Do you want your melee weapons to have more sophisticate differences between each of them? Or are you fine with a short sword, spear, mace, hammer and handaxe all doing 1d6 and being basically interchangeable?

For D&D I'm fine with them being interchangeable.

For a more simulationist game like Runequest I'd like them to have distinct notable characteristics (eg maces crush armour, swords are best vs unarmoured), but I generally finding simulationism gets in the way of the point of D&D.

If more mechanically diverse weapons means a more diverse armor system, count me in.

Quote from: RPGPundit;1058998Do you want your melee weapons to have more sophisticate differences between each of them? Or are you fine with a short sword, spear, mace, hammer and handaxe all doing 1d6 and being basically interchangeable?

I like them as-is but think typed damage should be used more often. There are a disappointingly tiny number of monsters in the 5e monster manual that have resistances or vulnerabilities to only one kind of damage. I think probably about 1 in every 5 monsters should have either resistance or vulnerability to one type of physical damage, both magical and nonmagical.

I playtested something to make individual weapon types more distinctive based on their historical usage.

MW Equipment

Some examples

Axe, battle 50d/ea. 8.0/lbs.
Damage: 1-Hand, 1d8
This is a single head axe between 24 to 36 inches long. Like the throwing axe, the head is shaped longer from the blade to the butt of the axe. At the attacker's option you can use this to pin an opponent's weapon or shield. After making a successful to hit roll, the opponent needs to make a saving or the weapon or shield is pinned. The attacker can't use the axe to attack while using it to pin.

Mace 13d/ea. 5.0/lbs.
Damage: 1d6
This weapon is between 24 to 36 inches long and has a ball of metal affixed to one end. It gets +1 to hit versus opponents wearing chainmail or gelatinous creatures like ochre jellies or black puddings.

Pike 30d/ea. 10.0/lbs.
Damage: 1d10, Reach: 10 ft.
This is a 12 inch spike affixed to a 9 to 10 foot long pole. The wielder of a pike can attack a target up to 10 feet away. When a target comes within 10 feet of the wielder for the first time during a combat encounter. The wielder gets a free attack. The wielder only gets one free attack in a round. The pike cannot be used if the target is within 5 feet. In this case the pike can be used as a quarter staff doing 1d6 damage.

Crossbow, Knight Killer 46d/ea. 6.0/lbs.
Damage: 5d4 (Bolts), Accuracy: +4, Reload Actions: 10. Range: 100 ft/yds.
This is the largest crossbow capable be carried on a regular basis by fighters. It uses either a windlass or a cranequin to cock the weapon for use. This takes a considerable amount of time, 36 seconds or 6 combat rounds. The result is a weapon capable taking out a heavily armored opponent in a single shot.

There's already more to these weapons than their damage die.  Some of these weapons are cheaper to make than others and, thus, cost less to purchase but are easier to break.  Then, there's typed damage, as fearsomepirate points out.  Also, some of these weapons have secondary qualities (or ought to have some), such as being light (easier to dual-wield), versatile (dealing more damage when two-handed), throwable, etc.  There's also their non-combat utility, like hammers smashing things and axes chopping things.  Last but not least, the very physical properties of these weapons make them vary in bulkiness.

If anything, I think D&D needs more sophisticated mechanics to better bring out the differences between these weapons.  Same goes for what happens in-game: if it's just fight, fight, fight, and everything else is glossed over, yeah, they'll be samey.  If I wanted more sophistication, though, I'd rather play another game, like GURPS, Burning Wheel, or even Savage Worlds.

I like about a 2nd ed level of differention (surprise, surprise) Different amounts of damage and weapon speed for initiative.

Quote from: Warboss Squee;1059002If more mechanically diverse weapons means a more diverse armor system, count me in.

I like the idea of diverse armor, but in D&D, it's the rule we usually skip as too fiddly.

So what version of D&D? With Greyhawk, D&D weapons have quite a few distinctions.

I think 1e/2e supported more granularity.

I think 5e doesn't but could.

The issue is not the weapon-differntiation. It's the core-mechanics you intend those weapon-subsystems to interact with that matters. So it depends on if you want your D&D to have more options. My general view of 5e fans is they don't.

Depends on how much it slows shit down, which mostly ties into how well the DM knows the system and how well the players know their own abilities without having to stop and look it up.

Boiled right down to it, though, I think "they're all just hand weapons, so they do the same damage" is kind of boring in an RPG, so I'm right about where Ratman_tf is.  Damage differentiation and maybe speed factors and I'm good.  I'm not averse to adding more, again it depends on how much it slows down combat.

For D&D, keeping things simple in the core game always made sense to me. I think I've just come to expect, and rather enjoy, supplements being the place where things get more elaborate. It allows the GM to bring that stuff in to a campaign where it feels right, but not have every campaign fret over minor distinctions between weapons.

For 5e my groups have been using the weapon "maneuvers" in the Midgard Heroes Handbook from Kobold Press.
Doesn't change the damage but offers a couple of options as long as you are proficient with the weapon.

Examples
 
Longsword can use reaction to parry one attack
Some thrown weapons can 'pin' someone to a wall, table or the like
Some of the bludgeoning weapons can mess with someone in heavy armors
etc.

I really like them because they give options other than just hitting the enemy.
So far nothing seems overpowered/game-breaking but we have only been using them for a month or so.

My old group liked the way the 2e rules were set up.
We also enjoyed the BECMI weapon mastery, but we all agreed the DM needed to keep a bit of a leash on it.

I'll admit I did really enjoy becmi's weapon mastery when it came out.  Other than that I'm pretty fine with the few times bludgeon/slash/pierce became relevant.  This is fundamentally an abstraction game with characters built of phlebotinum, not Fractures and Fatalities (TM).  For folks that like granularity like that, Riddle of Steel is the way to go.  Bludgeoning damage level 5 to zone 10... Death by snu snu.

A quick and dirty conversion would be that on a critical hit, you roll an exploding d6 and the number of 6's that show up determine the riddle of steel damage level.  Somebody crits, rolls yahtzee...  Colorful description of why you don't get an open casket.

Personally, given the D&D system, I think weapons should be a little more basic. Especially, I dislike the impression from the weapons table that there is some sort of factory standard for each weapon type (i.e. maces are 4 pounds, and morningstars are also 4 pounds but do greater damage, while war picks are just 2 pounds doing the same damage). It's not a big deal, but if I would probably have weapons just divided into small/medium/big, plus traits like reach and finesse and possibly quality.

It depends a lot on the game I'm playing. In most OSR type games I'm fine with the broad categories as in L&D tiny 1d4, small 1d6, medium 1d8 etc, but it is nice if axe, sword, mace doesn't just equal 1d8 damage. I do like to see things like estar posted to differentiate the different classes of weapon types.

Axes being more useful for chopping trees, breaking down doors etc, weighted weapons (maces) being more effective on tough or well armored foes, swords being a little faster and clubs being the default the others diverge from is enough detail for me, I don't need extensive lists of weapons at the scale of combat in most OSR games.

I do like when games include options for weapon quality, whether that is a small bonus (penalty) to hit or damage, and / or resistance to (or increased chance of) damage on a fumble etc. It is nice to have a reason to pay more for a weapon made by a master, and a reason to replace that cheap or badly worn weapon beyond it just looks nicer.


In more complex / finer detail games like GURPS or HERO I do enjoy more detailed breakdowns. In Fantasy HERO I took advantage of the rules to re-build the different weapons so that axes, maces, clubs, swords and picks of similar size do a similar amount of damage but work in different ways. None are "better" than the rest as a general weapon, but each is superior within its niche.  

Quote from: estar;1059015I playtested something to make individual weapon types more distinctive based on their historical usage.

MW Equipment

Some examples

Axe, battle 50d/ea. 8.0/lbs.
Damage: 1-Hand, 1d8
This is a single head axe between 24 to 36 inches long. Like the throwing axe, the head is shaped longer from the blade to the butt of the axe. At the attacker's option you can use this to pin an opponent's weapon or shield. After making a successful to hit roll, the opponent needs to make a saving or the weapon or shield is pinned. The attacker can't use the axe to attack while using it to pin.

Mace 13d/ea. 5.0/lbs.
Damage: 1d6
This weapon is between 24 to 36 inches long and has a ball of metal affixed to one end. It gets +1 to hit versus opponents wearing chainmail or gelatinous creatures like ochre jellies or black puddings.

Pike 30d/ea. 10.0/lbs.
Damage: 1d10, Reach: 10 ft.
This is a 12 inch spike affixed to a 9 to 10 foot long pole. The wielder of a pike can attack a target up to 10 feet away. When a target comes within 10 feet of the wielder for the first time during a combat encounter. The wielder gets a free attack. The wielder only gets one free attack in a round. The pike cannot be used if the target is within 5 feet. In this case the pike can be used as a quarter staff doing 1d6 damage.

Crossbow, Knight Killer 46d/ea. 6.0/lbs.
Damage: 5d4 (Bolts), Accuracy: +4, Reload Actions: 10. Range: 100 ft/yds.
This is the largest crossbow capable be carried on a regular basis by fighters. It uses either a windlass or a cranequin to cock the weapon for use. This takes a considerable amount of time, 36 seconds or 6 combat rounds. The result is a weapon capable taking out a heavily armored opponent in a single shot.

I like this, thanks for including the link to the complete list.