Mostly what I'm looking for is that these should be balanced (about as good as a military weapons would be good, I should think) and unique. Here are my ideas so far:
Reaper: Scythes gain defensive and reach properties*
Vicious Hook: Sickles gain brutal 1 property
Savage Beating: Melee basic attacks with a club gain the rattling keyword**
Precision Aim: you can use the ability of your choice for ranged basic attacks with slings (like melee training, but with slings)
Agile Spear: spear (the weapon, not the group) gains the offhand and small properties
Spiked Club: Great club becomes high crit
*No other weapon has this combo. Is it considered too good?
**Almost as good as some martial at-wills, but not quite since you have to use a less effective weapon to do it. Still, too good?
Daggers and spiked gauntlets seem good enough already.
Thoughts?
Agile Spear: spear (the weapon, not the group) gains the offhand and small properties
does it loose the versatile property?
Agile Spear: spear (the weapon, not the group) gains the offhand and small properties
does it loose the versatile property?
I was thinking no. The spear could be used main hand, two hand, or offhand (but not all at the same time) by any size character.
+2 for tempest offhand
+1 for versatile in two hands
+1 for scrappy
that does odd things for small tempest fighters wielding one spear in both hands
+2 for tempest offhand
+1 for versatile in two hands
+1 for scrappy
I don't think they could get all of those at the same time. Tempest technique requires wielding two weapons and the others require wielding a versatile weapon in two hands.
You can get both scrappy and versatile at the same time, but that doesn't seem like a big deal because you can already do that with other weapons.
which leads to the second issue: while you wield the defensive weapon in one hand and wield another melee weapon in your other hand.
The wording of defensive doesn't work for a two handed weapon
Reaper: Scythes gain defensive and reach properties
Reach alone would be more than good enough for a feat.
double checked, you're right, they need to be using two weapons.
which leads to the second issue: while you wield the defensive weapon in one hand and wield another melee weapon in your other hand.
The wording of defensive doesn't work for a two handed weapon
That must be new, because I know that several two-handed weapons previously had the defensive properties. Do you think it would be a problem to make a special exception in this case?
Reach alone would be more than good enough for a feat.
I was thinking that, but it seems not special enough since it is basically a glaive.
Granted the feat would make the scythe better than a glaive in many cases (although it still would not gain the polearm category, and so be unusable with polearm feats and weapon restrictions).
Defensive seems appropriate for a scythe given the way that you wield it: in two hands, crossed over your body, swinging always in a sweeping motion that would make it difficult for anybody to get close to you.
How about defensive and high crit?
(I confess there is also an ulterior motive to defensive. I want to use it myself for one of my characters, and I care more about the AC than the reach. Could be that is clouding my judgment.)
Balance wise it's not a problem, it's no better than a superior weapon. It's just the wording that doesn't work.
reach + highcrit and I'd consider it for my shadar-kai avenger instead of executioner's axe.
or maybe highcrit + brutal 2. very reliable, but the same average damage as an executioner's axe (and 4 points per [w] lower in crit)
I was thinking that, but it seems not special enough since it is basically a glaive.
Eventually, all of this balancing and whatnot, you'll eventually reach that point with all of them. The reason they are called simple weapons is because they are simple. Instead of "Simple Weapon Extra Stuff" feats, why not just take a Martial Weapon Proficiency instead? Get a glaive, call it a scythe, and shut that book.
I was thinking that, but it seems not special enough since it is basically a glaive.
Eventually, all of this balancing and whatnot, you'll eventually reach that point with all of them. The reason they are called simple weapons is because they are simple. Instead of "Simple Weapon Extra Stuff" feats, why not just take a Martial Weapon Proficiency instead? Get a glaive, call it a scythe, and shut that book.
why?
simple, fluff
My shadar-kai would be better RP wise with a scythe, but as things stand it's such a terrible crunch choice, it just doesn't fit in.
the staff fighting feat lets you build strong characters that use staffs.
example:
====== Created Using Wizards of the Coast D&D Character Builder ======
I was thinking that, but it seems not special enough since it is basically a glaive.
Eventually, all of this balancing and whatnot, you'll eventually reach that point with all of them. The reason they are called simple weapons is because they are simple. Instead of "Simple Weapon Extra Stuff" feats, why not just take a Martial Weapon Proficiency instead? Get a glaive, call it a scythe, and shut that book.
Fluff is a good reason, for one. I want to play a character who has advanced training with a scythe, not military training with a glaive. I realize that I could just grab a glaive and say my advanced training with a scythe has turned it into a reach weapon, but honestly I do think defensive is more appropriate for a scythe than reach anyway.
Also, because as I said I would like these weapons to be unique. Staff fighting is really a unique feat because it allows you to use your implement as a double weapon, filling a niche that no other weapon or implement does.
The staff is able to fill a unique niche because it is unique. Just giving neat effects to inferior weapons does not make it a good idea. In other words, look at it like this:
Don't make a feat to make a simple weapon better, just for the sake of making a simple weapon better. Decide on a hole that you think needs to be filled, then do so. If this means that a feat is made that makes a simple weapon better, fine. But you need to have a REASON for doing so.
I get what you are saying. But look at it this way: A Scythe with your feat has reach and defensive. Or I could take the feat to use a Glaive and just get the reach. Why would anyone bother?
I was thinking: Because the scythe is still not a polearm. That would make improving their ability with a scythe generally the better option for characters who are only trained in simple weapons, but characters who are going to be taking a lot of weapon feats will generally do a lot better with the polearm, or spending their feat on a superior weapon.
Same feat cost, but the superior weapon is not as good! It's a little weird. I totally get why you want to do this, but I wouldn't do it for EVERY simple weapon.
Well, it's not the same feat cost. It's the same feat cost for characters who do not have military weapon training, but they will mostly be casters and wouldn't take glaive proficiency anyway. For any class that actually uses weapons, and therefore probably has military weapon training for free, the cost for making the scythe better would be 1 feat while the cost for using a glaive is 0. The scythe costs as much as a superior weapon.
The staff is able to fill a unique niche because it is unique. Just giving neat effects to inferior weapons does not make it a good idea. In other words, look at it like this:
Don't make a feat to make a simple weapon better, just for the sake of making a simple weapon better. Decide on a hole that you think needs to be filled, then do so. If this means that a feat is made that makes a simple weapon better, fine. But you need to have a REASON for doing so.
I agree, but I think so far the properties I have suggested are unique and hopefully interesting. The club enhancement lets non-martial classes gain a rattling at-will, which is pretty darn cool, in exchange for using one of the lamest weapons of the game. The greatclub is the only high crit mace, making this a decent feat to use in conjunction with bludgeon mastery for a raging, foaming barbarian who runs around using nothing but a big tree branch as a weapon.
The sickle enhancement makes it identical to a kukri, which was a total oversight. Obviously that one is no good.
As far as making them different from glaives--I think it's important that you make them better than glaives. If you only have simple weapons, you can spend a feat to get a single superior weapon and skip military entirely. A feat to augment a simple weapon should be about equally strong--it should render it roughly equivalent to a superior, not to a martial.
I also think that they should be distinct enough from existing weapons. Giving reach to scythes still makes them worse than glaives. Giving them something else is appropriate--I'd say Defensive would not be unbalanced if it would 'work'. It might be cool to give them some other ability instead, like you did with clubs. (By the way, I think rattling on MBAs with clubs is probably fine as long as nothing else gives them any more boosts.)
I'd say Defensive would not be unbalanced if it would 'work'. It might be cool to give them some other ability instead, like you did with clubs. (By the way, I think rattling on MBAs with clubs is probably fine as long as nothing else gives them any more boosts.)
Well since these are feats, not actual weapon properties, there's a lot of options. For example, since the actual defensive weapon property won't work, I could simply say "You gain +1 shield AC when you wield a scythe."
Look at it this way: if you can think about how a character would wield a scythe differently in battle with extra training, then you can start to get good ideas for flavorful and useful feats.
Personally, I'm not really seeing it. Scythes... aren't weapons; they're farming implements. It doesn't mean they don't have sharp blades but it does mean that there aren't really very many "techniques" for battle. I'm trying to picture a guy fighting with one and all I can picture is him treating his enemy like a stalk of wheat (he's going for the knees). Maybe a knock prone? I don't know.
To be honest, reach doesn't make a lot of sense either. I can't imagine a combatant getting enough leverage to do anything useful without a hand near the top of the shaft.
Scythes... aren't weapons; they're farming implements.
This actually gives me an idea--it'd work for anything that's more of a farm implement than a weapon (or any other non-weapon object.) Maybe sickles and scythes.
You could have a fighting style built around the idea of looking like you aren't fighting-capable. Perhaps, "On the first attack action you use in an encounter, you gain combat advantage with all attacks made with a sickle or scythe that use this action."
Look at it this way: if you can think about how a character would wield a scythe differently in battle with extra training, then you can start to get good ideas for flavorful and useful feats.
Personally, I'm not really seeing it. Scythes... aren't weapons; they're farming implements. It doesn't mean they don't have sharp blades but it does mean that there aren't really very many "techniques" for battle. I'm trying to picture a guy fighting with one and all I can picture is him treating his enemy like a stalk of wheat (he's going for the knees). Maybe a knock prone? I don't know.
To be honest, reach doesn't make a lot of sense either. I can't imagine a combatant getting enough leverage to do anything useful without a hand near the top of the shaft.
And the guy with the staff shouldn't be as effective as the guy with the sword?
Look at it this way: if you can think about how a character would wield a scythe differently in battle with extra training, then you can start to get good ideas for flavorful and useful feats.
I'm not sure I agree. I mean, I agree that that is a good way to think about it – it's how I came up with the sickle and club feats – but I don't think it makes sense to constrain myself in that way. Indubitably there are niches that are going unfulfilled by weapons. You could invent a new weapon that provides +1 shield AC and reach, or a double weapon that is defensive and also an implement, but a) there are perfectly good weapon concepts going unused – there is pretty much no time when anybody would use a lot of simple weapons unless they are improvising and b) I like the idea of being able to choose between using a feat to upgrade your current weapon or upgrading to a new weapon.
Personally I like my characters to name their weapons and think of them as an extension of themselves. If they are going to take superior weapon proficiency they will take it very early. They don't take new weapons unless their old ones are broken beyond repair. Often I keep the same weapon for the entire life of the character. It's a fluff thing, I know, but I simply prefer to take feats that improve my effectiveness with a weapon I am already using than to take feats that allow me to use more weapons, or even simply buy better weapons.
Personally, I'm not really seeing it. Scythes... aren't weapons; they're farming implements. It doesn't mean they don't have sharp blades but it does mean that there aren't really very many "techniques" for battle. I'm trying to picture a guy fighting with one and all I can picture is him treating his enemy like a stalk of wheat (he's going for the knees). Maybe a knock prone? I don't know.
Meh. There are literally no techniques anywhere for a double sword, because such a thing simply does not exist as a weapon, whereas the scythe has at least been used in real life battles.
I'm picturing a scythe and it seems to me that there are a lot of decent individual moves. How they would fit together into a martial art style, I don't know, but you've basically got a giant kama on top of a staff. Also I'm imagining that a person trained in the regular use of these weapons would know how to modify them to make them more deadly, exactly the way flails went from being farming implements to being nunchaku and triple-headed flails and generally some of the most effective weapons in medieval Europe against certain types of armor.
For example, war scythes used by the Polish army:
To be honest, reach doesn't make a lot of sense either. I can't imagine a combatant getting enough leverage to do anything useful without a hand near the top of the shaft.
Most scythes I've ever seen has a handle about halfway up the haft, which allows you to hold it properly while making that arcing slash that it is built for. There's still about 3-4 feet worth of staff above the handle, plus about 2 feet worth of blade so you could conceivably have decent reach with a slash, and if the blade is not too curved then you could stab as well. But like I said, I think defensive (or equivalent) does make a little bit more sense since most of the time you are going to be holding the scythe up against your body and making wide arcs with it, which could make it difficult for enemies to get close.
That said, this is Dungeons and Dragons! One thing I was considering was, for example, allowing a character to add necrotic damage to a scythe somehow (to keep with the reaper theme), or to make it so that melee basic attacks grant a second weapon attack roll vs. a NAD that would knock the enemy prone (which could be handwaved as a magical effect by anybody who knows enough about martial arts for that to strain credulity). I ultimately discarded that idea as too complicated, though.
You could have a fighting style built around the idea of looking like you aren't fighting-capable. Perhaps, "On the first attack action you use in an encounter, you gain combat advantage with all attacks made with a sickle or scythe that use this action."
Hmm. How about if you crit with a sickle, you gain combat advantage against the creature you attacked?
There's some stuff on Youtube about fighting with a Scythe. General consensus seems to be "do not try this at home" which suggests that the Scythe is actually a Superior Weapon, not a simple one.
Maybe if wielding a scythe would turn grapple checks into a weapon attack, allowing you to add your proficiency, weapon enhancement, and expertise bonuses to the roll.
Or melee basic attacks with a scythe could give you the opportunity to grab your opponent on hit.
up the die type from 2d4 to 3d4
3d4 is 7.5 average damage, the same as an executioner axe, just lower varience.
And the guy with the staff shouldn't be as effective as the guy with the sword?
Don't think I said that. At all. Also, how is a staff a farming implement?
double sword stuff, etc
It's a fantasy game so do whatever you want. I assumed you were looking for feedback so I gave my opinion. Feel free to ignore.
Also to elaborate -
I'm not against using farming implements as effective weapons. There's a pretty rich history of this in the real world and there's no reason it can't be done in a fantasy world.
double sword stuff, etc
It's a fantasy game so do whatever you want. I assumed you were looking for feedback so I gave my opinion. Feel free to ignore.
You gave your opinion and I responded. Feel free to ignore it but this is how conversations typically progress. Your feedback generally amounted to "It sounds dumb because I can't picture it," so I tried to explain my thinking because obviously I can picture it, and if I could share that image with you then maybe you wouldn't think it sounded dumb anymore.
Also to elaborate -
I'm not against using farming implements as effective weapons. There's a pretty rich history of this in the real world and there's no reason it can't be done in a fantasy world.
Your statements heavily imply the opposite. You said pretty blatantly that the scythe could not be an effective weapon because it is a farming implement, or at least that you could not imagine it as an effective weapon because it's primarily used as a farming tool. Maybe the videos and the picture of the soldiers armed with scythes helped change your mind a little?
You gave your opinion and I responded. Feel free to ignore it but this is how conversations typically progress. Your feedback generally amounted to "It sounds dumb because I can't picture it," so I tried to explain my thinking because obviously I can picture it, and if I could share that image with you then maybe you wouldn't think it sounded dumb anymore.
I feel kind of bad that my post was boiled down that way. I must have worded things very poorly indeed.
I thought I gave some cogent advice on how I would design a feat like this. Sure it lacked specifics, but I was trying to picture how someone would use a scythe to greater effect with extra training so I could help out. Defensive and reach wasn't cutting it for me.
Your statements heavily imply the opposite. You said pretty blatantly that the scythe could not be an effective weapon because it is a farming implement, or at least that you could not imagine it as an effective weapon because it's primarily used as a farming tool. Maybe the videos and the picture of the soldiers armed with scythes helped change your mind a little?
I apologize that I came off the way I did. I should have taken more consideration to my composition instead of just typing as I considered the topic (sort of unfiltered spitballing) and I would have had I known it would prove to be such a big deal.
I haven't had a chance to watch the videos. They might help me visualize your thoughts better.
Edit - Okay, watched the videos and I'm still not seeing reach. I am however seing this:
Hmm. How about if you crit with a sickle, you gain combat advantage against the creature you attacked?
Or something similar. It looks like a scythe can be used to great effect to punish people for getting in your face. Especially the double sided one. According to youtube comments (not a great source, but they were there), a scythe is slower than a sword but it's good at getting around defenses (probably because of the awkward angle of the blade). All of those are interesting starts for a feat, I think.
We got one dude standing on the other with the curved blade.
However the biggest fanatsy fight with a scythe would have to be from the anime Soul Eater.. were the main character uses a scythe to fight.
www.anilinkz.com/soul-eater/soul-eater-e...
here is a better episode to show off what a scythe wielder could possibly do. www.anilinkz.com/soul-eater/soul-eater-e...
A small moment of reach when she uses the scythe to grab the emo kid.
Even exploited, such a feat probably should still be slightly suboptimal compared to just wielding a military weapon and taking a generally good feat instead. Those kinds of opportunities are made for people who tread the path less taken for the sake of self-expression.
On the other hand, for just your game, if a fighter wants to use a club for theme reasons, why not pump him up to be at least as good as if he'd used a longsword?
I wouldn't worry about whether or not your feats will stack to great power if WotC publishes some simple weapon feats. Most D&D games require a certain amount of agreement on what powers/items/etc should or shouldn't be used for the sake of everybody's fun.