage was enough, but maybe not. Do you think it should have a bigger damage die? Such as 1d10/2d10 but without brutal?
In regards to 3, you are right...the damage plus dailies would be ugly. I'm not sure what to do with it. Maybe I should come up with something that restricts it ranged basic attacks...though that would be clonky, I think.
I'd like to introduce you to my friend, Fluff. Fluff loves playing with the mechanics of the game that already exist. However, Fluff loves to play in settings and themes where the weapons, classes, powers, and other elements of the game aren't really ideal. So what does Fluff do? He changes the descriptions of things, without changing the actual mechanical properties of them (by "mechanical" properties, I mean the things that impact the rules, like damage, range, reload, and all that, not the physics behind their function). Fluff would say, "We're playing in a sci-fi style game? Cool, crossbows are now plasma rifles," but Fluff would still use the regular ol' rules for how much damage crossbows do, and how far they can shoot, and how you reload them. It'd just look and feel like a plasma rifle, but it would still be balanced within the larger mechanical formula of the game as a whole.
I think you'd like Fluff. I like Fluff.
Have you taken a look at Amethyst? It incorporates a lot of modern/future weapons without it being unbalancing. You might find something close enough to reskin, but if not maybe it'll at least give you ideas on how to make some unique but still balanced weapons.
Thank you Naga
I might have to look into that!
I'd like to introduce you to my friend, Fluff. Fluff loves playing with the mechanics of the game that already exist. However, Fluff loves to play in settings and themes where the weapons, classes, powers, and other elements of the game aren't really ideal. So what does Fluff do? He changes the descriptions of things, without changing the actual mechanical properties of them (by "mechanical" properties, I mean the things that impact the rules, like damage, range, reload, and all that, not the physics behind their function). Fluff would say, "We're playing in a sci-fi style game? Cool, crossbows are now plasma rifles," but Fluff would still use the regular ol' rules for how much damage crossbows do, and how far they can shoot, and how you reload them. It'd just look and feel like a plasma rifle, but it would still be balanced within the larger mechanical formula of the game as a whole.
I think you'd like Fluff. I like Fluff.
Thank you Cohen
Your point is well taken, and I agree. I do like fluff. In fact, I fluff all the time. But for the next campaign I run, I want to do more than fluff. I want to change the mechanics. There is a reason to my madness...I just don't always know how to realize my madness sometimes, and that's why I posted this thread.
The weapons posted above are a meager attempt at adjusting for other changes that I plan to implement to the system. Changes that I feel require an adjustment beyond just fluff.
Incidentally, I wasn't trying to be rude or snarky, that whole thing just sort of came out when I reached for the keyboard.
Be very, very careful though. It sounds a bit like you're almost trying to rewrite the book, and that's not a simple task. Design and development for 4e alone (not counting Essentials) took a team of five people at least three years, and in the end, there were still a lot of flaws with the first PHB.
Just don't try to reinvent the triangle or anything, I guess is what I'm saying.
I think the flaw in your idea is the 4th edition power scheme. A barbarian with a mordenkrad isn't deadly simply because his weapon does 2d6 with brutal 1, it's because when he hits with his encounter power, he's rolling three times that amount of dice.
That being said, there are theoretically some work arounds, but you'd be fundamentally changing the mechanics of the game, either way, really. Balancing weapons that take time to reload, at a minimum, requires them to start unloaded, requiring the character to spend the necessary load action prior to shooting. Still, that only helps a very little. I think you need to find a mechanic that backs off the damage die, but possibly still allows the weapons to be used to do more damage. Perhaps weapon powers? If you're proficient with the weapon, you take a feat, and you gain an encounter power that allows you to, for instance, prime the weapon with multiple shots, effectively gaining an extra [w] or 2 on your next attack with the weapon.
In any case, all of those weapons need their damage die drastically reduced. Those are insane amounts of damage. Off the top of my head, a rogue can do that kind of damage with a rapier, a feat, and Combat Advantage. A Ranger can do it with a feat and even a semi-decent weapon, but those are classes intended to do a lot of damage, and no non-striker class has the ability to bring that kind of damage to bare with an at-will attack.
Also, as an aside. 1d8/Brutal 1 = 2d4 (generally speaking). Just so you know.
Two pieces of advice to bear in mind here:
1. If it's better than the Fullblade or Gouge, it's too good. (Those being the effectively balanced pair of superior +3 and +2 weapons.)
2. A non-simultaneous drawback does not balance an advantage, it just invites exploitation.
The second one, in particular, is an absolutely pandemic and absolutely fatal mistake in houseruling attempts. Look at your third, shotgun weapon there, for instance: do you really think I'm going to care that it takes a standard action to reload my gun or makes me grant CA when I kill a target in one hit with it? I'll just carry around a set of the things and quickdraw a new one when I need to shoot again.
Or Ring of Free Time (IIRC) to get a standard action unusable for attacks to load the thing.
Your warnings are taken to heart in regards to "reinventing the wheel." I'd rather not go through the trouble of even trying to make adjustments, but I like tinkering with things to see if I can come up with something that myself and my players find more enjoyable.
"I think you need to find a mechanic that backs off the damage die, but possibly still allows the weapons to be used to do more damage." Cohen
Taking into consideration Cohen's comment, what do you think about allowing certain weapons to add 1.5 ability mod to damage? Would the following weapons balance against each other?
Wpn1 +2 1d6/2d6 6/12 Minor per dmg die Precise, Brutal 1
Wpn2 +3 2d6 20/40 Free Hi Crit
Precise: When you use a power with this weapon and the power adds an ability modifier to damage, you instead add 1.5 times the ability modifier to damage.
@Cohen--Thanks for the clarifying your tone! I really appreciate that.
First off, if they're guns; you should create new categories for themm like Pistol, Rifle, Cannon. It helps that you can then define who gets them and add attributes and feats that would concern them.
The other thing I figured is that modern gun like weapons could feasibly do about a 1 die size larger damage than let's say a crossbow or longbow without the numbers getting way toooo ridiculous. I think if you went with a military ranged weapon, one handed, +3 prof and 1d6 damage is decent pistol. Rifles, I think should outclass a longbow easily, at least in the proficiency department (could feasibly be military ranged weapon, one handed, +3 prof and 1d8 damage (I'd probably go for 1d10))...
Now these weapons more or less don't do anything special in terms of how they would interact with powers. That's sort of the point, so a ranger with twin strike doesn't do ridiculous damage at 20 squares away...
But, if you wanted to give them special properties, I would give the weapons an at-will property that allows for your special effects.
So maybe:
Wpn 1: +2 1d10 6/12 load minor brutal 1
So that your weapon 1 could have a special at-will attack
Wpn1 Attack
At-will; Weapon
Special: This attack must be used with this weapon
Standard Action Range weapon
Target: one creature
Attack: Dexterity vs. AC
Hit: 1[W] + 1d6 + Dexterity mod damage.
21st level: 2[W] + 1d6 + Dexterity mod damage
Special: Until the end of your next turn, any attacks made with this weapon have a -2 penalty.
That's just a suggest from my inference that you're trying to make more modern guns or something of the sort. Or something.
Why would guns possibly to do more damage than bows to begin with? Damage numbers are arbitrary and I assume you're not trying to have gun and bow users in the same party.
Seconded.
From a realism persepctive, massive damage from old-fashioned guns was not the reason they were adopted. Armour penetration, ease-of-use, maintenance and training were probably major factors. A skilled bowman was probably deadlier than a regular firearm soldier well into late 1700s/early 1800s.
From a game perspective, you'll end up with something more playable if you keep things balanced, and your starting suggestions are way off track, they will cause you to make massive knock-on changes to re-balance e.g. ranged spellcasters and melee fighters.
Edit: Second set of suggestions looks closer to balanced, though I stil think "Weapon 1" looks like it might be exploitable by certain builds.
Why would guns possibly to do more damage than bows to begin with? Damage numbers are arbitrary and I assume you're not trying to have gun and bow users in the same party.
Seconded.
From a realism persepctive, massive damage from old-fashioned guns was not the reason they were adopted. Armour penetration, ease-of-use, maintenance and training were probably major factors. A skilled bowman was probably deadlier than a regular firearm soldier well into late 1700s/early 1800s.
From a game perspective, you'll end up with something more playable if you keep things balanced, and your starting suggestions are way off track, they will cause you to make massive knock-on changes to re-balance e.g. ranged spellcasters and melee fighters.
Edit: Second set of suggestions looks closer to balanced, though I stil think "Weapon 1" looks like it might be exploitable by certain builds.
Thirded.
Until the invention of rifling, guns were wildly inaccurate, and until the invention of smokeless powder, filled the entire battlefield with a pall of smoke, which made things even worse.
This is what reflavouring is for.
(and yes, I know they are not often this big; I'm being humorous)
And when you scale up a heavy flail to be used for a large target, you get this...
That does 2d8 according D&D.
Depending on caliber, firearms should do between 1d6 and 1d8 damage, reserving the 1d10 and 2d6 for extremily high caliber rounds. In Amethyst Foundations, the most powerful two-handed small-arm inflicts 1d10--a sniper rifle. A more powerful heavy weapon variant does 2d8, but you can't move with it. In Amethyst Evolution, we have weapons that do 1d10+10 and 2d6+6....those are artillery emplacements.