D&D (2024) New One D&D Weapons Table Shows 'Mastery' Traits

The weapons table from the upcoming Unearthed Arcana playtest for One D&D has made its way onto the internet via Indestructoboy on Twitter, and reveals some new mechanics. The mastery traits include Nick, Slow, Puncture, Flex, Cleave, Topple, Graze, and Push. These traits are accessible by the warrior classes.

 

[W'rkncacnter]

Dumb question, and maybe this is something that's been around for ages but I only just noticed it now:

Even though at 10 lbs it's the heaviest weapon on the list, why is greatclub not classified as "heavy"?

because apparently a halfling fighter can easily swing a greatclub, but not a greatsword.

honestly i think the heavy property is dumb anyways. it's essentially just a "PUNISH SMALL STRENGTH MELEE CHARACTERS" tag.

 

[Incenjucar]

Dumb question, and maybe this is something that's been around for ages but I only just noticed it now:

Even though at 10 lbs it's the heaviest weapon on the list, why is greatclub not classified as "heavy"?

Being "heavy" is not just a factor of sheer weight. A great club is an inefficient use of mass, so it's not going to have as much oomph per pound as a warhammer. Beyond that, game logic.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

What was peoples problem with damage on missed in 4e?

It was always extremely vague. Metagaming seemed to be somehow involved, but it didn't really make sense because HP is an inherently "meta" attribute, all the way back to EGG's earliest descriptions of it. It was mostly the increasingly-rare "HP = MEAT POINTS!" crowd who were mad about damage-on-miss.

 

[tetrasodium]

People keep saying that the difference between 1h & 2h is only one point of damage. That's an oversimplification that obscures the truth

• 1d10 10% chance of any number 1-10 each roll with a 50% chance of being above 5
• 1d8 12.5 chance of any number 1-8 each roll with a 37.5% chance of being above 5
• 1d12 8.33% chance of any number 1-12 each roll with a 58.33% chance of being above 5
• 2d6 72.22% chance of being above 5
  • 1 impossible
  • 2 2.78% chance on any given roll
  • 3 5.56% chance on any given roll
  • 4 8.33% chance on any given roll
  • 5 11.11% chance on any given roll
  • 6 13.89% chance on any given roll
  • 7 16.67% chance on any given roll
  • 8 13.89% chance on any given roll
  • 9 11.11% chance on any given roll
  • 10 8.33% chance on any given roll
  • 11 5.56% chance on any given roll
  • 12 2.78% chance on any given roll

Even more distorting is the impact of abilities that allow reroll 1s &2s giving a 100% chance of >5 if reroll all 1s &2s. If just reroll 1s /72s but must take the second roll it gets complicated enough that I'm not going to try building it in anydice but it should be well under a 10% chance of ever occurring & some fraction of a single percent to get quadruple 1s &2s needed for a value under 5.

This is a problematic distortion because wotc doesn't do things like 1d6->2d3, 1d8->2d4, or 1d10->1d6+1d4 & similar so what is objectively the best damage value weapon (2d6) is also not beat in max damage by any other weapon.

 

[CleverNickName]

Hopefully they will reconsider that "damage on a miss" stuff. That's always going to be a hard nope for me.

 

[Emberashh]

It was always extremely vague. Metagaming seemed to be somehow involved, but it didn't really make sense because HP is an inherently "meta" attribute, all the way back to EGG's earliest descriptions of it. It was mostly the increasingly-rare "HP = MEAT POINTS!" crowd who were mad about damage-on-miss.

Well that makes sense I suppose. I have a similar mechanic in my game (its based around having to actively defend yourself to null a result; otherwise any attack can deal at least half damage depending on the attackers accuracy) so I was curious as to what ticked people off.

I also don't use HP, but a paint over I call Composure or CP. Makes more sense for what HP is trying to convey and I have specific mechanics for handling taking actual wounds and the like.

So I imagine my game won't have such issues, which sates my concern.

 

[Pauln6]

because apparently a halfling fighter can easily swing a greatclub, but not a greatsword.

honestly i think the heavy property is dumb anyways. it's essentially just a "PUNISH SMALL STRENGTH MELEE CHARACTERS" tag.

I'm no sure I follow your logic. I can recall when halfling males could have max str17, and females max str14, and also when all their weapon dice were reduced by one size in exchange for greater accuracy and a better AC. The penalties applied to small folk in this edition seem less than any other. The logic is that a longsword is big enough to be a two-handed sword when you are only 3 feet tall.

I think the concept of a Str20 halfling with a two-handed sword is utterly ludicrous and I have no real problem with small folk being steered towards equally powerful but less cheesy concepts. Plenty of ways you still lay on the cheese if you still want to.

 

[tetrasodium]

Dumb question, and maybe this is something that's been around for ages but I only just noticed it now:

Even though at 10 lbs it's the heaviest weapon on the list, why is greatclub not classified as "heavy"?

"Heavy" is a beneficial property like high crit multiplier or high crit range was in 3.5. Greatclubs are simple weapons allowed by nonmartial classes & those abilities tend to be kinda broken by design.

 

[Xeviat]

One extra point of damage on average over a standard sword-and-board wielder compares to push or slow every round, or an extra attack every round, how exactly?

The same as Ray of Frost vs Firebolt?

 

[Vaalingrade]

Hopefully they will reconsider that "damage on a miss" stuff. That's always going to be a hard nope for me.

Yes, make it more prevalent. Like a feat or something.

Obvious design space. Makes a statement about HP, attacks and how the game works. Needs to happen.