Weapon Choice
“How dare you! The choice of 1d8 bludgeoning vs. 1d8 piercing damage couldn’t be more important! That’s the difference between smashing skeletons and *checks notes* popping gulper behemoths!”
Well I have good news. You can go to bed tonight knowing you’re technically correct. There are indeed minor mechanical differences between most weapons in 5e D&D. (Though notably not all of ’em. Looking at you morningstar / war pick!) I think we can admit that those differences are pretty friggin’ marginal though. And that in turn leads us to a more interesting design question. When it comes time to flesh out your RPG armory, how do you go about making all those pointy sticks different enough?
Let’s start with a few touchpoints. At one end of the spectrum you have the rules-light offerings like Lasers & Feelings. With this one-page RPG’s abstract approach, the contents of your arsenal matters not at all. Lasers has you attacking with your “lasers” stat no matter what, and that means a pistol and a rocket-mounted assault poodle are functionally identical.
Going a step up the complexity ladder is Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay (WFRP). Ask the internet for an example of “gritty fantasy” and it usually makes the list. As an outgrowth of the tabletop game, sidearms like swords, axes, hammers, maces, and clubs are all classed under the umbrella of “hand weapons.” While options like “big weapon,” “reach weapon,” and “shield plus weapon” are still on the table, all the subtle variations are erased, making a “great club” and a “great axe” the same mechanical beast.
Our opening example of 5e weaponry offers the next tier of complexity, with a relatively shallow pool of damage dice and special properties distinguishing a glaive (1d10 heavy, reach, two-handed) from a rapier (1d8, finesse).
After that you get into the crazy-pants progression of Starfinder (Mach III Swoop Hammer, 14d10 B & F Knockdown 2 Powered [capacity 40, usage 4], reach, unwieldy) and the literal tome o’ guns over in Shadowrun.
No doubt you can think of any number of other systems that fall along this continuum. But if you start scratching your head and trying to figure out what is best, you run into some interesting contradictions. For every forum thread complaining of 5e’s lack of significant choice, there’s a corresponding thread bemoaning option exhaustion in Starfinder. How are we supposed to parse this biz?
Let’s start with this: Personal preference is 100% valid. If you know what you like, that makes you a savvy consumer. But in moments like these, I find it’s important to remember there are no “best solutions” in design. As a designer, you’re looking for the best solution for this game. The question is whether you want to emphasize fluid play, crunchy play, particular genre, or some other element. Do you want one shots that ease you into a single-serving experience, or long campaigns that favor progression?
In all cases, the flavor of “sword guy vs. axe guy” remains on the table. But whether that mechanical difference is nonexistent (Warhammer), minor (5e), or silly (Starfinder), is all about the experience you’re trying to create.
That of course brings us to our question of the day! What is your favorite weapons systems? What hits that sweet spot for your personal preferences, and what kind of gameplay does it support? Conversely, is there a system out there with a mismatch between its gear and its design goals? Shout out with all your favorite flails, hammers, rapiers, and flail-hammer-rapiers downs in the comments!
ADD SOME NSFW TO YOUR FANTASY! If you’ve ever been curious about that Handbook of Erotic Fantasy banner down at the bottom of the page, then you should check out the “Quest Giver” reward level over on The Handbook of Heroes Patreon. Thrice a month you’ll get to see what the Handbook cast get up to when the lights go out. Adults only, 18+ years of age, etc. etc.
Chronicles of Darkness hits my prefered balance on most fronts, with weapons having about the same complexity as WFRP in most cases. However it use weapon size as a relevant trait i.e. hand-sized being size 1, chainsaws being size 3, which does lean into the system’s more investigative side where subtlety is sometimes key.
D&D 5e doesn’t really worry about weapon size except if Small PCs can’t wield them, but when you are trying to get pass a patdown, its nice to have something codified.
Shadowrun’s Tome o’ Guns is an indulgent read of mine though. I’ve played the system all of one session in my life, but their catalogues of gear are fun to read, if only to see some of the strange and wonderful ideas they cook up.
> Shadowrun’s Tome o’ Guns is an indulgent read of mine though
There’s a reason today’s comic is Paladin at a market. There’s a primordial shopping itch that these books scratch, giving the compare/contrast part of your brain a thorough workout.
Who doesn’t love window shopping? Whether it’s reading Shadowrun’s Tome o’ Guns, WHFRP’s Big Book o’ Gear You Can’t Afford (5000gc for a cannon and that’s not even the most expensive item), weighing up options in the Mekton Techbook or even a Bard perusing the Waifu Catalogue. 😀
Oof… never got into the WoD stuff. The whole system just doesn’t scale well at all.
I see Paladin is thoroughly halo-less now (unless the banner is hiding a very high quality animation). Guess he’s leaning away from good proper.
I think the garlic and mistletoe is a good choice if he plans on beating up Necromancer’s vampiric suitors.
The script said “A disgruntled (and still disheveled) Paladin.” I have no control over how the art department interprets that.
Aw, I was hoping for an April Fools edition comic.
Oh, it’s in there. >_>
I’ll add the experience of picking weapons in 4e – whatever best fits your specific ‘weapon expertise’ feat (or elemental damage type and implement for the casters/gishes). Because the specific weapon expertise gives you a unique gimmick per weapon (e.g. flail expertise users can shove people around, daggers are for critfishers…).
And if you want the mathematically optimal choice, a ‘superior’ weapon that gives the highest +hit bonus due to the importance of +hit modifiers in 4e.
I used to shoot for “mathematically optimal.” But over time I cam to realize that the memorable moments come from unique options rather than +1 to hit and damage.
Shadowrun is interesting in that the optimal gun/weapon isn’t strictly the most expensive/damaging, it’s the most practical one – i.e. the one you can hide easily (or bullshit excuses/have licenses for) and won’t get you arrested/shot at on the spot.
Military-grade weapons and fancy cyber-implanted war-crime causers are flashy but the moment you need to use them, you’ve already switched to plan ‘guns blazing’ which isn’t ideal for non-pink mohawk runs and leaves tons of problems after the mission.
And let’s not forget the magical considerations. It’s been a while since I played, but I seem to recall that too much wetware means your magic stops working.
Oh man, I remember being so starved for meaningful character options concerning weapons, that I started combing through every single 5e book WotC have put out, extracting possible weapons from the bestiaries.
Like the “Garrote” (Princes of the Apocalypse, p.210): melee, reach 5ft, when attacking one Medium or Small creature with advantage on the attack roll: 1d4 bludgeoning damage, and the target is grappled (escape DC 15). Until the grapple ends, the target can’t breathe, and you have advantage on attack rolls against it.
Or the “Oversized Longbow” (Waterdeep: Dragon Heist, p. 201): ranged (150/600 ft.), heavy, two-handed, ammunition, only usable by Medium or larger creatures with STR 18 or higher, 2d6+STRmod piercing damage.
The idea died pretty quickly though, as I just didn’t find enough weapons.
More weapon variation necessitates more weapon mechanics (e.g. a “Trip” keyword for hooked swords/whips etc.). But that’s something WotC simply doesn’t want in its game. Sad though it is, it will be the same 37 weapons, the same 12 armors and the same single shield until the upcoming 5.5e.
There has to be a third party option that’s done this. Hmmm…
Ha! The reddits recommended this one: https://koboldpress.com/category/beyond-damage-dice/
I think the differences in weapons are mostly pointless. I like something relatively simple and have worked to craft my own very basic system based on the idea that there is small variation (mostly so you get to use all the math rocks in a set of them. 4, 6, 8, 10, and 12. Very light, light, medium, heavy, very heavy) but overall, it is more about whether you have the skill to use a type of weapon, or you don’t (normal strike, or strike with disadvantage).
If you hit someone with a bat as hard as you can, or a sword, or shoot them with a gun, does the damage they take really matter? Each type of damage is equally painful, depending on where it hits can do the same kind of damage overall, and armor is probably just as good or worthless depending on how protective it is.
Yes, there is actual minutia of variation in reality. How much penetration versus hard stopping power does a caliber of bullet do (and is it just the bullet, or is it also the grain of gunpowder behind it). And lest we never forget the Palladium games system of MEGA damage! Does a laser pistol really vaporize you? Or do you just take a little burn around the wound point and keep going?
At the end of the day, I think it really just comes down to personal choice, table preference, and what everyone is there for. If you care about story and flow, I bet more simple mechanics are better. If you want “realism” I am sure there are systems out there for you, but just remember, the more time you spend figuring out the math, the less time you spend moving forward with the game 😉
I spend a good chunk of the film unit in my class each semester explaining why “realism” isn’t a useful unit of analysis. The problem is that it’s too imprecise. One critic might call very-deadly guns realistic, while another might argue (along with you) that all damage is practically equal. You usually get better insight from going a step further: “What about your version of ‘realism’ appeals to you?”
5e has a special place in my heart because it was it’s rules light approach that made me realize I could roll whatever dice I want behind the dm screen and dress it as whatever is thematic. The harpy stat block says she attacked with two claws and a club, but it’s more spooky if I say she wrings your neck while you gaze up in rapture.
Weird how only the GM has this power. What would gameplay look like if players were also allowed to do this biz?
I have seen different groups come personally close to this slice of player nirvana in a couple of systems: FATE (specifically Spirit of the Century) and Mage the Ascension, though I’m aware that we were probably “doing it wrong” in both cases. It was still pretty cool in Spirit of the Century when our gadget girl had whipped up a “lightning tank” and was rolling Science for damage.
Although now that I write it out… I guess it’s not exactly the same thing as ignoring the weapon type printed on your sheet for the sake of thematics. It’s just what popped into my head.
Dungeon World damage is defined by your class – you can fluff it as anything you want as long as it fits the rules of the world. So as long as the GM says it’s an option, it’s an option.
The example given is you can’t use a regular sword to hurt a dragon and a housecat would have trouble fighting an ogre, but I can give my character anything from a longsword to knuckledusters and describe my attacks however I want.
So it’s not quite ignoring default weapon damage, more that weapon damage isn’t a thing at all.
I, too, wish to have Weapon Specialization in “rocket-mounted assault poodle.”
Once I was bitten by a LARP’s “one-handed edged” vs “one-handed blunt” vs “two-handed edged” etc., I just started hand-waving some of the distinctions as a DM. The players get a little bit of leeway as long as it makes sense in the Pathfinder/D20/3.X campaigns we usually play, but behind the scenes I decided it just didn’t matter in lieu of good story-telling. Tell me what you want for your character build, and I can probably min/max a rules-legal way for that bardiche to be a guisarme-voulge instead.
One of my favorite conversations on the topic ran something like this:
Player: Wow! Good session. I’m liking this superhero campaign. I’d tried looking over D20 Modern before, but where’d you whip up the stats for the gang hideout?
DM: Thanks. Are you sure you want to know? I mean, the man behind the curtain has a curtain for a reason.
Player: Yeah! I mean, was there a certain rulebook or–
DM: Kobolds.
Player: What?
DM: You just successfully cleared a cavern full of Kobolds. The rave guests you rescued were “+100% noncombatants”, the named thugs were Lt. and mini-bosses. Only the gang leader was a kit-bashed special.
Player: Oh. (Wanders away, muttering “good game”)
Serious question: What do you give up when you lean this hard on reflavoring?
When I ran DnD I did exactly this all the time. Wanted Drow enemies for level 3 players, but all the official Drow statblocks I could find were way too powerful. So I reskinned some bandits. Weird underdark fauna were actually wolves. and so on.
I don’t think I gave up anything? Although I can see it causing confusion among players who are very used to the Monster Manual being used as is and would think “I can’t defeat a Drow warrior at level 3, this fight is impossible!” or similar.
In our Homebrew Superheroes campaign, not much. So much of our use of D20 Modern flavored everything that no one thought twice about the knives/handguns of your average thug doing less damage than what the PCs’ pistols and powers could do. No need to consult the Menace Manual and core book for everything. There was always a balance of investigation, RP, and sometimes crowd-melee before a fight vs. a honest-to-Doom supervillain with a unique build.
You’re right, though. One of our most frustrating nights of gaming came from a D&D session with a newbie DM: the first two encounters ran normally, then we hit a lizardman village wherein every foe had the stats of ogres. Bless him, he was *trying* to do a good job, but his idea of “winging it” led to general frustration and grumpiness from the players who knew the rules fairly well and had no way to gauge the relative toughness of any fight or the effectiveness of any of their own attacks.
I’m actually totally fine with the 5e system. I used to like a system where each weapon “has its own rules”, but the Savage Worlds magic system showed me how much more efficient yet enjoyable is a system where the core mechanics and stats are the same, but the trappings are different.
Yes, the battleaxe, longsword and greatclub use the same attack and damage mechanics. But I still can describe my attacks as reckless abandon with the axe, or as quick, calculated feints and parries with the sword, or just plain overhead clobbering with the greatclub. With more uniform stats we can spend less time on maths and rules and more time on describing That Cool Move We Just Totally Did.
Currently playing 5e, I’m of mixed feelings. On one hand, I want to be able to play whatever weapon I feel look right for the character, without worry of the stats. For instance, I might want a spear or mace without worrying about sub-optimal damage, or I might want to swing around a weapon that doesn’t have stats, like a scythe. But on the other hand, the solution many people propose (having a list of damage dice+properties without any names attached) feels too mechanical and unflavourful, so I also want to know that I’m swinging around a longsword, not I set of stats I arbitrarily decided to name that (despite the fact of their being no difference between me and the designers naming the bundle of stats, there’s still a difference in my mind).
So far, what I’ve best come up with is keeping the standard weapon table, but with the asterix that you can reskin one weapon as another if you’d like.
I do sometimes miss 3.5, though; slightly further along that ratio of simplicity-complicated than 5e. While I usually prefer the latter, there is the occasional time when I yearn to pick up a punching dagger in one hand and a flail in the other and see what I can do.
Mutants & Masterminds 2e (which can be easily reflavored to fantasy) has you literally build your weapons from base mechanics, meaning they can be as simple and straightforwards or as mindbendingly complex as you want them to be.
It is, to this day, my “This is Perfection” system.
The HERO System is similar; in fact, it did the point-buy design-your-own-powers thing first, and does it very well. It can be a little heavy-going, though. While I don’t know M&M 2e, I have looked at 3e and can tell it has significant advantages over the HERO System for things like “learning the game” and “getting through multiple fights in one session”.
For most parts I have less issue with how weapons are portrayed than shields and that is how I base my grading for systems. A finnish game called Praedor being my favourite on how it deals with defending yourself with weapons, bloking with shield, parrying and dodging work differently from one another and malee vs ranged defence exists, for one you can’t parry arrows and shield actually prevents geting damage, unlike in DnD where it is piddly +1/+2 AC… can I also rant, once again, how gamedesigners need to experienc shield use, especially bashing, more?
I’m a little fond of the simplicity of the weapons of Mork Borg. Most of them are functionally identical and deal either d4 or d6 damage, but what you get is determined by a die roll, so there’s no choice paralysis to be had. And if that’s too simple, there’s plenty of supplemental material with weapons with a variety of exotic effects. My favourite is Ripper’s Blade, which deals no damage but reduces a target’s armour by 1d4-1.
PF2e’s weapons are great. bonus crit damage, multiple damage types, trip and shove, plus critical effects for skilled users.
I have only ever played a couple one-shots of this, but I’ve always liked Gamma World 4e’s weapon system.
Basically, you determined if your weapon was melee or ranged, light or heavy, which stat it used, and then described it.
For example, I could pick a light melee that used intelligence. Then describe it as a length of sharpened rebar.
Then again, I could pick a heavy ranged weapon that relied on constitution. Then describe it as a table saw blade.
4E’s weapon table is probably the best of any edition. The inclusion of weapon categories made it so features could also apply to different weapon types (This feat applies to all “Axe” weapons”)
As I’ve said before, my biggest problem with 5E’s weapons is how every damn magic weapon is a sword. Swords are for chumps, and Elves! (But I repeat myself)
Fighter wrote 5e.
https://www.handbookofheroes.com/archives/comic/weapon-focus
Someone hasn’t played the Kingmaker CRPG yet I see.
That’s one of the biggest complaints about that CRPG, is that it preferences giving out non-sword magical weapons, so if you specialize as a one-handed sword boi you’re up shite’s creek.
> As I’ve said before, my biggest problem with 5E’s weapons is how every damn magic weapon is a sword. Swords are for chumps, and Elves! (But I repeat myself)
That’s surely only a problem if you game is limited to using the DMG magic items list. Which is for chumps. And lazy DMs. (But…)
😉
Ops and Tactics, the RPG made by gun-nuts, for gun-nuts.
I recently gave myself a migraine over this very topic. I’m writing a sort of mini-sourcebook for a dead system that I really love (Alternity, my first love/system) and came up with unique damage calculations for:
Swords, Axes, Hammers
With each category broken down into:
Light, Medium, and Heavy.
And because of how Alternity works, each weapon needs three different damage values (for Ordinary, Good, and Amazing successes on the attack roll.)
I decided that swords have the smallest damage range, but also the highest minimum damage, axes have a slightly larger damage range but a slightly lower minimum damage, and hammers have the highest maximum damage but also the lowest minimum damage.
So the Medium weapon of each is:
Sword: 1d4+4 stun / 1d4+2 wound / 1d4+1 mortal
Axe: 1d6+3 stun / 1d6+1 wound / 1d6 mortal
Hammer: 1d10+1 stun / 1d10-1 wound / 2d4-1 mortal
“the literal tome o’ guns over in Shadowrun”
Which edition? Some editions are more fiddly than they are fidelity if you know what I mean…
“What is your favorite weapons systems?”
GURPS. A fine gritty system but it can be as lite and floofy as you need, just start dialing back the options.
“What hits that sweet spot for your personal preferences, and what kind of gameplay does it support?”
Depends on what I want. Sometimes I like uber tactikewl nonsense, where you describe your bling’s bling down to the refraction index of the red-dot sight, and sometimes I want a simple Sword and Blaster Romance where your gear isn’t all that important.
“Conversely, is there a system out there with a mismatch between its gear and its design goals?”
FFG’s Star Wars. It’s got a very fiddly weapon options systems (stolen/inherited from the old KOTOR games, but that system is at odds with the narrative approach the rest of the game is aiming at… in fact… the Character abilities system is also very much at odds with the narrative dice and “Force” system they have, it’s a very non-narrative system with narrative elements tacked on.
Street Samurai Catalog and Rigger Black Book for the win!
I find 1E and 2E Shadowrun have the most fun-to-read books and lingo. 2E is my favorite to play (although I must confess no experience playing anything past 3rd edition, and very *very* minor experience with 3rd).
Your comic continues to be very precient for me… I just have been tweaking at the 5e weapons table for a bit more variety and “accuracy” (e.g. swapping out “finesse” with a mandatory use of Dex, and applying it to all swords; adding a minimum strength for all weapons, particularly things like bows; changing sword damage to slashing *or* piercing)
But broadly speaking I like the 5e approach. Pretty rules light, mostly just flavour. That actually makes it an easier system for me to tweak too, since there are far fewer elements for me to have to balance in adjustment.
I have two Pathfinder characters that start off with a single level of Inspired Blade Swashbuckler – Lini the Bard and Alester the Magus. It gives Weapon Finesse and Weapon Focus Rapier as bonuses so you can use your level one feat for Fencing Grace and have Dex to Damage right off the bat. But it only works for rapiers. When I later made my twins Tristian and Crissie, I wanted to use a Sword Cane. But it’s a Martial Weapon so the Rogue Crissie didn’t have proficiency. And it’s a piercing weapon, which meant there wasn’t a feat to give Tristan dex to damage with it. So I had to give Tristian a scimitar and Crissie a rapier. I find it annoying that 3 of my characters have to use the same weapon. I haven’t given anyone else a rapier.
My personal preference is “yeah it’s just flavor”. Once again the way Blades in the Dark handles things fits me well. Yes, having a weapon with words describing it means *something*, but it’s all about context and what meaning your group has decided on for it.
As for the complaints 5e gets, well I think the issue (if you’re going to call it one) is that it deliberately aimed for a simple acceptable medium. The aim is people new to the game can look at this list of options and feel they’re picking something without being confused by either being told to make things up themselves or information overload.
Which is certainly an understandable choice given that’s sort of the whole general deal of 5e overall. It has just enough complexity that you shouldn’t get lost in a sea of endless options or a lack of an idea of what to do without some kind of guidelines.
I imagine the reason people wind up complaining about this stuff is because this design means 5e isn’t really doing the “best” job of anything in particular aside from “easy to get into”. Once you stop needing “easy” (in this particular sense), and you feel comfortable leaving this comfort zone (not something everyone will do judging by the massive popularity of D&D compared to other systems), then you’ll be wanting things that the game wasn’t really designed to do.
You can see this intent in the fact that even the presented weapon options are very samey and lack variations that even that limited scope should you’d think allow for. And you can tell that some of the options only are on the table because the same reason a lot of stuff in 5e is there, because it was there in previous editions.
And you can REALLY see it in the design of magic weapons. They’re very clearly not even *trying* to presented a broad range of interesting options. Most magic weapons are swords. Many magic weapon properties are repeats you’ll find elsewhere with just some extra or fewer options on this one. And mainly they’re “do more damage” or “emits light”. And most damning in this regard, several mundane weapons have not a single magical equivalent even now years and years and many a book out. (At least last I checked. Pretty sure there’s no magic crossbows to be found.)
Admittedly I’m not sure *why* magic weapons are like that. Aside from the assumption of “everyone wants to use a sword anyway”, it’s actually kind of baffling they didn’t make a simple checklist and make sure there was at least one magical weapon for each mundane version.
So… yeah. I figure weapon stuff gets a lot of complaints because the mundane options are designed more for ease of use for beginners than “do whatever works for your character” or “a long enough list of options that the thing you want is probably here”. Which is going to leave a lot of people wanting more.
And the way magical weapons work just has so little “magic” to it and such limited options that it just compounds that issue.
Now do I think this is bad execution? Maybe a little? It’s tough to say really. The system as an individual thing would benefit from not being weighed down from “have to include legacy things and just do what serves what we’re doing” for sure. Given the place the hobby was in when 5e came about, an easy entry was exactly what was needed. (And the lack of attempt at overwhelming complexity still makes this probably the best version of D&D yet.)
On the other hand…. I honestly don’t know what the heck the people who threw together the magic item list for the DMG were thinking not making sure there were options for every mundane equivalent weapon. Or at least not making that the first supplemental book you put out. (This again might be a problem caused by feeling obligated to include legacy material rather than what the game they were actually making would be served better by.) You really should know better than to designed a combat system based on numbers that assume the weapon users will get particular boosts to accuracy/damage at fairly regular intervals and then…. not provide them the tools to do that.
(Admittedly yes, any GM can just make up or adjust magic items. But…. D&D is the beginner game and lots of GMs are beginners too/sit in their comfort zones of just following the rules as written/are doing whatever weird creativity isn’t allowed nonsense happens in Adventurer’s League… so there’s a LOT of space for games where this just won’t happen even when it clearly *should* be.)
“the literal tome o’ guns over in Shadowrun”
A decade-and-half or so ago, I fell for Spycraft 2nd edition. I was looking for some “modern time” rpg, and it was based on the D&D 3.5 built, which I already knew (the 1st edition was, anyway).
Ton of guns in the basic splat book, and that’s before the few “bags of guns” published after.
Plenty of differences between guns – each caliber has its own damage, the gun cames with either built-in add-ons (like scope, sound suppressor, gas brake…) or free add-ons you have to select when you pick the gun. And you can expend equipment slots to “buy” more add-ons.
Plenty of choice with ammo, too.
Now, the result? An extremely complicated equipment system, compared to other games. You have to “assemble” your gun by perusing at minimum at three huge tables (each spreading across many pages) and the associated text. Took me ages to go through it and to get a good enough mastering of it so I can guide players through it.
Is it worth it? Well, if you want a Tommy gun or that pistol James Bond’s opponent was using in that 19xx movie, you will get it. Maybe not at 1st level (equipment’s slots are limited and go up with your level)
OTOH, if all you want is firepower, take the Steyr AUG assault rifle. Comes with plenty of add-ons, built-in and custom, and is the same price as a basic Kalachnikov. Same price as a heavy pistol or a heavy SMG, too.
Tl;dr: I ultimately found the Spycraft weapon system disappointing. Both too complicated and at the same time proposing weapons of different efficiently and quality at the same “price”. At the end of the day, the choice is cosmetic, while still requiring an extensive knowledge of all the little options.
If you ask me, 5e’s weapon system has the worst of both worlds. Its weapons are specific and well-defined enough to put some restrictions on character concepts (e.g. the scrawny sneak can’t use most two-handed weapons effectively without an unexpectedly high Strength), but 90% of the time the only qualities that matter are whether you can use your preferred ability score and the damage die (which, as the comic notes, doesn’t vary all that much between weapons).
As with many TRPG topics, I think looking at video games can be enlightening.
On one hand, we have the Fire Emblem series (and many other SRPGs). Units are very restricted in their weapon choices, but weapon choice feels meaningful, both because of the famous weapon triangle and because the weapons are statistically distinct. Axes hit hard, but lower your accuracy and attack speed. These differences aren’t overwhelming—you can build a fast axe-fighter or a clumsy spear-soldier—but they’re significant enough that you can feel the difference.
On the other hand, many other VRPGs barely make a distinction between weapon types. Any melee class can use an axe, or a spear, or a shortsword, or a tangle of spikes that some concept artist thought looked rad. Depending on how the weapons and other systems work, this can either let the player freely experiment with several different kinds of weapons and/or express themselves through weapon choice, or let them grab whatever weapon they think looks rad and focus on other aspects of the game.
(I kinda wish I could think of a specific example for this one like I did with Fire Emblem.)
Anyways, my point is that games should commit. They should either make weapon choice feel more important than “Am I a Dex character or a Str character?”, or make it something that doesn’t really matter so just go with whatever.
I recognize that this isn’t gonna be a universal viewpoint. Not everyone likes Fire Emblem! To some people, an extra 1.5 damage vs. an extra +2 AC gives the choice between greatsword and longsword plenty of meaning. I just disagree.
Though saying that, 5e does have some supporting systems that help make the weapons feel a little more distinct, for some characters. If you have a combat style, then one-handed weapons can be a bit more accurate, or two-handers can hit a bit harder. Or you can pick a combat style that doesn’t affect weapon choice at all.
It’s not nothing, but…it’s not much, and it’s easy to build around without trying, even as a martial character.
IMO, 5E’s real crime is not the lack of variety in their one-handed weapons, but that there’s a clear correct choice. Versatile weapons do exactly the same damage in one hand, but can also do more if you need to two-hand them for some reason.
The lack of variety in the other options is still pretty lame, though.
For some gamers, “one clear choice” translates to “only one choice.” And that amounts to the same thing as “lack of variety.” More on the subject on this one:
https://www.handbookofheroes.com/archives/comic/average-damage
what i really like is an exploitable weapon. something that can’t be done with the more ‘standard’ weapons.
back in the blue box it was the bastard sword + gauntlet on off hand to be able to ether hit with a two handed slash or get two attacks for lesser damage (to take out mooks)
in 3.5 it was small sized shuriken (deal 1d1 point of damage) together with a feat that let you deal ability (i think it was con?) damage whenever you roll maximum damage. (oh that was one nasty small ninja 🙂
in pathfinder it’s the nodachi, everything a falchion have, only better damage, brace, cost less AND it’s a pole-arm so you can use it with a shield if you get the shield brace feat. combining the best of sword and board and two handed fighting.
in shadowrun it was a semi-burst gun with enough recoil compensators to max out a deadly would with every burst without getting any penalty to the shots.
(also in 3.5 one of my ‘EBBG’ 2nd in command was using an adamantium greatsword to sunder the party’s tank weapons. it was there to make a point of ‘he’s so evil even your gear is not safe’)
Weapon tags are a definite solution. I feel as if weapons “leveling” with you is a great solution, at least the feeling of how your weapon is personal to you rather than just scavenging other’s relics. I’ll also be the first guy to say that I love big romps through gear guides and catalogues– but only if they are interesting.
I feel this links back to the dichotomy of “gear vs. character.” You definitely need to balance them.
On the topic of system design, I agree that the best solution can differ on what you want to create. However, I also state that there are some objectively good and bad decisions you can make in terms of system design.
To me, this is the dichotomy of “serious to casual systems,” and the design may differ depending on what you want to create.
I have a Warpriest named Kotri that’s a blacksmith. Her shop is filled with unusual weapons like the Traveling Kettle, Boulder Helmet, and Battle Ladder. She mostly uses a warhammer herself, but can use her crafting tools to fight with if needed.