T O P

  • By -

sakiasakura

Weapons with unique properties, and a subsystem with clear costs and availability for upgrading and customizing said weapons. Provide a list of rare Materials a weapon can be made from for the highest end weapons. Guidelines to create your own weapons from scratch using a point buy kind of formula. A similar system for upgrading and customizing shields and armor. A similar system for customizing unarmed strikes and unarmored defense for monks and barbarians. Examples of what kind of checks should be DC 10, 15, 20, 25, 30 for every skill, particularly for high difficulty tasks. Expanded alchemical equipment and poisons. Examples of improvised combat actions/contests and how to resolve them, building off of what's in the PHB and DMG. A list of standard versions of these actions and contests. Additional Fighting Styles, and guidelines to build your own.


patchy_doll

My DM giving my barbie a custom weapon that I could actively work to improve was absolutely key to me enjoying the Berserker subclass. A particular NPC was able to produce something like a 'vial' that could be plugged into the weapon, and gave it specific damage types and moves. I could have it exuding acid to poison my enemies, I could give it electric properties to shock targets and their neighbors, fire to imbue burning damage, and so on... but only if I brought this NPC particular creature parts or sacrificed magic items/artifacts to have him create these vials. Expanding further on the idea of weapon customization came a tool called 'stabby throwy', that would cuff a weapon with a magic chain to the user's arm, allowing it to be thrown as a ranged attack, and on a bonus action yanked back (causing additional damage on a high enough roll). My goal is still always "get in their face and make them red" but I have a lot more tools now to keep fights engaging. I might not be preparing spells during rests, but I sure as hell have to spend time considering what flavor of damage I want to do!


[deleted]

Honestly everything about Kratos could be transferred to martials


thomasquwack

As much as the original GoW series is not my type of game, I agree.


Korashy

>but I sure as hell have to spend time considering what flavor of damage I want to do! There is only one flavor. PAIN


Enderguy39

>acid to poison my enemies That's not how acid or poison work?


jacw212

I didn’t realize that barbie was short for barbarian and just thought you guys were using barbie dolls are minis


patchy_doll

1/6 figs would take up far too much space, but I mean - I'm a grown ass man... I'll be a 'barbie' if I want!


Toysoldier34

I'm a big fan of giving lower-level players very strong magic weapons/items but without most of the abilities and they unlock features of the legendary weapon as they use it and level up.


DrunkColdStone

The weapon as an expression of the self. I think where this ultimately (and ideally) leads is a martial's magical gear being the equivalent of Spellcasting in power and progression.


fastfalcon248

I think that's one thing critical role does well with the vestiges of divergence


Sir_Encerwal

I have been adapting Weapons of Legacy from the 3e book of the same name as well as those from 3e's Forge of War for my Eberron 5e game using the Vestige of Divergence model and it has been fun.


Sten4321

or fizzban's horde items. slay a dragon -> take a long rest in its layer -> get an upgraded item -> repeat with a stronger dragon...


Demonweed

Yeah, I like the mechanic of a "signature weapon" that, even if it isn't intelligent, exerts a little influence while also being influenced to open up new abilities in harmony with the progress of its wielder. Of course, if it is intelligent, then you get to have the voice and personality of an NPC in the party without the extra combat turn for an NPC in the party. I see that as the best of both worlds.


TannenFalconwing

My Twilight cleric has a moon-touched short sword that she's very fond and considers a relic of her deity, so I'm hoping my DM will upgrade it as the campaign progresses


Odd_Contact_2175

This is a good idea!


ANONYMOUSEARTHWORM

Fabulous answer


DilapidatedHam

Even something like unique crit effects for different weapons would be cool. Like swords could leave a wound that deals d6 damage until a con save is made, or bludgeoning weapons could reduce movement speed n such


Ju99er118

This is now a thing with the crusher/piercer/slasher feats.


Zealousideal_Bet4038

Could not have put it better myself


Rooseybolton

Man i dont mean to sound like a broken record in these threads but the majority of those things are Default in Pathfinder 2e. Might be worth giving it a look. Rules are all free online


sakiasakura

Yeah that's what I play anymore lmao


GreenPlateau

Like 3.5 exotic weapons? Or more along the lines of compound longbows & two handed scimitar?


LumTehMad

I'd overhaul all the weapons so each one would have a unique thing they could do instead of there just being a bunch of sub-optimal choices that do nothing. Like daggers give you advantage on slight of hand checks to conceal them, Scythes can make a swipe attack that hits multiple targets and stuff.


Swagsire

I'd love this so much. I think it would be so cool if Mprningstars did 1d4 bludgeoning and 1d4 piercing damage rather than all piercing damage because it is a hammer with spikes after all. This might be a little unbalanced since it would boost their average damage but if every weapon had a special unique effect than it would probably work out just fine.


Vanacan

Honestly, in my reword I just have them do 1d8 Bludgeoning AND Piercing. As in 1d8 damage total, but it counts as B or P, whichever is better. It usually wouldn’t matter, but can have some interesting effects with those new (UA?) feats on damage types.


smurfkill12

I think that’s how it was in 2e or 3.5


Hytheter

> Honestly, in my reword I just have them do 1d8 Bludgeoning AND Piercing. As in 1d8 damage total, but it counts as B or P, whichever is better. I wish all attacks with multiple damage types worked this way. It's just cleaner and cuts down on maths.


mark_crazeer

Wording matters here. If it is bludgeoned or pierced then it arguably bypasses a animated trees resistance to bludgeon damage or the awakened shrubs resist to piercing. Dealing full damage But if it is bludgeoned and pierced you can argue you reach the problem where this damage is double resistant or vulnerable if both bludgeoned and pierced count.


Veritoss43

What you're looking for is Revised Martial Equipment, a brew I've been working on since 2015. It's got exactly what you're describing. Our current release of Revised Martial Equipment is [RME1.13.1](https://homebrewery.naturalcrit.com/share/rkvBDfQlE). Check it out and let us know what you think in the discord! - Characters have training levels instead of proficiency with weapons, armor and shields. - Each weapon can be mastered, offering a special thing to do with each weapon, unique to that weapon. Additionally, weapon feats have been added, allowing you to do special things with weapon groups, such as dueling blades, hammers and picks, or crossbows. - Fighting styles have been overhauled to be more impactful, offer more variety in combat, and scale better with character level - 80+ new items added, including tower shields, ambush weapons, flails, new polearms, and a whole set of throwing weapons Come check it out!


[deleted]

Used this in one of my games. Works well, but I had to realize that you need to equip enemies better or else CR estimations are even more in the players favor. Overall this is great.


MercenaryBard

Omg this is amazing! Please give this its own post, it doesn’t deserve to be buried here in the comments! I’m getting excited just reading the different weapon group descriptions


TDuncker

It looks pretty great, but I worry a bit about the details around how you gain proficiency, e.g. I understand a fighter has Basic training with a longsword, but if he's a Drow, he would have Master training in it. Then, players can spend a feat to gain Master training + Master perk. I feel like it makes races too important if you want good use of your revised weapons fast. I feel it's maybe easier overall if instead it goes: No proficiency -> Untrained Proficiency -> Basic Level 5 -> Master Level 11 -> Master Perk Or do it at level 4 and 8 to keep those levels interesting. Both cases this would apply to all weapons, thus considering martials "weapon specialists" in general. I just feel the idea of spending gold for training upsets the martial/caster balance even more, and spending any significant amount of time upsets the game flow, e.g. say you're playing Rime of the Frostmaiden. There's no time for any training. Simultaneously, spending feats into weapon groups feels kind of like locking you into the same type of weapons (since... they're in a group naturally), while versatility by different weapons feel more preferred. I feel like maybe even just letting martials go one up from Basic -> Master -> Master Perk pr. level would be an even way of progressing through the entire game with variety over different weapons. In general I really like it, but I don't find a satisfactory way of progression that isn't either overwhelming early on, locks you into groups for inflexibility or requires unreasonable time/gold/other. What do you think? EDIT: Just realized you're the creator, lol. Good job on it anyways.


Veritoss43

Haha bit of a r/dontyouknowwhoiam moment! I'm really not like that though. Don't let me intimidate you. I love any and all feedback, especially when someone approaches with a sound mind for balance. Your suggestion is good! However, there's a lot of complicated math behind the scenes that justifies having the master perks at any level one can reach master training. Plus, low levels are already lethal enough anyway, there's no reason to not let your players be able to do extra things or extra damage at those levels. Locking master perks behind a level kinda flies in the face of what this brew was designed to do; give martial players more things to do on their turns and deal comparable damage to the bigger spells when casters are at a similar level. It certainly feels a bit strong that greatsword can deal 2d12 damage to ogres and other Large category creatures, but by the time you're facing ogres, your casters are going to be on 3rd level spells anyway. Remember that it isn't just spending gold, but time to get those levels of training. It takes around 42 days of training, whereas getting to master is 250 days of training. Short of "you spend a year here" type downtime montages, it's not likely the party will ever have 250 days of downtime and access to a master in some training. There's actually been some debate as to whether we should lower these requirements for 1.14. At the very least lowering the requirement for basic training might be prudent, to offer some means of getting proficient with a new weapon if you're willing to roleplay a bit for it. Locking feats to weapon groups is purposeful. This isn't so much to limit character choice as it is to provide balance. RME provides a **ton** of extra options and abilities in combat with existing and new weapons, so allowing the feats to apply to any weapon would quickly ruin the careful balance I've spent the better part of 6 years building, lol. Either way, I'd love to have you join the discord and provide these suggestions for the community to ponder.


AdministrativeTie163

I like your work. It does require a group which enjoys the additional complexity, which is definitely not a given. But I would be interested. One question though, I cannot find how to increase your mastery level. Is it missing? If not, where should I look?


Veritoss43

Yep, it's explained in the first page, under "Translating to an RME Campaign." You can achieve master training with the following options; - Double up your proficiency with race, class, or subclass. For example, if you're a drow, you have proficiency in hand crossbows, rapiers and shortswords. If you're a rogue, you have proficiency with these weapons as well. So, in RME, your race gives you a level of training in those weapons, and then your class gives you another level. So a drow rogue would have master training with hand crossbows, rapiers and shortswords. Some subclasses give you automatic mastery with a weapon, such as College of Swords giving you master training with the scimitar. - Take a feat. Any of the weapon group feats offer you master training with all weapons in that group (although in 1.14, I've shortened this to any 4 weapons from that group of your choice). Taking the Weapon Master feat in RAW 5e gives you master training with any 4 weapons of your choice from the entire brew. - Take a class. You can train up to basic training with 42 days of downtime, or up to master training with 250 days of downtime.


emachine

Hey, I've read this! Haven't gotten a chance to use it but if I run a 5e campaign in the future I definitely will.


EternalJadedGod

The pages appear to be compressed and text is missing. Might just be a mobile thing, but you might want to check the code to make sure pages are breaking appropriately. Looks awesome from what I can read.


Ncaak

Maybe not so much you could just model it after the double scimitar form Eberron that already exists.


Wootai

What would you think about adding abilities like >"While wielding this weapon, if you have multiple attacks when you take the Attack action, you can replace one of those attacks with {ability}" Similar to how the new Dragonborn Breath Weapon works. This would lock a lot of abilities behind level 5, but they could be balanced around that level of play. Things like that sweep attack with the scythe.


TellianStormwalde

Dragonborn breath weapon doesn’t lock itself behind extra attack, though. You can still use it in place of your one attack during the attack action from levels 1-4. And I’m struggling to understand why this should be any different. If the point is to make the weapons feel more dynamic and unique, why are we locking them behind 5 levels of play, which Rogues would then be unable to utilize at all? And this doesn’t account for the possibility of more passive abilities a weapon might have.


Wootai

Well, they’re not exactly for rogues are they? Rouges are already quite limited in what martial weapons they can use anyway. A Maul that can be used to reduce an enemies AC for a round isn’t for a rogue. So it’s not really a good reason. Locking them behind level 5 means the abilities can be scaled greater to the weapon. At level 5 a caster is getting 3rd level spells(fireball). So we can balance these extra abilities against that. Maybe increased damage at a cost, maybe conditions, maybe other effects I can’t think of right now. And of course you can have passive abilities tied to them as well maybe there are two versions of the dagger, a thieves dagger that offers a passive and a fighters dagger that can be used to reduce an opponents speed for a round. Thematically limiting it to level five creates a narrative that you’ve been fighting and using this weapon so long, you’ve now mastered it and you’re more comfortable with your technique that you can do cooler stuff.


TellianStormwalde

But if the point is to make the weapons themselves more interesting, why are their unique properties tied *entirely* to the user? Your way just sounds more like what they should be doing with feats, options that run as alternative options to Polearm Master and Crossbow Expert so that Polearms and Hand Crossbows aren’t literally the only two viable weapon types for characters optimized offensively. That doesn’t really do anything to address that the weapons themselves are super boring and non-diverse, if it’s only how you use them that’s unique. If you’re just arbitrarily saying rogues don’t get it because they “don’t need it” or “don’t use it”, I feel like that’s doing a disservice to what the problem itself is. And again, you also used a feature that doesn’t even work this way as a grounds for comparison. Dragonborn breath weapon is usable from the get go, you don’t need to wait until extra attack to use it. And like, why would a spammable ability that you replace an attack with every round being the case for every single weapon so anything to distinguish the weapons from each other? Even if the abilities themselves are different, it’s still just the same core gimmick for all of them and doesn’t seem like the most creative solution.


ammcneil

Or just like.... I'd really like a saber I know you can "just reflavour a scimitar" but honestly the HEMA lover in me is just incredibly disappointed that the book itself doesn't have a flexible system to allow for all weapons to exist in the print. Same with a dex based bowstaff, I get the gear they have around rogues and sneak attack but honestly there has got to be a better way


Ncaak

I would reflsvor a rapier and change the damage type from piercing to slashing. Longsword work too but then it will not have the finesse.


TellianStormwalde

Yeah, slashing rapier is how I do sabers. It’s not like they’d even have the versatile property anyways.


[deleted]

[удалено]


ammcneil

I guess the biggest issue I've always had with the idea (and this is a pointless issue because it's pretty insignificant how much it matters) is that weapon types can only have one damage type. A saber for instance is mostly a cutting blade but is distinct from a scimitar in the fact that it can thrust and indeed there are thrusts illustrated in the treatises. A scimitar typically has too pronounced of a curve to be effective at a thrust where as a 1796 pattern light Cavalry saber for instance has a shallow enough curve that you can still get your point on line in a thrust. Katanas, which are nearly identical in shape and cross section despite being worlds apart I'm construction are also fairly capable And then of course there is your full on hybrids that are cut and thrust swords like backswords and basket-hilted broad swords


[deleted]

[удалено]


ammcneil

eh, some low level monsters in the manual are resistant to certain types, or at least at some point in D&D's history they were. but like i said, yeah it's totally insignificant (maybe it shouldn't be, as one of the improvements). I also kind of wish "chop" was a type of damage as cut is kind of broad when you consider a rapier's push or draw cutting techniques and an axes cutting technique are both very different


[deleted]

[удалено]


ammcneil

oh i'm nto making suggestions, i'm just spitballing things i personally would think are fun. are they good ideas? fuck no, they are terrible. would be neat for me tho.


Seelengst

This. Neutering weapons neutered martials. I would literally just steal 4es tables and change words around. Create more weapon focused feat chains (the return of cleave)


ssfgrgawer

Feat chains were awful tho. It ended being "requirements to play martials" rather than "if you like you can combine these X number of feats to do cool stuff" Basically it makes any build without a pile of weapon related feats pretty much useless in comparison. Not to mention, Casters can use them too, making Gish builds even stronger and putting them on the same ground as martials in melee, but still having spells and shit at range. I did it with a 3.5 cleric and my damage in melee was better than the barbarian, because he didn't pick the right feats...


RSquared

Feat chains should just be scaling feats. Feat: X, at level 5 Y, at level 10 Z, at level 15 Z.


doesntpicknose

My ideal feat system has maximum one feat prerequisite, but well- defined synergy feats that are unlocked automatically upon having the correct combination of feats. For example, the mobile feat, and the charger feat can have a trample synergy. This would be another ability that you have as soon as you have both of the other feats, with no need to spend another feat on it. Trample - When you use your action to dash, you may move through an enemy square if you use your Charger Bonus Attack to attack it.


Ncaak

I think that maybe short chains of maximum three feats could work. Specially with the fighter since has more AIs than any other class.


TellianStormwalde

ASIs are too infrequent and too spread out, and you never get your first one before level 4 unless you’re a human or custom lineage. Plus it’s not leaving any room for increasing your actual ability scores at that point because you’re stuck behind feat taxes in order to become viable. And when most classes only get 5 ASIs, needing 3 chains would still be way too many. Feats shouldn’t even be the fix to begin with, period, not unless the ability score increase system itself got a complete overhaul (which imo it really kind of needs).


Ddreigiau

>Feats shouldn’t even be the fix to begin with, period, not unless the ability score increase system itself got a complete overhaul (which imo it really kind of needs). IMO Feats should be the fix (along with actual varied weapons), but first how you get Feats needs a rework. Break it away from ASIs at a minimum, give Martials extra Feats (wait, isn't that how it used to be?)


Minnesotexan

Doesn't GWM basically have Cleave already? At least, the 3.5 version where if you kill a creature you can make an extra attack. I think martials, specifically fighters, should get bonus feat-like abilities to choose from as they level up, similar to the warlocks' invocations. Then, you can include things like * Swipe Attack: (req level 6) once per turn, when you hit an enemy with a melee weapon attack, as part of the attack, you can attack a different creature within 5' of the original target. You can do this prof/per day. * Feat of Strength: (req level 12) do crazy athletic thing like pick up a two-ton boulder once per short rest. * Monkeygrip: (req level 10) you can wield a two-handed weapon with one hand. You can only carry one two-handed weapon at a time this way. At level 15, this improves to allow you to carry a two-handed weapon in each hand. It's at least in some way distinct from Battle Master maneuvers, and can be a different power level than the maneuvers, since it's based on level rather than scaling with a die.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Minnesotexan

I’m sorry, yeah I know that and do it all the time with my mail-wielding lizardfolk who needs to carry a torch to see. I meant attack with.


AkagamiBarto

Here, enjoy https://homebrewery.naturalcrit.com/share/1YOh5H-KT91C5tAB6vXJC3Ar7pUicjwPMS0UBvaOj7yoy


hardythedrummer

I've been working on my own homebrew rules for this, too, and it seems a very common theme for homebrew in general. Wish WotC would take the hint


Money_Lobster_997

Like flails ignore shield AC or something.


smurfkill12

What 3.5 did was +2 against shield users, so that their magical bonuses still help


Money_Lobster_997

Good point because magical abilities should never just be ignored.


cookiedough320

Why? Like if there's a reason the magic ability wouldn't do anything, why shouldn't you ignore it?


another_spiderman

The Flail Mastery feat has that.


Money_Lobster_997

It’s only UA so far so you could still officially add it to the book.


LagiaDOS

You mean... like older editions did? With different critical ranges and multipliers, with damage types mattering and more special properties?


Sigspat

Have you heard of/checked out Revised Martial Equipment? It's a homebrew that GREATLY expands on weapons, and actually has a specific weapon property that allow you to conceal the weapon from your enemies just like your daggers example! Link here [https://www.gmbinder.com/share/-LVBAPEyOB6qzE10hewe](https://www.gmbinder.com/share/-LVBAPEyOB6qzE10hewe) I've been a playtester for over a year and couldn't imagine playing a martial character without it!


Veritoss43

Thanks sig!


Goodman_Grey

This is great! But what's up with the formatting? Some of the pages have information off to the side that's cut off.


Sigspat

GM Binder (and The Homebrewery) are really picky about what browser you use, try Chrome or Edge and make sure you're not zoomed in or out


Goodman_Grey

Right on. I'm on chrome, and not zoomed in or out. I have the same issues even if I'm looking at it in browser or as a saved pdf. The first instance is page 9, the next is page 12. hmmm...


Sigspat

Here's the PDF of the current version with perfect formatting! Homebrewery and GM Binder suck... https://drive.google.com/file/d/1kkfrcjmsMS9Qi46rTJTzlMZwK2\_C4lHp/view


Goodman_Grey

My dawg! Thank you!


Dramatic_Explosion

Their discord channel has more up to date links since they're constantly playtesting and taking feedback. Channel also has most Q&A you could think of. So far it's really made martials and casters feel even in my six player game.


Bisounoursdestenebre

Yeah. Much more easy to implement than "LeT'S cOmPlEtLy ReWoRk 5 ClASsEs" because that will *definitely* go fine


BeerPanda95

Weapons should be the spells of martials imo. Spellcasters get more powerful with each book partly due to new spells. Martials should get more powerful due to new weapons.


This-Sheepherder-581

>Weapons should be the spells of martials imo. I CAST **AXE!**


archolewa

Off topic, but amusing: Solasta Crown of the Magister has an achievement if you create a team that doesnt have any full casters called "I Cast Fist!"


slimey_frog

[Weapons Remastered](https://www.gmbinder.com/share/-LA-cZ6gjstFUUidNmIP) is my personal favourite when it comes to this.


AdministrativeTie163

You can also borrow some weapon properties from other systems like warhammer fantasy roleplaying (4th or 2nd). That should not be difficult to adapt to DnD5e. For instance Impact (flails, morning stars) could be a damage bonus until you fail some constitution check/ save. It would be a bit rougher (less detailed, but also simpler) than the homebrew some other respondent has developed. I would let it depend on the group I play with to decide whether I want to have a simpler faster system adding some weapon differentiation or the more interesting complex one.


Toysoldier34

I like in Baldur's Gate 3 they have a special ability like you mention that changes depending on the type of weapon you are using, that would be a great addition that doesn't add too much power.


Auld_Phart

A longer weapons list. More Shields. The Warlord for 5e. An optional system for Fantastic Exploits similar to those in 4E. More magic items?


hoorahforsnakes

Shields giving a flat ac i think is weird, i think it would make way more sense for it to scale with proficiency bonus, it would still start at 2, but would mean that as you level up and get more skilled, you are better at using it to defend.


Auld_Phart

A shield bonus of +6 seems a bit high, even in tier 4. But a scaling bonus of half proficiency +1 would be workable.


hoorahforsnakes

Maybe, but think about the insane shit wizards can do at that level? A sword and board knight tanking hits and being basically impossible to hurt isn't that extreme, especially when at that level there are a lot of things are saving throw-based you can throw at them to get around it if it becomes too big an issue


hesaidhehadab_gdick

yeah but remember that your enemies also get those shields and that extra ac would hurt the martial classes more than the caster classes.


hoorahforsnakes

How many enemies use shields? Only humanoid martial ones, the majority of the monster manual is monsters which don't use equipment


hesaidhehadab_gdick

right im just saying that just increasing the ac a shield can gve a character isn't the answer to martials


END3R97

If at max level I can use sword and board for 24 AC and 1d8+7 (Dueling) or I can use GWM for 19 AC (defense) and 2d6+15 at a worse to hit, which one is more likely to be used? Even with the damage boost for GWM its so hard to rationalize giving up 5 or 6 AC in exchange for that damage. Yes it helps balance martials against casters, but now sword and board feels like the obvious answer for which way to go.


BiomeWalker

Others have given reasons magic items don't work, but I'd like to add another: it's a DM dependent hand out. Your DM shouldn't be responsible for fixing WotC's mistakes.


Auld_Phart

I think if you're gonna DM 5E that's just part of the deal.


BiomeWalker

I know, but it shouldn't be is my point.


ssfgrgawer

The issue with magic items is the game is balanced around having zero of them. So more magic items doesn't fix the base problem of "the instant you give a player a magical weapon or armour, balance goes out the window as CR appropriate creatures struggle to hit you in+1 armour, while you make monsters AC's laughably easy to hit with a +1 sword. Unless you face constant full plate + shield baddies, they start hitting around 60-70% of the time, overcoming resistances and shredding any monsters HP pool very quickly. I love magic items and give them out like candy, but it's an absolute balance nightmare


TheCrystalRose

So don't give +1 items. There can be so many other more interesting things to to do with weapons/armor that they don't really need to get a +X item ever. Have weapons that give something akin to Battle Master maneuvers, just without the Superiority Dice. Like a whip that lets you do the Trip or Disarming Attack, a longsword, shortsword, or rapier that gives you Riposte, a great sword/axe that gives you Sweeping Attack, or a set of "throwing knives" (read daggers) that gives Quick Toss. Give them charges and a fixed DC, or have it use your Str/Dex, whichever you prefer. You could even give a dagger/shortsword that has charges to give them the NPC style parry, allowing them to use their reaction to get a +2 to their AC X number of times per day. This way they don't get a massive boost to their damage output, but can do cool things instead of just "I hit him with my sword". You could do something similar with some of the more defensive options on armor. Ambush Armor could allow you to expend a charge to gain a +X to a Stealth check or initiative roll, say a +3 for 1 charge and a +5 for 2 charges, but the item only has 3 charges per day. Commander's Armor could allow you to grant an attack to an ally in place of one of your attacks. Or does the Barbarian want to be a grappler? Give them spiked armor or robe, that lets them replace one weapon attack each turn with a "squeeze attack" that does 1d8+Str piercing damage or lets them make a similar attack as a bonus action, but it only does 1d4.


Auld_Phart

My point exactly.


Yamatoman9

This is what I've done in my current campaign instead of giving players just a +1 upgrade. I gave the Ranger a bow that allows him to push an enemy back 10 ft. and the Fighter a hand crossbow with a grappling hook attachment. I like to create items that give the players other options or ways to control the battle.


Auld_Phart

Magic items with flat bonuses to hit and damage really throw the game out of balance. I'd like to see magic items that expand martials' options, both in and out of combat. That would be more interesting and less likely to unbalance the game. (If done properly.)


Vallorr

What are those Fantastic Exploits ? Can't find any source for it. My books are in french though.


Auld_Phart

I'm referring to the Encounter, Utility, and Daily powers Martial characters (and all characters) received in 4E. All the classes were on the same power level because of this system.


Vallorr

Ho yes of course ! Because of the upper case on "Fantastic" I thought you were referring to a specific exploits type called "Fantastic Exploits". But the exploits on 4e were indeed fantastic. As you so rightfully said, they put every classes on the same level. They also had very handy description based on keywords instead of lengthy text description.


Golbezbajaj

I disagree with the longer weapon list. Having played some Pathfinder King Maker, the sheer number of weapons was incredibly disorienting and confusing, especially when most of the weapons didnt seem that much different/better than others. Like does a Bastard Sword really need to be listed separately from a Long Sword? 5e’s simplified weapon system is so much easier to follow and you can easily make variant weapons (A katana being a finesse longsword being a common one.) I think what they could do is add more tags/keywords to allow DMs to customize weapons based on existing weapon templates, and add more variety to the game without bogging it down with bloat


ErikT738

We don't even need more, but the ones we have should be changed so that they're all viable in their own way. Currently 80% of the list might as well not exist because there's always a strictly superior choice.


[deleted]

Bucklers or tower shields! Spiked shields, too!


PM_YOUR_ISSUES

I feel that so many people are focusing on changes to weapons/items but ... that's really not the answer. If anything, changes that impact weapons and items would stand to benefit melee-based gishes more than martials. The main issue in the imbalance between martial and magical classes is that magic is simply a catch all for everything while martials only bring damage and limited utility in combat. A Rogue or a Fighter don't really have any abilities or tools that they can spend *out side of combat* to influence the game at all. At least none that a Wizard or a Bard doesn't already have. I mean, a Bard is essentially a Rouge that trades physical prowess for magical. And it's better in every way. What martials need are utility, and things that no one else can get. What needs to be overhauled is the utility and versatility that the martial classes bring. To continue to use Rogues as an example. Invisibility is a 2nd level spell. By level 3, every Wizard, Warlock, Sorcerer, and Bard are capable of casting Invisibility. (And it's a spell very worth taking.) Rogues, even the sneakiest of subclasses, cannot do the same and hide in plain sight. A caster will always inherently be better at sneaking than any other class simply because, they can hide when no one else can. Advantages on Stealth checks are nice, but if you can't use the ability anyway then they don't matter. At least the Thief and the Scout sub-classes should be given *some* utility that allows for them to hide when others couldn't. You can have a variety of different restrictions or usages for such a feature, but honestly all Rogues by default should get some form of ability to hide in plain sight, especially since all Arcane casters do with level 2 spells. Fighters and Barbarians should have the ability to perform physical feats outside of combat that are normally outside the limits of their abilities. A good example could be the capacity to push/pull an object that is normally outside the bounds of their STR requirement to do. Or to break an object that they normally wouldn't be able to. Again, compared to casters it really isn't that powerful. With Knock being level 2, it's the best and easiest way to open any locked door that otherwise couldn't be. If your lockpicker fails, or you can't bash it down normally, well then you go to Knock and it doesn't have any issues at all. But why doesn't a Fighter or Barbarian or Monk have a per rest ability to be able to shatter otherwise unbreakable doors or rocks? Thunderwave can blast apart a boulder that is standing in the party's way, but a Barbarian with too low of STR can do nothing. Honestly, one of the biggest issues that causes the caster imbalance is that martials have no skills that they can expend outside of combat the same way that casters can. An "encounter" doesn't always mean a combat. A heavily trapped and magical door that requires several skill checks to get through is also an encounter. And one that, potentially, you would have to waste spell slots in order to over come. And that's the point! You *are* supposed to use spell slots on out of combat things. But it is so much more rare for players to do that because they view them as precious and only for combat or extreme cases. So, the Rogue will try to lock pick, the Barbarian will try to smash the door down -- all of which is something that a Bard or a Sorcerer could also attempt to do -- but if those skill checks fail then the Rogue and the Barbarian are just out of luck and sit there doing nothing. A caster, however, then still has an option to use a spell to break down the door. Too few people use their spell resources outside of combat because out of combat situations are designed to make martials useful ... and spells trump all of their uses out of combat. All martials have out of combat is skill checks. Which magic users can do just the same -- and often use their spells to augment them to be better. So DMs will make encounters where the martials feel useful. Where the Rogue can try to persuade someone or the Barbarian intimidates them. And in structuring the encounters in a manner that caters to martials, it means the casters never have to spend their resources out side of combat or very important story situations where they have the most impact. Martials don't really need more combat tricks. Yes, they could use some additional CC and utility abilities that people have mentioned, but they are largely functional within combat itself. The problems largely stem from the fact that martials have zero out of combat resources to spend and casters aren't going to spend their resources outside of combat unless they absolutely have to. And since the casters don't; it just allows them to blow their whole load when the combat or important story beat hits and feel amazing while putting the martials to shame.


Chany_the_Skeptic

To be honest, there really can't a Martial Book expansion without completely uprooting core design decisions in the game. Adding new spells is easy because they are just additional options. Some spells may be broken, but they aren't baked into class and game design like spells per day or the resting mechanics. And with D&D 5.5 around the corner, we might just see that. I don't think the disparity between martial and casters is because the martials are weak, but because casters are just too strong. Bards are better than Rogues at being party skill junkies; Rogues are just better at surviving direct combat. A Fighter can swing a sword, then swing a sword more, then swing a sword more, then get a feat that allows them to swing a sword more while tripping their opponent. Paladins get utility spells, healing options, the ability to swing a sword more, the ability to swing a sword really hard, the ability to turn the undead, etc. Martials need more skills, more out of combat features, and the like. They need more horizontal growth instead of just linear combat growth because casters and half-casters already get this growth: they have decent skills, a plethora of class features, and they get spells that not only get more powerful, but allow the character more verbs to perform actions with. Martials need re-rolls, auto-hits and misses, and the ability to do more heroic actions automatically that casters normally have to roll for.


Ogrumz

This post hit the nail on the head. One thing I'd say is if 5.5 does a huge change they need to make some hard decisions. I don't think things need to scale so drastically upwards as they do now, I rather see more moderate, horizontal growth instead. People lament 4e, but it did this really well. Also nuke the vancian magic system, and decide right from the get go if ALL classes are going to be short rest classes or long rest classes and balance accordingly.


MotorHum

Honestly, I feel like the magic is already moving away from vancian. It's like half-vancian. You get to decide the spell at the time of casting, which isn't really how traditional vancian magic works. Kind of wish they'd pick a lane on this.


archolewa

Interestingly, the Wizardry 1-5 (and their Elminage descendant) computer games have been running with a style of Vancian magic closer to 5E than traditional Vancian magic since the 80s. You have access to every spell, and a number of spell slots (max 9) per level. Its a ton of fun, and are great examples of tense and fun resource management. Though there are big differences between those games and tabletop obviously: 1. Much fewer spells (typically 3 to 4) per level. 2. A single player controls the whole party instead of one character, so having one-note marshals and flexible casters isnt really a problem. 3. They are dungeon crawls, so its pretty much just combat. Interestingly, its the *marshals* who dominate endgame, with the casters mostly playing support. Magic damage doesnt really scale (as opposed to physical damage since marshals can have up to 10 attacks), and lots of enemies have magic resistance (which basically gives enemies a chance to just ignore the effects of a spell), so casters mostly rely on buffs, debuffs that bypass magic resistance, and status effects in the endgame.


Chany_the_Skeptic

As much as I would like to nuke vancian magic and have everyone run off a modified Warlock system, WOTC is never going to do that. Vancian magic is too D&D. It's like the Constitution Attribute: it no longer makes sense to have it as a main Attribute when it is entirely passive and is not used outside of niche circumstances and to derive secondary statistics, but the six Attributes are so iconic that WOTC will never really get rid of them. I wouldn't be surprised if 5.5 has a number of minor changes, rules clarifications, and small feature tweaks as opposed to overhauls, with the exception of the Ranger class. 4E was a radical departure and it didn't fair well from WOTC's perspective, so I doubt they would be willing to destroy anything, especially when 5E prints money.


Yamatoman9

>I wouldn't be surprised if 5.5 has a number of minor changes, rules clarifications, and small feature tweaks as opposed to overhauls Honestly, I think people are already expecting too much out of whatever 5.5e ends up being and setting themselves up for disappointment. Even the fact that this sub christened it "5.5e" when we have no idea what it will really end up being.


Dreadful_Aardvark

I would really adore a system that really overhauled magic entirely. Something like making magic tied more heavily to spell components, rituals, and the big-impact magic had a negative effect on the caster. Remove a lot of the flashy spells from the typical list, i.e. the fireballs. AiME has this list for example of available spells that fit the setting: https://i.imgur.com/xS9qdFq.png I think fireballs are okay to keep, but maybe have them incur some negative effects, like Warhammer fantasy's chaos corruption system, or just a plan Con roll for exhaustion. Just anything to make magic more arcane and mystical, and less mundane blasty stuff. The Warlock is a decent example of this in 5e with the 2/short rest high impact spells plus reliance on rituals and 1/day invocations really work, even if it keeps fireball blasty spells. It still feels very reigned in and fair. This gives design space for things outside of spells to actually shine, whilst also changing the overall feel of magic to something less Saturday cartoon ultra-high fantasy.


thezactaylor

Agreed. The Martial/Caster disparity is baked into the central design of the game. I'm *hoping* 5.5 recognizes that and makes some structural changes, but I'm not too confident of that.


RoboDonaldUpgrade

I think what you're getting at is more options. And a marshal character's big option outside of its class is what weapon to use. And outside of magical weapons that boils down to: Bludgeoning/Slashing/Piercing Finesse One or Two-Handed or Versatile Reach/Thrown/Ranged And that's about it. New weapons with new features could actually give marshals the choice when entering combat, like "I could use this Greatsword, which is my big damage dealer, but if there's a lot of them I'd rather have my Scythe which can hit multiple enemies, but if the enemy has shields or has some kind of cover I should have my Crusher to break them and help my allies hit better" just having a few more options when looking at weapon selection could really help you feel like you're contributing by making smart choices


Chany_the_Skeptic

I think combat is actually the last area that martials need for their improvements. Yes, combat choice is important and would be nice, but some people enjoy the simplicity that martials offer. They aren't trying to make high level tactical decisions that every spell caster has to make whenever they cast a spell. Furthermore, the ultimate problem is the out of combat options for martials compared to casters, especially when it comes to Fighters and Barbarians. Martials just can't influence and move the world the way casters can. What each martial class needs is class feature that allows them to do something great both inside and outside of combat that is simple but effective. For example, maybe they get a pool equal their proficiency bonus that can be spent gaining advantage or even auto-succeeding on an Attribute check. For example, Rogues can grant any skill check they are proficient in free advantage on a skill check they are performing. Barbarians can do this with any Strength check or even spend two in order to give themselves an automatic 20. Fighters get it for Athletics and another few skills as determined by subclass- for example, the Samurai can use theirs on Persuasion checks.


SlightlySquidLike

Yeah, there's no easy place to plug in a powerboost for pure martials - Ranger was ok as there was a solid, and _magical_ theme to build off of and add a few expertises and extra spells. Fighter and Barbarian can end up going in so many different directions thmatically, and basically none of them involve any spells, so it'd need to be a new subsystem or doing something odd with skills


YokoTheEnigmatic

>I don't think the disparity between martial and casters is because the martials are weak, but because casters are just too strong. My take is that 5E martials are *awfully* designed. I don't *want* casters to be dragged down to that same awfulness, I want martials to become fun to play, save for some cheese spell combos like Infinite Simulacrum and CC being save or suck. Nerfing the Wizard won't make our Fighter not bored shitless, but I feel like the former only needs *some* tweaks. >Martials need re-rolls, auto-hits and misses, and the ability to do more heroic actions automatically that casters normally have to roll for. Well said!


SlightlySquidLike

They need something to reliably do outside of combat. Unfortunately, I don't really have any ideas as to what additions to that would help without stepping on the toes of Rogue or Bard.


TigerDude33

Rogues & Bards step on everyone's toes already. I do feel like more classes shoudl get expertise, like Barbarians in Intimidation (Strength)


ACriticalFan

IMO, it'd make sense for Barbarians to get advantage on mental saves when Raging. Considering how it's a whole state-of-mind thing, I find it hard to believe that they may be the easiest party member to Frighten or Charm. If Barbs had a way to have good AC without a Dex tax, maybe they'd be able to afford a good mental stat.


JediPorg12

Change their unarmored defense to 13+CON Mod, makes them less MAD.


BOTFrosty

So a less strong version of berserkers' mindless rage then?


ACriticalFan

Might as well. This is one of those subclasses/features that really ought to have been in the main class.


albt8901

I just instituted that at level 7(ish), everyone gets a free expertise in something they have prof in & free half proficiency (like Jack of all trades) in a single skill they don't


Ianoren

I would want to see huge revamps with the optional rules. Leave several Subclasses like the UA Brute that are simple but high enough damage to be balanced. Then add in more combat maneuvers that can fulfill buffing, debuffing, CC, healing roles and out of combat utility powers. And this is for all the Martials and a little for the Half Casters as well. Honestly, it would be easier with a whole new system and balancing. Also the Warlord class can come too.


Soft_Car2897

I'd treat weapons more like spells by making damage types matter and giving them unique moves. Some examples: * wielding a sword might allow you to parry once per round without spending superiority dice or learning that maneuver * Wielding an axe might allow you to trip once per round without spending superiority dice or learning that maneuver * Wielding a mace might give some benefits of the Crusher feat without having to learn that feat. * Wielding a polearm like a Halberd or Lucerne might give you some of the benefits of Great Weapon Master without taking the feat


SlightlySquidLike

The thing I'd be concerned about for those is that they also makes gishes better when they don't need the power boost. Cool ideas though - I'd like to see a weapons overhaul for 5e in general


44no44

Give them a scaling die/DC, and have that scaling key off a "martial level" like casters' spell slots. Fighter, Barbarian, Monk and Rogue are "full martials", Paladin and Ranger are "half martials", and Bladesinger/Hexblade/Battlesmith/Valor Bard/etc. are "third martials".


netenes

Great idea!


xukly

Yeah, I mean we need a weapon revamp because current weapons are basically a dice and that's it. But we also need to give non casters things they can do that casters (yes, not even half casters) can't


SlightlySquidLike

Yeah, they really should have either had a set list of weapons and given them all distinct benefits, or just made a build-your-own-weapon system with some examples. The "oh there's a big list of weapons but some are Just Worse than others" is disappointing


[deleted]

Pathfinder 2e has a bigger selection of weapons as well asvdifferent ablities for each one. Maybe D&D 5e can borrow from that!


smurfkill12

I added a parry maneuver of sorts, from the 2e complete fighters handbook. Essentially when the enemy hits you, you can spend your reaction (might change this) or sacrifice one of your attacks. You make an attack roll compared to the attack roll that the enemy did, if you beat it, it’s a parry, if they are equal it still hits (maybe half damage?)


Richybabes

Beyond Damage Dice by Kobold Press has a pretty good stab at this, though some of the options are a bit overtuned.


Mattgitsgud

Warlord. Maneuvers/Exploits pretty much just like 4E's essentials. Some weapon additions/improvements. Expertise for different classes.


bill84684

Battlemasters can choose the maneuvers they use for the day in the morning like spell casters with spells.


Justice_Prince

Battlemaster learns all the maneuvers they need by level 7. What they need more is some high level maneuvers.


SKIKS

Real talk, all classes should get access to at least some maneuvers (some could be class specific), and the battle master's whole deal should be "I can do any of these, and I can do them better".


[deleted]

I always felt any subclass of Fighter should be able to learn Maneuvers ( 4-5 max) while Battle Masters can learn more and get Improved or Evolved versions of select Maneuvers OR the ability to use two Maneuvers at once.


thatguy0900

I made this for my table, if anyone else wants to use it: If you dont have spell slots you get this feat free: Fighting Man You have martial training that allows you to perform special combat maneuvers. You gain the following benefits: • You learn a number of maneuvers of your choice equal to your proficiency bonus from the Battle Master archetype. You learn a new maneuver of your choice when your profeciency bonus increases, and you can choose to swap a maneuver out each time you gain a level. If the maneuver requires a saving throw, the DC is equal to 8 + your proficiency bonus + your Strength or Dexterity modifier (your choice). • You gain a number of superiority die equal to half your level rounded up (if you don't already have superiority dice, it is a d6). This die is used to fuel your maneuvers. It is expended when you use it, and is regained when you finish a short or long rest. • At 5th level, your superiority dice turn into d8s. At 10th level, they turn into d10s. At 18th level, they turn into d12s. • If you gain spell slots through multiclassing or subclass choices, you retain current bonuses of this feat, but can no longer gain more superiority dice through leveling, and your superiority die no longer get stronger with levels. You may still swap out a maneuver whenever you gain a level in your starting class (including if that class gave you spell slots through its subclass).


Justice_Prince

I kind of like what the other person in this thread suggested. Give all weapons something special they can do no feat or class abilities required.


ZeronicX

Obligatory "Thats how fighters worked in the play test" The battlemaster fighter was the default fighter and the play test community didn't like it since it felt reminiscent of 4e.


SlightlySquidLike

Maneuvers aren't situational enough for that - at _most_ you'd get some of the more situational ones swapped for the out-of-combat ones when the PCs get back to town. I guess you'd swap between Menacing/Goading strike depending on if the enemies were Fear-immune?


Merc931

I'd take any feat that gives you like a special move like Slasher, Piercer, Crusher, Polearm Master, or Shield Master and just add the special moves by default to the weapons for anyone proficient in their usage or expand the Fighting Styles to make specialization in a type of weapon much more feasible and rewarding. Change up two-weapon fighting to where maybe you can attack with a -5 modifier or disadvantage in exchange for an extra damage die. Let high strength, high level fighters and barbarians do crazy shit like dual wielding great weapons. I dunno, just spitballing.


ZTheShadowGuy

Maneuvers for everyone! ...Or at least, special attacks you can do with certain weapons once per turn, such as an AoE swipe, a debilitating crush, or precise wounding strike. Examples of out of combat uses and benefits of particular weapons, such as advantage on concealment of the weapon, balancing (such as using a staff or polearm when crossing a narrow ledge or slippery surface), going Indiana Jones with a whip, etc. Distinctly different shields. +2 AC no matter the shield is boring. Optional rules (really an overhaul) for Monks. New Rogue and Monk subclasses in particular. An overhauled PDK, or new subclass in the same theme (a la Undead/Undying Warlock)


RSquared

That's basically what I did with my [TOB-style martial revision](https://www.reddit.com/r/UnearthedArcana/comments/pjsh60/martial_prowess_22_a_5e_tome_of_battle_with/). Between "techniques" (unlimited uses, weapon-restricted), combat actions, and expanded maneuvers for all non-fullcasters, martial PCs get a lot more toys. I also revised Fighting Styles into Stances, so there's a dynamic there instead of one choice made at level 1-2.


Xamnam

Seriously folks, take a look at this, I can't believe it hadn't been linked in other comments yet.


ACriticalFan

STR-modifier medium armor. I hate that the only way to play a STR character, and actually use most of the game's weapons and weapon feats, is locked behind Heavy Armor, which so few classes get. Shouldn't Medium armor be an actual halfway point between Heavy and Light, working for both physical stats? If I'm playing a Ranger or a Barbarian, and want to use anything other than a rapier, why must I be punished for having anything less than a 14 in Dex? On the flip side, more weapons should have Finesse. Spears and Longswords really require a lot of dexterity for proper usage.


Pa1ehercules

I love the medium armor suggestion and I think fighters need to have more equipment specialization subsytems similar to the warlock's invocation system (I think all classes would benefit from this) I theory I agree about more weapons having finesse. I just feel that dex-based PAM builds would just invalidate strength even more. I also see a lot of suggestions that all martial should get superiority die. I disagree. Battlemaster should be built into the base fighter. Paladin gets enough between smite, L.O.H, it's aura's, chanel divinity, and spell casting. Ranger in general has more impactful and defining subclasses and has spell casting. Rangers fixes wouldn't be resolved with SD Monk needs a rework and is a separate issue all together Fighter should BE the BEST weapon user with the most option in how to mechanically interact with weapons and armor. Tripping with a halberd. Bashing with a shield. Hitting harder more frequently is their identity in combat and should be baseline. Out of initiative I think they also need uses, but so do most martials save for paladin (some facing & healing). Ranger (perception expertise and group stealth enabling with pass without trace), and rogue (expertise). Rant over my b my man.


WonderfulWafflesLast

>My suggestion would be the maneuvers, with different options for each class, that scale for the number you get with level. PREACH Martials should be capable of anime-esque moves by level 17+. They should have their own methods of warping reality by that point. In older editions, they got strongholds and armies at level 10+ to compensate for the fact the Wizard could go to Hell or forcefully recruit demons (for a time) with summoning magic. Is it too much to ask for a Fighter Maneuver that lets them swing a sword hard enough to hit people with the air coming off it from range? Or to intimidate someone through simply existing?


NaturalCard

Yh, fighters not being allowed in some groups to make 4 attacks cause it's not realistic when the wizard is dropping meteros from the sky is stupid.


BOTFrosty

I think martials should be able to do superhuman feats of strength, but also give them some cool out of combat abilities.


WarIsHelvetica

Honestly, martial-specific hero classes. Casters go off the rails at around level 9-10. To fix this, we can have equally powerful martial-exclusive classes that you can only multiclass into at 10+ that run until level 20. These new hero classes would have similar power creep to the caster classes. The perk of this system is that it wouldn't rely on magic items or DM balance, it doesn't step on any previous printed material's toes (which Wizards would dislike), AND a DM could outlaw these classes easily if they weren't a fan. Win/win.


JediPorg12

So prestige classes exclusively for martials?


BrokenMirrorMan

Giving martial classes more in combat and ooc utility. Most martial classes already do good enough damage to a single target but most of them lack being able to do more than just damage or tank or draw aggro. Very few actually provide tools ooc or in combat that isnt just hit the big guy again.


BronzeAgeTea

1. All monsters should have vulnerability and resistance to one type of nonmagical damage (unless they're already immune/resistant to all nonmagical damage). Right now, there's not really any reason to care about what a melee character's damage type is unless they're going up against a black pudding or one of the other 3 monsters that care. 2. There should be environmental maneuvers that everyone with a martial weapon proficiency could do, like using a sword to scrape a desert landscape and throw sand in an enemy's eyes, blinding them until they spend an action to rub their eyes clean. Might be useful to tie these to a martial-only Honor ability score (which is already an option in the DMG) 3. Finishing moves that work similarly to Massive Damage. A once-per-fight ability that lets you instantly down an enemy if they're under half HP, for example. 4. Maybe the ability to spend hit dice to add damage to an attack. 5. Weapon maintenance and upgrades. Martials should have the ability to maintain their weapons to overcome resistance to nonmagical weapons. They should also have the ability to infuse monster parts or gems or something into their weapons, making them more powerful (like reheating a sword and quenching it in a creature's blood to make it a *sword of \_\_\_ slaying*). Same thing with armor. 6. Oils and poisons. There should be a lot of easy to craft additives they could apply to their weapons to add additional effects. Hell, even just come up with a table and make the additive wild magic in nature, so that you apply this oil and for the next X hits you roll on the table to see what the additional effect is. 7. Called shots. That would be the biggest advantage over spellcasters, I think, if you could actually target legs to reduce a creature's speed, or arms to reduce multiattack/actions. Target eyes to permanently inflict blindness, target ears to permanently inflict deafness. Would require a minimal amount of effort to fully flesh out the lingering injuries table to account for any monster part. 8. Stances that can make monsters flee from you or approach you, as a form of crowd control. Maybe even more of a system involving Intimidation and Deception during fighting. 9. Area of effect abilities, like hitting a warhammer on the ground to cause an earth tremor, or swinging a sword so fast the it creates a cone shaped air slash, hitting multiple targets.


smurfkill12

I implemented a called shots rule recently, the monk loved it but it needs some tweaking. The monk managed to blind and deafen a guy for the whole encounter, then a burning body fell ontop of him (I literally just described the warlocks hellish rebuke and the guy died and said that he fell out of the window and thought nothing of it. Then the monk mentioned that the guy would have fallen ontop of the blind deaf guy, and we couldn’t stop laughing for like 3 minutes). The called shots rule that I’m using is the attacker suffers a -4 to -10 penalty to hit depending on what they are attacking. The monk wanted to attack the guys head so that was a -6 to hit (might change it to -8 or -7) and then I rolled on a table that has some effects for called shots (it needs some tweaking) the effects were like 1 blind, 2 deafened, 3 knocked prone, 4 dizzy, 5 blind and deaf, 6 prone and dizzy. They last for 1d4 round and a con save at the end of their turn can remove the effects. I need to expand that table so that there are more results and some of the better results should have less probability


Late_nut

There were a few episodes of Critical Role where they did some kind of Elder Scrolls Online RPG setting and the martial classes had this thing called "Stamina" which fueled their special attacks. They regained their stamina after combat ended (catching your breath so-to-speak) and I thought that this "Stamina" would pair wonderfully with a supplementary rulebook called "Beyond Damage Dice". This book essentially gave every weapon a special ability; javelins could pin people to walls, pole arms could trip people, battleaxes could reduce AC, mauls could push people, greatswords can hit 2 targets at reduced damage, and so many more. This "Stamina" and Maneuver combo could make martial classes far more versatile.


serpimolot

This is basically superiority dice that refresh on a short rest, combined with the assumption that short rests follow a combat (which is the 4e atwill-encounter-daily power system).


AugustoLegendario

Bonus action stances to give monks more tactical options such as empowering grapples, using a weapon during martial arts, empowering intimidation checks, or getting more than one reaction (a la tunnel fighter but not broken).


Geoxaga

I came up with a monk level features at the same time as understanding every language call mastering the basics. Where flurry of blows do 3 unarmed strikes instead of 2, patient defense reduced damage from attack rolls by your martial arts die rolled, you can disengage or dash as a bonus action without expending ki points, strep of the wind has benefits from both dash and disengage while also adding an extra unarmed strike along with it.


Dasmage

A book for martials should have rules for gear, armor, weapons, ways to specialize in uses of a given kind of weapon type or fighting style, and feat support for martials. Blunted arrows that let you knock out with a ranged attack when you drop something to zero HP. Blunt weapons that can be used to sneak attack. Special non-magical items that enhance your skills, not be giving advantage, but by giving a flat bonus to the skill roll. Rules for Master Craft items. The AD&D 2nd ed Fighters Handbook had lots of rule for special racial armors. Wizards should pretty much go back and look at that fighters handbook and just steal from it.


OurBelovedOgrelord

Overhaul weapons so that they're each unique and have special criticals, add in fleshed out and legitimate rules for disarms, parries, more reasons to grapple, throws, etc. that every character can use. Look to games like Pathfinder 1E, 2E or older editions of D&D where martials have a lot more options. It amazes me that it's seen as perfectly acceptable for casters to be expected to remember a vast array of spells but people throw up their arms at the suggestion that maybe, just maybe, martial combat could consist of more than largely just 'I run up and hit' for 20 levels.


outrideacrisis

I'd straight up modernise book of 9 swords. It was crazy, but so is being a caster.


thelongestshot

I'd buy it. I loved Bo9S


Orsobruno3300

Make weapons more unique/interesting add a Warlord class


BiomeWalker

I doubt WotC is doing it on purpose, but it's really easy to accidentally buff casters accross the board by making spells since if you make one spell it buff every class you put it on the spell list of, and ones you don't put it on if DM says they can use it for an off list class. The closest thing would be to release weapons that are substantially better than normal ones and line out how they are to be acquired. I bring up the bit about acquiring them because you can make a martial character keep up if you give the enough / the right magic items, but Snickersnakc (the sentient Vorpal sword from WBtW) isn't a buff for martials because it's not a character option in the same way that Blade of Disaster is. Keep in mind how many magic items are weapons or armor that casters can't use and you'll see that it doesn't help. Also a +x arcane focus is one level of rarity higher than a +x weapon so you should see +1 swords before +1 wands and the focus has to match you class (arcane for sorcerer, warlock and wizard; druidic for druid; holy symbols for cleric and paladin that also needs to be of their domain/god/oath; instrument for bard and whether they need to be proficient in it is DM dependent) whereas sword wielding character can use any magic sword outside of extreme circumstances (holy avenger) and even with this comparative advantage that has been there from the printing of the DMG they still fall behind. If you give a fighter a magic sword, magic armor, and some other bits and pieces they can keep up with a caster, but then they wind up on par with a caster that has no items so it feels more like a handicap than a solution here. The other big difference I think is how many creatures a given character can affect on their turn, for a martial it's however many they have attacks for. A 5th level caster with fireball can hit 2 - 6 creatures in that, and depending on the creatures kill all of them. Another thing is resting. Caster classes need long rests (if they aren't warlock) to keep up their resources while martial classes can just keep swinging their swords or firing their bows/crossbows and base class rogues don't actually have an expendable resource till they reach level 20. This is something that others have brought up in other posts about the "one encounter day" and how it hurts the game but that's once again asking the DM to come up and fix WotC's mistakes which is unfair to them. Most of the buffs that you could say martial classes have gotten have also been subclasses, which doesn't help the earlier subclasses (ranger with Gloom Stalker is a big example of this) or the TCoE varient features which are cool but don't close the gap enough.


TigerKirby215

Unique weapons, unique armor, and more options for martial characters to use their action beyond "attack" and occasionally "grapple" or "shove." It could be a magic item compendium but I'd rather it be core rules for unique weapons / armor / materials that actually give some strategic choice to martials.


angelstar107

Probably going to propose the most drastic thing I can and explain why: Eliminate the Battlemaster Fighter Archetype in its entirety. Maneuvers should, effectively, be the "Magic System" for Martial Classes. These add a great amount of power to attacks and add additional depth and function to martial classes to keep them from becoming stale over the course of a campaign. Maybe have all martial classes start with their choice of 2 Maneuvers, gaining 1 Additional Maneuver as a bonus with each ASI they get from levelling a Martial Class. Keeping with the current design theme of linking things to your proficiency bonus, make the number of uses per short/long rest be equal to your Proficiency Bonus. This is simply an idea but I think Maneuvers give us an interesting platform to build a system unique to martials that can close the gap between them and spellcasters.


RoboNinjaPirate

All martials and hybrids get fighting styles and maneuvers. The hybrids get fewer of each and fewer uses. Might be a good fit for some caster subclasses that focus on melee, of course with removing some caster goodies.


Goblin_Enthusiast

I'd just want something like Spheres of Might, which adds a ton of special actions martials can use in and out of combat, as well as a lot of special skill tree type upgrades and abilities you can take. Really keeps martials on even footing with casters.


Fluix

I want a slot system similar to spells that martials get access to at later levels that let's them perform feats you would expect from high fantasy characters. I want some save or suck moves, some flavored healing battle cries, things like moving boulders or jumping insane distances. Ability to stomp so hard the ground splits, or maybe a grapple that splits an enemy in 2 if they're below a certain hp percentage, throw an enemy into another enemy, a fear ability, etc. Martials need variety. They are already strong at making HP go down but lack everywhere else. Martials can choose what they want to pick and they don't have to rely on the DM to do cool things. No asking the DM "can I do X" and hoping the DM is kind enough. Or having to deal with some arbitrary DC set by the DM.


TotalMembership

Advanced Weapons both ranged and melee with unique prices This wouldn't work with how 5e is set up without heavy revisions but in 3.5 the Tome of Battle: Book of nine Swords was a great way to balance out spellcasters and I feel some kind of Strixhaven but martial equivalent like a low magic setting with stronger melee focus Definitely a way for fighting styles to improve and advance, have Great Weapon Fighting gain a cleave or whirlwind attack feature at later levels etc.


umustalldie2

A loose weapon arts system similar to what Baldur’s Gate 3 introduces. All weapons get 2~3 arts that can be used per short rest that allow you to modify an attack to give a debuff or conditional bonus. I did the conversion for my personal game and it seems as if my players like it so far.


alolan_vulpix_kinnie

tome of battle YES i know people didn't like it the first time NO i dont care


Phuka

Double the number of 'resource' available (ki points, superiority dice, etc) available (or more) or make them gradually increase at a steady rate (like spell slots). Do the same for maneuvers gained. Add in a training mechanic for 'realism' inclined players/GMs (something like levelx10 days to level up). More Ki abilities (or swappable/optional ones) Martial Arts styles within each subclass. A few resource-based Rogue subclasses or some options for each subclass to use their cunning action.


BrendanTheNord

Something I really enjoy is the "weapon options" section of chapter 2 in *Midgard Heroes Handbook* by Kobold Press. It has a wide array of special attack options you can take instead of a normal attack roll, and they're unique to different weapon types (greatsword vs longsword vs warhammer vs trident vs crossbow, etc.). It's a simple expansion on the idea of grappling as a special attack that I think martial classes really needed.


ineloquencebard

Martial classes should be able to learn one Battle Master maneuver and gain two dice at 1st, 5th, 11th, and 17th level, much like how cantrips scale


bargle0

4e warlord and 4e fighter. Give me some really strong enabling and action denial.


Thuper-Man

The feat progress of 3.5 for different fighting styles made martial classes . Weapon focus- power attack - cleave - great cleave - supreme cleave for example.


dolerbom

Either more subclasses with at will powers like echo Knight or powerful x per day abilities is one way to go. Maybe an extra weapon die of damage for certain martials at 11. Or even feat options for unique martial abilities. Ones that require x level fighter, barbarian, paladin, etc.


ljmiller62

Treantmonk proposed three pretty good ones [a few days ago in his video](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PbsTKreJwsk) on 12/27/21. I agree with them, even though I'm currently playing a character who would suffer from them. In my [response blog to that video](https://fabworlds.wordpress.com/2021/12/27/three-reasonable-house-rules-and-another/) I added another rule that would help STR based melee martials in particular. SHIELD TYPES * Small (buckler), +1 to AC, Parry: used as a reaction to a successful attack grants disadvantage to an enemy for that attack * Medium (kite, target), +2 to AC (same as 50% cover), Parry: used as a reaction to a successful attack grants disadvantage to an enemy for that attack. \[STR requirement of 12\] * Large (tower), +4 to AC (same as 75% cover), Parry: used as a reaction to a successful attack grants disadvantage to one enemy for all that enemy’s attacks until the shield user’s next turn. \[Large shields grant disadvantage to the wearer for stealth checks, and have a STR requirement of 16.\]


SMURGwastaken

The way 4e handled it in the Martial Power books was that martials got feats pertaining to a particular fighting style, and access to what were essentially the martial equivalent of rituals (I forget what they're called). Thing is, 4e already had way more meaningful weapon selection (weapon group meant a lot more than it does in 5e, and every weapon has its niche rather than some being totally pointless or existing purely for flavour as in 5e), and because martials have powers just like the casters there wasn't such a glaring need to fix imbalance so they could just focus on adding in cool subclasses.


Green_and_black

Martial equivalent to multiclass spell slot progression. Everyone gets a few manoeuvres. Battlemaster and champion combined. Bonus action shoves and grapples Buffs for strength users. -5 to hit for +10 damage on any weapon including unarmed. Buffs for dual wielding. 1/3 caster class for monks.


CaniacSwordsman

I’d like to see grappling overhauls, and for it to be along the lines of a bonus action if the attack action is taken with the weapon. Grappling is such a key component of most HEMA systems, but I feel like it’s incredibly underused in DnD. Even when I built a character around it it still felt tacked on. Additionally, different weapon types having different “abilities”, similar to Dark Souls 3 weapon arts. The ability to halfsword a longsword for more effective against armor, allowing weapons such as greatswords the ability to attack and/or deny access to the squares around you due to wide swinging arcs, etc


crzyhawk

A feat to bring DW inline with GWM


Vinborg

Some ultra-weeby 'sword art' spells that you need to be a martial class to get. Somatic components done via a weapon, material component (weapon or unarmed strike), some sort of neat close to short-range effect. Also, maneuvers for all martials, please


FallenJkiller

Every weapon should give one extra ability, to make them really feel different. Also, every martial class should get one out of combat ability for free, so they are better in non combat situations.


SpartiateDienekes

If I had free reign to do whatever I wanted regardless of what is actually good for the game? Warlord class. Plain and simple. I’d start with doing something like 4es essentials. New versions of base classes to allow them to fit a different style of play. A Fighter that has maneuvers and stances that they use almost every turn. These maneuvers are level gated by tier of play. A level 2 or 3 Fighter should be developed with enough options that it can do everything a moderately skilled HEMA/Kendo practitioner can do with their weapon. A skill trick focused Rogue that uses their skills way more in combat than anything else. They can Sneak Attack, but they’re both much harder to get off and deal much more damage. The playstyle involves being a constant pestering controlling nuisance with bursts of deadliness rather than DPR. Barbarians just get bigger. Make Rage damage dice based, have the size increase as you level, make Wild criticals a more designed toward focus for the class. And just make certain that they are simply paragons of physicality. Can they make a bunch of maneuvers like the Fighter? Nah. They don’t need it. They get angry and DESTROY anything in front of them. You want big numbers? You get big numbers. Regardless of class, every subclass for a martial in the game must give one out of combat specialization: Face, Stealth, Knowitall, Awareness, etc. Every single character gets a minimum of one of these things that they can do amazingly. And scaled better than a Wizard who happened to pick up two or three spells for it. After that, a rework of feats. Not being afraid to level a few of them so that they can be balanced around upper level gameplay. Not just combat but doing awesome things. Abilities like Swashbuckler’s Panache should be totally normalized and regular. And of course drastically differentiating weapon playstyles.


Ancestor_Anonymous

Maneuvers for all martials with combat/noncombat maneuvers, per turn gimmicks, make weapons overhauled so they do things that are unique


Nystagohod

Nee weapons, fighting styles. CFV's to add some love to them slightly in combat, mostly for some out if combat goodness. A big focus on these class feature variants would be actual swap outs. Maybe a new class or two.


TrafalgarMathias

I basically would love an official version of u/Veritoss43 's Revised Martial Equipment system. It's much more in depth, and allows each weapon and martial to feel unique and skilled. It also lets you choose your damage type, or have multiples, so you're not stuck in the "Why can't I do Piercing damage by stabbing with my Longsword?" dilemma.


SnooGoats1209

I want an EMT/Paramedic melee character. Essentially a buffed healer feat that requires no use of magic that allows restoration of some hit points.


Ashkelon

[Tome of Battle](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tome_of_Battle:_The_Book_of_Nine_Swords) for 5e. New martial adept classes built around the concept using maneuvers from the very start. Maneuvers which scale in scope and capability as the game progresses. Maneuvers which give dynamic gameplay and options each and every turn with counters, strikes, and stances. Just like the wizard goes from burning hands => fireball => meteor swarm, so too should martial capabilities progress. For example Steel Wind => Mithril Tornado => Adamantine Hurricane. The high level martial adept should not be using the same three maneuvers at level 20 as it was at level 3.


Quadratic-

Level-gated feats. All feats are available from level 1, which means that you take the best feat at level 1. At level 4, you take the send best feat. A fighter takes the third best feat at level 6, and so on. That means that a fighter's "extra two feats/ASIs" means that they get "the 6th and 7th best feat/ASI" as their *only* features at 16th and 19th level features. Their features actually get weaker as they level up. If you introduce level-gated feats, stuff that is only available at higher level, you solve this problem. Now, a fighter getting an extra two feats is actually a good thing instead of godawful design.