Weapon Groups and Feats (PEACH)

[PhoenixPhyre]

I like the idea from 4e that each type of weapon should be able to do different things. I don't want to overhaul the whole weapon system to make it happen. Thus, I'm thinking of the following (google doc):

NB: this replaces Polearm Master, Greatweapon Master, Sharpshooter, and Crossbow Expert.

Spoiler: Weapon Groups

Show

Group: Weapons
Axe: greataxe, battleaxe, war pick, halberd, handaxe
Bow: Longbow, shortbow
Crossbow: hand/heavy/light crossbow
Crushing: Greatclub, mace, flail, maul, morningstar, warhammer, light hammer
Polearm: Glaive, halberd, lance, pike, trident
Heavy Blade: Glaive, Greatsword, longsword, scimitar
Light Blade: Dagger, rapier, shortsword, sickle, scimitar, javelin
Staff: Quarterstaff, spear, glaive, halberd
Spear: Spear, javelin, lance, pike, trident
ProjectileThrown: Handaxe, javelin, light hammer, sling, dart, dagger
Exotic: Trident, whip, blowgun, net

Explanations:
*Blade == sword-like
** Light == stabby, heavy == slashy
*Axe == choppy
*Staff == can use haft as well as any sharpened bits.

Spoiler: Feats

Show

Blade Opportunist
You gain proficiency in either heavy blades or light blades. If you chose heavy blades, your Strength score increases by 1; if you chose light blades your Dexterity score increases by 1. Whenever you make an opportunity attack with a light or heavy blade, you have advantage on the attack roll. When you hit with an opportunity attack with a light or heavy blade, the damage dealt increases by an amount equal to your proficiency bonus.

Far Throw
Choose either Strength or Dexterity—your chosen score increases by 1. Both normal and far ranges of any Projectile weapon are doubled and you may draw any number of thrown weapons in conjunction with the action used to throw them.

Nimble Blade
Your Dexterity score increases by 1. When you hit with a light blade and roll less than half the maximum damage, you may reroll a number of damage dice equal to your proficiency modifier and take the second result.

Deadly Axe
Your Strength score increases by 1. Whenever you score a critical hit with an axe, roll the dice three times instead of twice.

Hammer Rhythm
Your Strength score increases by 1. When you miss with an attack using a crushing weapon, you deal bludgeoning damage equal to your Strength modifier to the target.

Heavy Blade Mastery
Your Strength score increases by 1. When you hit with an attack using a heavy blade and deal less than half of the maximum damage (before applying resistance or immunity), you instead deal half the maximum damage (before applying resistance or immunity).

Polearm Gamble
Your Strength score increases by 1. When an enemy enters your reach, you can use your reaction to make an attack against them. If you do, you have advantage on this attack but that enemy has advantage on its next attack against you until the end of its next turn.

Spear Push
Your Strength score increases by 1. Once per turn when you hit an enemy with a spear you can take the Shove (push) action against them without spending an action and without the size restrictions. The range of the push increases to 10 feet.

Deep Gash
Your Strength score increases by 1. Once per turn when you hit with an axe or heavy blade, the target must make a CON save against a DC of 8 + your Strength modifier + Proficiency. On a failed save they take additional damage equal half the damage dealt by the triggering attack at the beginning of their next turn.

Balanced Blades
Your Dexterity score increases by 1. You can use two weapon fighting with a rapier and a dagger. If you do, you gain +2 AC and opportunity attacks against you are at disadvantage.

Staff Momentum
Your Strength score increases by 1. Once per turn when you hit an enemy with a staff you can take the Shove (prone) action against them without spending an action and without the normal size restrictions. The target has disadvantage on the opposed ability check to resist this action.

Street Thug
Your Dexterity score increases by 1. One-handed crushing weapons count as finesse weapons for you and you can apply sneak attack damage to attacks made with them.

Kneecapping Strike
Your Strength score increases by 1. Once per turn when you hit with a crushing weapon, you can force the target to make a Constitution save against a DC of 8 + your Strength modifier + Proficiency. On a failed save the target’s movement speed is reduced by 10 feet until the end of your next turn.

Hobbling Shot
Your Dexterity score increases by 1. Once per turn when you hit with a bow, you can force the target to make a Constitution save against a DC of 8 + your Dexterity modifier + Proficiency. On a failed save the target takes 1 damage for every 5 feet they move until the end of their next turn.

Crossbow Expert
Your Dexterity score increases by 1. You ignore the loading property of crossbows. Once per turn when you attack with a crossbow, the bolt continues past the target. Make an attack roll against the first enemy on the 5-foot-wide line between you and your target extending out to the range of the weapon. They have half cover on this attack. If you hit with your first attack, this second attack deals half damage; otherwise it deals normal damage.

Sharpshooter
Your Dexterity Score increases by 1. You are no longer at disadvantage on attacks up to the far range of your bow or crossbow or against prone targets. Cover is reduced by one step--total cover to ¾ cover, ¾ cover to half-cover, and half cover to no cover when you use a bow or crossbow.

Close-Quarters Shooting
Your Dexterity Score increases by 1. You are no longer at disadvantage when making ranged weapon attacks when an enemy is within 5 feet of you. When you hit a target within 10 feet of you with a ranged weapon attack from a bow or crossbow you can Disengage as a bonus action.

Exotic Weapon Master
Choose either Strength or Dexterity—your chosen score increases by 1. Once per turn you gain advantage on both attack roll and damage done when using an exotic weapon. Attacks using nets deal 1d4 damage and no longer have disadvantage on attacks made with an enemy within 5 feet.

Edit: changed some of the groupings, removed the now defunct Spear feat.

[Requilac]

I like the idea of weapons groups, but in truth I am confused by some of your choices. Your list seems kind of strange and oddly worded with an unnecessary amount of inconsistencies. Here is the list of all the odd things I found.
1) why is a halberd an axe instead of a pole-arm?
2) is it really necessary to seperate bows from crossbows?
3) why is the trident a pole-arm instead of a spear?
4) how exactly are scimitars heavy blades instead of light blades?
5) why is the halberd not a heavy blade if the glaive is?
6) if the spear and the glaive are staffs then why aren’t tridents, halberds and pikes too?
7) why is the hand-axe a projectile weapon instead of an axe?
8) what exactly is the projectile weapon group for? It seems to consist of half the thrown weapons and a couple of randomly placed ranged weapons. I think you might need flesh that category out more.
9) why isn’t the light hammer a crushing weapon?

Is it really necessary to have so many groups anyway? You could majorly shorten the list into more broad categories. And why are some weapons in multiple categories too? Would it not be better to use something like this?
Swords: dagger (close enough), great-sword, long-sword, rapier, scimitar, short-sword
Axes: hand-axe, battle-axe, Great-axe
Bludgeoning: club, great-club, light hammer, mace, flail, maul, morning star, war-hammer,
Pole-arms: quarterstaff (close enough), spear, glaive, halberd, lance (possibly exotic instead), pike, trident
Bows: light crossbow, short bow, hand crossbow, heavy crossbow, longbow
Projectile: javelins (possibly pole-arms instead), dart, sling, blowgun
Exotic: sickle (possibly sword or axe instead), war pick (possibly axe instead), whip, net

I do like the feats you have created though, I just think that there are an unnecessary amount of them. Could you not simply make one feat for each weapon group to keep it simplified? The system you have set up seems complicated and confusing and it is almost as strange as the current 5e weapon’s list. Sorry if I seem too aggressive, I do like this idea that you have created, It is just a little confusing to me. Thank you for coming up with this idea!

[PhoenixPhyre]

General notes:

The weapon groups were simplified from 4e's groupings (which had maces, flails, and hammers all as separate groups).

I wanted to have focused half-feats, not bigger full feats as I don't want to replicate the current "must-have" nature of some of the martial feats. It's more of a pick-and-choose/opportunity-cost idea than a "you get these list of effects that have little to do with each other."

Weapons can be in multiple groups, in which case they work for any feat calling for any of their groups.

Specific responses:

1) It's both. Halberds are choppy pole-arms.
2) Yes. There are feats that conceptually don't work with one type that work with the other and some that work with any.
3) It should be both as well as exotic...If I goofed, I'll add it.
4) Thinking about it, they should be either light (sabre) or heavy (falchion).
5) I'm trying to distinguish slashy blades (glaves) from choppy blades (halberds).
6) The key distinction for me was "does it make sense to use the haft in addition to the blade-end?" Personal call there. Halberds and pikes just felt too long, tridents too awkward.
7) I rarely see them used as melee weapons, so the heavy chopping part got lost there. I could go either way.
8) Yeah, that's fair. I needed some place for the thrown weapons and those that behave like them. Blowgun should come out, and they should ignore loading on slings.
9) See #7, but with crushing instead of chopping.

Spoiler: Requilac

Show

I like the idea of weapons groups, but in truth I am confused by some of your choices. Your list seems kind of strange and oddly worded with an unnecessary amount of inconsistencies. Here is the list of all the odd things I found.
1) why is a halberd an axe instead of a pole-arm?
2) is it really necessary to seperate bows from crossbows?
3) why is the trident a pole-arm instead of a spear?
4) how exactly are scimitars heavy blades instead of light blades?
5) why is the halberd not a heavy blade if the glaive is?
6) if the spear and the glaive are staffs then why aren’t tridents, halberds and pikes too?
7) why is the hand-axe a projectile weapon instead of an axe?
8) what exactly is the projectile weapon group for? It seems to consist of half the thrown weapons and a couple of randomly placed ranged weapons. I think you might need flesh that category out more.
9) why isn’t the light hammer a crushing weapon?

Is it really necessary to have so many groups anyway? You could majorly shorten the list into more broad categories. And why are some weapons in multiple categories too? Would it not be better to use something like this?
Swords: dagger (close enough), great-sword, long-sword, rapier, scimitar, short-sword
Axes: hand-axe, battle-axe, Great-axe
Bludgeoning: club, great-club, light hammer, mace, flail, maul, morning star, war-hammer,
Pole-arms: quarterstaff (close enough), spear, glaive, halberd, lance (possibly exotic instead), pike, trident
Bows: light crossbow, short bow, hand crossbow, heavy crossbow, longbow
Projectile: javelins (possibly pole-arms instead), dart, sling, blowgun
Exotic: sickle (possibly sword or axe instead), war pick (possibly axe instead), whip, net

I do like the feats you have created though, I just think that there are an unnecessary amount of them. Could you not simply make one feat for each weapon group to keep it simplified? The system you have set up seems complicated and confusing and it is almost as strange as the current 5e weapon’s list. Sorry if I seem too aggressive, I do like this idea that you have created, It is just a little confusing to me. Thank you for coming up with this idea!

[Requilac]

General notes:

The weapon groups were simplified from 4e's groupings (which had maces, flails, and hammers all as separate groups).

Just for reference, I have never played 4e.

I wanted to have focused half-feats, not bigger full feats as I don't want to replicate the current "must-have" nature of some of the martial feats. It's more of a pick-and-choose/opportunity-cost idea than a "you get these list of effects that have little to do with each other."

Weapons can be in multiple groups, in which case they work for any feat calling for any of their groups.

I suppose that is fair, but still, are so many groups necessary? We do not need 11, we could just as easily have 7 or 8. I understand if you want to seperate bows and crossbows, but I do not quite see the point behind making a staff group, separating the heavy and light blades, and having a “spear” category which seems way too similar to pole-arms? To me, it seems like the difference between “pole-arm, spear, and staff” are incredibly trivial and needlessly makes things more complex. And to add on, can you better define “blade” in the context of heavy and light blades? Almost all of these weapons have blades so I do not quite know what your definition of blade is. Each of the categories I have named don’t seem well defined to me. Could you perhaps put an explanation of each in too so I can understand were you are coming from, because I can’t fathom what the differences are when it comes to D&D mechanics.

Specific responses:

1) It's both. Halberds are choppy pole-arms.
2) Yes. There are feats that conceptually don't work with one type that work with the other and some that work with any.
3) It should be both as well as exotic...If I goofed, I'll add it.
4) Thinking about it, they should be either light (sabre) or heavy (falchion).
5) I'm trying to distinguish slashy blades (glaves) from choppy blades (halberds).
6) The key distinction for me was "does it make sense to use the haft in addition to the blade-end?" Personal call there. Halberds and pikes just felt too long, tridents too awkward.
7) I rarely see them used as melee weapons, so the heavy chopping part got lost there. I could go either way.
8) Yeah, that's fair. I needed some place for the thrown weapons and those that behave like them. Blowgun should come out, and they should ignore loading on slings.
9) See #7, but with crushing instead of chopping.

1) halberds may have a choppy axe-bit, but they behave absolutely noting like other axes. It is an entirely different motion that is required, and it feels weird to lump them together. Just because they have an axe like part does not mean they would behave the same a battle axe or hand axe
2) Okay then, that is fair. I will concede to that
3) It was an exotic weapon before, but not a spear. I see that you fixed it though so nevermind.
4) while real life scimitars can be either, D&D 5e scimitars have “light” in the name and only weigh 3 pounds. There is not a “falchion” like weapon in D&D, just the lighter kind of scimitar. Unless you homebrew a new weapon than there is no possible way the scimitar could be “heavy”.
5) so, are the choppy blades in the “axe” category and the slashy blades in the “blade” category? I think so, but to me I still do not think “blade” is clearly defined. I find it highly confusing when a weapon that has a blade and is nearly identical to another heavy blade is not a “blade” weapon but an axe. You should probably rename those categories if that is the case
6) Why would any of those shafts be any more awkward to use than the ones presented? Pikes make sense as they are too long, but I do not see how the shaft end of a halberd is any different than the shaft end of a glaive nor do I understand why you could perfectly use the shaft of a spear but not the shaft of a trident. Perhaps I am just a title ignorant on medieval weaponry but I never saw an extremely massive difference between the weapons I distinguished.
7) yes they can be thrown, but it literally has axe in the name. How exactly is weapons that is not an axe (the war pick) an axe but an axe is somehow not an axe? It even has the choppy bit that appears to be the pre-requisite for your axe category. Why can’t the hand-axe be both?
8) so are projectile weapons the melee weapons you typically throw? Wouldn’t it be m easier to just name that category “thrown” weapons. To me projectile is kind of misleading, as a bow is a projectile wepaon group too.
9) so what if the light hammer is thrown? It crushes things like a crushing wepaon does. Why exactly is a weapon that’s prime purpose is to crush things not in the crushing category.



It appears that my main cofusion is with the names of your groups. It seems like When you say axe you do not actually mean the weapons, but you mean the make of the blade. Somehow an hand-axe is not not an axe, despite having axe in the name. Somehow weapons with blades are not in the blade category, as by blade you mean a slashing shape not an actual blade. Weapons which weigh 3 pounds can be defined as heavy. Things which can just as easily used as staffs as other weapons are not in the staff category. Weapons which are meant to crush things are not in the crushing category. Weapons which have projectiles are not in the projectile category. You really need to either rename your categories or better define them, because this seems extremely strange to me and endlessly confusing.

[PhoenixPhyre]

I suppose that is fair, but still, are so many groups necessary? We do not need 11, we could just as easily have 7 or 8. I understand if you want to seperate bows and crossbows, but I do not quite see the point behind making a staff group, separating the heavy and light blades, and having a “spear” category which seems way too similar to pole-arms? To me, it seems like the difference between “pole-arm, spear, and staff” are incredibly trivial and needlessly makes things more complex. And to add on, can you better define “blade” in the context of heavy and light blades? Almost all of these weapons have blades so I do not quite know what your definition of blade is. Each of the categories I have named don’t seem well defined to me. Could you perhaps put an explanation of each in too so I can understand were you are coming from, because I can’t fathom what the differences are when it comes to D&D mechanics.

I'll probably remove spears entirely as a separate group. I was going for long + stabby, but I don't think it's conceptually distinct enough. Staffs are mainly there because I don't like calling a quarterstaff a polearm. Just feels wrong to me. Blades vs axes are defined below.

1) halberds may have a choppy axe-bit, but they behave absolutely noting like other axes. It is an entirely different motion that is required, and it feels weird to lump them together. Just because they have an axe like part does not mean they would behave the same a battle axe or hand axe

As I understand it, there were two major modes of use for a halberd--poking like a (short) pike or chopping like a poll-axe. That, and to differentiate halberds from glaives (which I picture as more slashing/draw cut). It's also how they were classified in 4e, where I took most of this from.

4) while real life scimitars can be either, D&D 5e scimitars have “light” in the name and only weigh 3 pounds. There is not a “falchion” like weapon in D&D, just the lighter kind of scimitar. Unless you homebrew a new weapon than there is no possible way the scimitar could be “heavy”.

The name comes from 4e, where scimitars (at 4 lbs) were a heavy blade. I also wanted to differentiate them from shortswords. Heavy blades tend to be slashy-types, light blades more stabby types.

5) so, are the choppy blades in the “axe” category and the slashy blades in the “blade” category? I think so, but to me I still do not think “blade” is clearly defined. I find it highly confusing when a weapon that has a blade and is nearly identical to another heavy blade is not a “blade” weapon but an axe. You should probably rename those categories if that is the case

As above, I took the names and most of the groupings from 4e. Blade == sword-like object. I could change the names, but I'm horrible with names. Suggestions are welcome.

6) Why would any of those shafts be any more awkward to use than the ones presented? Pikes make sense as they are too long, but I do not see how the shaft end of a halberd is any different than the shaft end of a glaive nor do I understand why you could perfectly use the shaft of a spear but not the shaft of a trident. Perhaps I am just a title ignorant on medieval weaponry but I never saw an extremely massive difference between the weapons I distinguished.

This was entirely based on gut instinct. I see halberds as being slightly longer and less balanced for such things compared to glaives and tridents as being shorter and awkwardly balanced. Entirely subjective here, and I'm not too firmly attached to the groupings.

7) yes they can be thrown, but it literally has axe in the name. How exactly is weapons that is not an axe (the war pick) an axe but an axe is somehow not an axe? It even has the choppy bit that appears to be the pre-requisite for your axe category. Why can’t the hand-axe be both?
9) so what if the light hammer is thrown? It crushes things like a crushing wepaon does. Why exactly is a weapon that’s prime purpose is to crush things not in the crushing category.

These are all good points. I'll change those.

8) so are projectile weapons the melee weapons you typically throw? Wouldn’t it be m easier to just name that category “thrown” weapons. To me projectile is kind of misleading, as a bow is a projectile wepaon group too.

Plus things like slings where the action is throwing-like (as opposed to using tension in a bow/crossbow).

Does that clarify things a bit?

Axe == choppy,
Blade == sword-like (drawing cuts, slashing, or stabbing)

[Requilac]

I'll probably remove spears entirely as a separate group. I was going for long + stabby, but I don't think it's conceptually distinct enough. Staffs are mainly there because I don't like calling a quarterstaff a polearm. Just feels wrong to me. Blades vs axes are defined below.

Instead of making a staff category, why don’t you just make some of the feats specify that they work with staves? That way you can shorten down on the categories without the need to call a staff a pole-arm. Your spear group is definitely not that different from your pole-arm group, so that is definitely a good idea to remove that category. If you follow both methods detailed above than you have already lowered the numbers from 11 to nine, thus making the list much more manageable.

As I understand it, there were two major modes of use for a halberd--poking like a (short) pike or chopping like a poll-axe. That, and to differentiate halberds from glaives (which I picture as more slashing/draw cut). It's also how they were classified in 4e, where I took most of this from.

The difference I see between a halberd and an axe is the hand motions and technique you attack with. Sure both the axe and the halberd are chopping motions (like how a glaive and a sword both do a slashing motion) but the away you move your hands to use them are much different. I think the main difference is that the halberd requires a much different technique than using an axe (even though it has an axe bit), so it is kind of weird they are in the same category.

The name comes from 4e, where scimitars (at 4 lbs) were a heavy blade. I also wanted to differentiate them from shortswords. Heavy blades tend to be slashy-types, light blades more stabby types.

So the difference is that light blades stab while heavy blades slash? Why did you not just call them “slashing” blades and “stabbing” blades instead then?

As above, I took the names and most of the groupings from 4e. Blade == sword-like object. I could change the names, but I'm horrible with names. Suggestions are welcome.

I would base the names off of the motions of the weapons, like you did with “crushing” weapons.

•Axes turn into “chopping blades”
•I would change crushing into “bludgeoning” just to make the association more clear but it is not my main concern
•heavy blades turn into “slashing blades” (you should probably put sickles into this category instead of light blades if you do though)
•light blades turn into “stabbing blades” (scimitars probably could not be included in this category anymore though than)
•staves do not even need to be their own group, just state that some of the feats work with quarterstaffs
•Spears should just get rolled into the pole-arm category
•projectile weapons should turn into “thrown” weapons
•bows, crossbows and pole-arms are fine

This was entirely based on gut instinct. I see halberds as being slightly longer and less balanced for such things compared to glaives and tridents as being shorter and awkwardly balanced. Entirely subjective here, and I'm not too firmly attached to the groupings.

I am pretty sure halberds are typically longer than Glaives (though I am no expert on the matter) but I also believe that either would be much too unbalanced to use as a staff effectively so if we are suspending belief for one we might as well do it for the other. The thing about D&D spears though is that saying “spear” is an incredibly broad grouping of weapons that could describe anything from 10 foot pikes to 2.5 foot iklwas. Some spears would be much shorter than a trident, others would be significantly longer. I highly doubt that tridents are too short to be used as quarterstaffs though.

Plus things like slings where the action is throwing-like (as opposed to using tension in a bow/crossbow).

If that is what you mean than shouldn’t every thrown weapon be included? Spears, tridents, blowguns and nets are missing from the list then if that is your intention.

Axe == choppy,
Blade == sword-like (drawing cuts, slashing, or stabbing)

Yes I understand that now.

[PhoenixPhyre]

I'm going for a more gamist view than a historical/scientific one. I'm not too concerned about how they were used in reality, I'm concerned about making a useful game distinction between too-similar weapons.

Instead of making a staff category, why don’t you just make some of the feats specify that they work with staves? That way you can shorten down on the categories without the need to call a staff a pole-arm. Your spear group is definitely not that different from your pole-arm group, so that is definitely a good idea to remove that category. If you follow both methods detailed above than you have already lowered the numbers from 11 to nine, thus making the list much more manageable.

That's doable, I guess. I don't particularly like specifying weapons in feats (as that's part of what I was trying to avoid), but...

The difference I see between a halberd and an axe is the hand motions and technique you attack with. Sure both the axe and the halberd are chopping motions (like how a glaive and a sword both do a slashing motion) but the away you move your hands to use them are much different. I think the main difference is that the halberd requires a much different technique than using an axe (even though it has an axe bit), so it is kind of weird they are in the same category.

I have very little concern for "realism" here in motions. Chop vs slash is a fine enough distinction for me, personally.

So the difference is that light blades stab while heavy blades slash? Why did you not just call them “slashing” blades and “stabbing” blades instead then?

Tradition, mostly. And both can do both, it's just the dominant use that matters here, personally.

I would base the names off of the motions of the weapons, like you did with “crushing” weapons.

•Axes turn into “chopping blades”
•I would change crushing into “bludgeoning” just to make the association more clear but it is not my main concern
•heavy blades turn into “slashing blades” (you should probably put sickles into this category instead of light blades if you do though)
•light blades turn into “stabbing blades” (scimitars probably could not be included in this category anymore though than)
•staves do not even need to be their own group, just state that some of the feats work with quarterstaffs
•Spears should just get rolled into the pole-arm category
•projectile weapons should turn into “thrown” weapons
•bows, crossbows and pole-arms are fine

I don't like the repetition of "blade." It may just be background habits, but I associate "blades" with swords more than anything. I intellectually know that axes have blades, but I don't think of them as being blades. I've removed the spears category as a separate thing. It also feels wrong to lump sickles in with greatswords. Dunno why, but...

I'll have to think about the names some more.

I am pretty sure halberds are typically longer than Glaives (though I am no expert on the matter) but I also believe that either would be much too unbalanced to use as a staff effectively so if we are suspending belief for one we might as well do it for the other. The thing about D&D spears though is that saying “spear” is an incredibly broad grouping of weapons that could describe anything from 10 foot pikes to 2.5 foot iklwas. Some spears would be much shorter than a trident, others would be significantly longer. I highly doubt that tridents are too short to be used as quarterstaffs though.

Again, that's my subjective feeling. These aren't hard, realistic categories, they're an attempt at differentiating the all-too-similar weapons. I'll probably ditch the staff category entirely, adding quarterstaffs into crushing weapons and adding them where appropriate as a specific exception.

If that is what you mean than shouldn’t every thrown weapon be included? Spears, tridents, blowguns and nets are missing from the list then if that is your intention.

The dominant reason for lumping these together is to combine all the usually-thrown weapons that lack any kind of support together. The big thing they all lack is that you can't throw very many in a turn (due to object interaction effects). Throwing multiple tridents or nets in a turn (let alone carrying them effectively) just strains my disbelief a bit. I can see someone throwing lots of daggers or javelins, but tridents? Again, subjective, not scientifically rigorous.

[Requilac]

I'm going for a more gamist view than a historical/scientific one. I'm not too concerned about how they were used in reality, I'm concerned about making a useful game distinction between too-similar weapons.

I prefer a gamist perspective over a realistic perception in D&D too but the system you have made is heavily reliant on historical aspects so I feel it is necessary to bring them up.

That's doable, I guess. I don't particularly like specifying weapons in feats (as that's part of what I was trying to avoid), but...

I am simpy afraid that the amount of groups may become a little overwhelming, but if you think that is better solution than it is fine. That is definitely a rather strange group to add on though keep in mind, and I do not see any reason why it can’t be a pole-arm, but if you are intent I suppose it is fine.

I have very little concern for "realism" here in motions. Chop vs slash is a fine enough distinction for me, personally.

I would be fine putting it in there if the group was called something like “chopping” weapons but i personally find the category of “axe” misleading. Now that I know what you mean by axe, I am fine with it being there but I am stating that people would not intuitively know that axe=chopping weapons.

Tradition, mostly. And both can do both, it's just the dominant use that matters here, personally.

If you wanted to keep the tradition you could always just put the motion in parantheses. Called them axes (chopping), heavy blades (slashing) and light blades (stabbing) or something. Like that

I don't like the repetition of "blade." It may just be background habits, but I associate "blades" with swords more than anything. I intellectually know that axes have blades, but I don't think of them as being blades. I've removed the spears category as a separate thing. It also feels wrong to lump sickles in with greatswords. Dunno why, but...

If you do not like the word blade you can use the suggestion I stated in the previous paragraph. I can imagine why you would find putting sickles in with great swords strange though, but it is just that if your mentality is really heavy=slashing and light=stabbing than sickles would be heavy.

Again, that's my subjective feeling. These aren't hard, realistic categories, they're an attempt at differentiating the all-too-similar weapons. I'll probably ditch the staff category entirely, adding quarterstaffs into crushing weapons and adding them where appropriate as a specific exception.

I still do not understand your issue with making staffs pole-arms. Many of the same feats that would apply to pole-arms make a lot of sense for staffs too. But putting them In with crushing is fine.

The dominant reason for lumping these together is to combine all the usually-thrown weapons that lack any kind of support together. The big thing they all lack is that you can't throw very many in a turn (due to object interaction effects). Throwing multiple tridents or nets in a turn (let alone carrying them effectively) just strains my disbelief a bit. I can see someone throwing lots of daggers or javelins, but tridents? Again, subjective, not scientifically rigorous.

Fair enough, there are several feats that work with spears and tridents anyway do they do not need any extras. Your case about the nets are fair too. I do not understand why blowguns are exempted from the list though.