More Interesting Weapons for 5e (PEACH)

[Grod_The_Giant]

Weapons in 5e are, I think we can (mostly) agree, are a bit...lacking. Despite the length of the list, options are redundant: A battleaxe and longsword are identical weapons apart from weight, there's no reason to ever use a flail in place of a warhammer, and so on. There's a pretense at differentiating similar weapons, but the difference is never more than skin deep. It seems to me that the game should be pushed in one of two directions: either give up on the weapon table altogether and just say that a martial weapon has such stats regardless of form, or bring a little bit more complexity to things and make different weapons actually different.

Three guesses as to which I went with.

-----------------------

Weapons come in all shapes and sizes. Every culture has their own spin on classics like "swords' and "axes." That said, there are certain commonalities:

Size
All weapons fall into one of three size categories: Light, Medium, or Heavy. Each size has its own special features:

• Light Weapons are small and easy to handle. So easy to handle that they only require Simple Weapon proficiency, and so light that they can be used for two-weapon fighting, or thrown. You can use a Light Melee Weapon to make a ranged weapon attack, with a normal range of 20ft and a maximum range of 60ft.
• Medium Weapons are versatile, capable of filling many roles. Medium Melee Weapons normally only require one hand to wield, but you may use both hands to gain a +2 bonus to damage rolls. Medium Ranged Weapons always requite two hands to wield, but their comparative ease of handling allows anyone with Simple Weapon proficiency to use one, and while wielding one you may ignore partial cover.
• Heavy Weapons are large, ponderous, and deadly. They require both hands to wield effectively, and Small-sized characters have disadvantage on attack rolls when attempting to swing one. However, their weight gives them options: when wielding a Heavy Melee Weapon you are proficient in, you may add your Proficiency Bonus to either the attack roll or the damage roll.

Weapon Stats by Size

	Light	Medium	Heavy
Melee	1d4	1d6	1d10
Ranged	1d4, 30ft/90ft	1d6, 80ft/320ft	1d8, 150ft/600ft

Type
There are, broadly speaking, seven different types of weapons, each with its own quirk.

• Axes are particularly devastating against unarmored foes. When attacking a creature with no armor or natural armor, they deal one additional die of weapon damage. This extra die is not doubled by critical hits. Axes deal slashing damage.
• Bows are quick in the hands of an expert. They possess the Ammunition property. Bows deal piercing damage.
• Crossbows are slow but powerful. They possess the Loading property, but if you roll less than the average value on their damage die, you may round up to the average. For example, if you're wielding a Light Crossbow with a damage die of 1d6 and you roll a 2, you would round that up to 3. Crossbows deal piercing damage.
• Dueling Blades are light and fast. They possess the Finesse property, allowing them to use either your Strength or Dexterity to attack. Dueling blades may deal either piercing or slashing damage, depending on their design.
• Maces are clumsy, but absolutely brutal when they hit. You suffer a -2 penalty to attack rolls with maces, but may roll one additional damage die when you hit. Maces deal bludgeoning damage.
• Polearms are long, allowing you to strike distant targets. They possess the Reach property. Polearms may deal any type of damage, depending on their design.
• Swords are keen and deadly. You gain a +1 bonus to attack rolls when wielding a sword. Swords may deal either piercing or slashing damage, depending on their design.

Weapons
Any given weapon has a Size, a Type, and a set damage type. Beyond that, you may give them any name you wish. The following combinations are the most common types, but you should feel free to re-flavor weapons as you see fit--even changing the damage type, if your DM allows.

	Light	Medium	Heavy
Axes	Handaxe	Battleaxe	Greataxe
Bows	Sling	Shortbow	Longbow
Crossbows	Hand Crossbow	Light Crossbow	Heavy Crossbow, Arbalest
Dueling Blades	Dagger	Rapier, Scimitar	Estoc
Maces	Club, Light Hammer, Sap	Morningstar, Warhammer	Maul
Polearms	Javelin, Pilum	Spear, Trident	Pike, Glaive, Halberd
Swords	Shortsword	Longsword, Katana	Greatsword

Special Cases
There are also a few unique weapons that don't easily fall into the above paradigm:

• Blowgun: A blowgun is an assassin's tool. As an action, you may make a ranged weapon attack against a creature within 25ft, adding your proficiency bonus. If you hit, they take no damage but must make a DC 10 Insight check to notice that they've been struck. Despite causing no hit point loss, the wound is sufficient to deliver poison.
• Darts are Light Melee Weapon with the Ammunition property, dealing 1d4 piercing damage. They have twice the range of a normal Light Weapon when thrown; however, their light design means melee attacks made with them are are disadvantage.
• Flails are Medium Melee Weapons, dealing 1d6 bludgeoning damage. When wielding a flail, you have Advantage on attempts to disarm a foe or Shove them prone.
• Lances are Heavy Melee Weapons with the Reach property, dealing 1d12 piercing damage. You have disadvantage when attacking adjacent foes with a lance; however, when mounted, you may wield a lance with only one hand.
• Net: As an action, you may make a melee weapon attack against a Large or smaller creature within 5ft. If you hit, they are restrained until freed. A net has no effect on creatures that are formless, or creatures that are Huge or larger. A creature can use its action to make a DC 10 Strength check, freeing itself or another creature within its reach on a success. Dealing 5 slashing damage to the net (AC 10) also frees the creature without harming it, ending the effect and destroying the net.
• Quaterstaffs are a Medium Melee Weapon, dealing 1d4 bludgeoning damage. They are Simple Weapons, and may be used as Arcane Focuses

Weapon Feats
Finally, each Type of weapon has its own unique feat, granting unique abilities to those who devote themselves to a single instrument of death.

Arcane Warstaff
When wielding a Quaterstaff, you may use a bonus action to charge it with magical energy, granting the following benefits:

• If you take the Attack action before the end of your turn, your first melee weapon attack uses your Intelligence, Wisdom, or Charisma (your choice when choosing this feat) in place of Strength.
• If you cast a spell requiring a melee spell attack before the end of your turn, it does an additional 1d4 bludgeoning damage (or 1d4+2 if wielding the staff in two hands).

Blade Mastery
When wielding a Dueling Blade or Sword, you may take one of the following stances each turn:

• Parrying Stance: When you are hit by a melee attack, you may use your reaction to roll 1d4 and add it to your AC against that attack, potentially turning the hit into a miss.
• Aggressive Stance: Your first attack each round deals an extra 1d4 damage.
• Opportunistic Stance: When making opportunity attacks, you may roll 1d4 and add it to your attack roll

Bowman
When wielding a Bow, you may use your bow as an improvised melee weapon with the Finesse tag, dealing 1d4 damage (for a shortbow) or 1d6 (for a longbow). In addition, you may use the following abilities as bonus actions:

• Far Shot: You may over-draw your bow. The next bow attack you make before the end of your turn ignores disadvantage for firing at long range.
• Manyshot: You may notch an extra arrow. The next bow attack you make before the end of your turn deals an extra die of weapon damage.
• Precise Shot: You may take an extra second to aim. The next bow attack you make before the end of your turn ignores half and three-quarters cover.

Cleave

• You gain +1 Str or Dex. In addition, when wielding an Axe you gain the following benefits:
• On your turn, when you score a critical hit with a melee weapon or reduce a creature to 0 hit points with one, you can make one melee weapon attack as a bonus action.
• If you hit an opponent with a melee weapon, you may use a bonus action to make a second melee attack against a creature who is both within your reach and adjacent to the original target. If you hit, you deal damage equal to your Strength modifier.

Crossbow Expert
When wielding a Crossbow, you gain the following benefits:

• You ignore the loading quality of crossbows with which you are proficient.
• Being within 5 feet of a hostile creature doesn't impose disadvantage on your ranged attack rolls.
• When you use the Attack action and attack with a one handed weapon, you can use a bonus action to attack with a hand crossbow you are holding.
• When you attack with a light or heavy crossbow, you gain a +2 bonus to damage.

Fell Handed
When wielding a Mace, you gain the following benefits:

• If you hit an enemy with a melee attack, you may push them 5ft.
• Whenever you have Advantage on a melee attack roll and hit with both dice, you can knock the target prone if it is no more than one size larger than you.
• Whenever you have Disadvantage on a melee attack roll and hit with just one die, the target takes damage equal to your Strength modifier.

Flail Mastery
When wielding a Flail, you gain the following benefits:

• As a bonus action, you may extend your reach by 5 feet until the start of your next turn.
• If you use a Shove action and knock the target prone, you may immediate make a melee attack against them as a reaction.

Spearman
When wielding a Polearm, you gain the following benefits

• Your target provokes attacks of opportunity for entering your threatened range. If they took a Dash action or moved at least 20ft before doing so, they take an extra die of weapon damage
• As a bonus action, you may attack with the butt of your weapon, dealing 1d4+Str damage.

Throwing Mastery

• You've mastered the art of throwing knives, axes, and anything else you can imagine. When using a thrown weapon, you gain the following benefits
• Double the range of thrown weapons
• Do not take Disadvantage for attacking with a thrown weapon when an enemy is within 5ft.
• You may draw a thrown weapon as part of the same action you use to attack with it.
• You may draw and throw a light thrown weapon as a bonus action, so long as you have at least one free hand

War Slinger
When wielding a sling, you gain the following benefits:

• Increase the sling's damage die to 1d6
• You may load and fire a sling without needing a free hand.
• After successfully striking a target with your sling, you may cause the stone to ricochet. Make a second attack against a target within 10ft of the original; on a hit, you deal damage equal to your Dexterity modifier.

[Potato_Priest]

For the most part, I like these a lot. You seem to have gone through and made most of these interesting options. However, I do have some questions.

What was your reasoning for changing the lance so much?

Under these rules it's a heavy weapon (gwm eligible) with 5 foot (aka short) reach, and no disadvantage attacking enemies within 5 feet. In other words, a gwm paladin's dream weapon since it can be used with a shield and has no significant penalties.

Also, given the way blunt weapons were historically used as a counter to armor (while swords are super devastating on unarmored foes), I'd swap the stats of the clubs and the swords. Either way though, you run into issues since AC accounts for both actual armor and dodging ability. Maybe instead of hit bonus, give the swords bonus damage against targets not wearing armor and without the natural armor trait?

Lastly, what happened to the net?

[Grod_The_Giant]

For the most part, I like these a lot. You seem to have gone through and made most of these interesting options. However, I do have some questions.

What was your reasoning for changing the lance so much?

I didn't want to make any one weapon too complicated. I figured that "devastating mounted weapon" was the most important part of the Lance. But you're right, it is crazy strong when combined with GWM. Given how uncommon mounted combat is, it might be better to drop altogether...

Also, given the way blunt weapons were historically used as a counter to armor (while swords are super devastating on unarmored foes), I'd swap the stats of the clubs and the swords. Either way though, you run into issues since AC accounts for both actual armor and dodging ability. Maybe instead of hit bonus, give the swords bonus damage against targets not wearing armor and without the natural armor trait?

Bah, "realism." I was going more by archetypes--swords are usually associated with skillful fighters, and clubs with big strong brutes.

Lastly, what happened to the net?

It doesn't make much sense as a weapon, given how differently it works from everything. I think it fits better as adventuring gear. Then again, maybe as a replacement for the Lance...

EDIT: I'm also...not entirely happy with "light weapons as simple, everything else martial." Maybe instead it would be better to have a separate table for simple weapons; say...

	Light	Medium	Heavy
Bladed	Dagger: 1d4 piercing	Hatchet: 1d6 slashing	Longspear: 1d10 piercing
Blunt	Light Hammer: 1d4 blunt	Quaterstaff: 1d6 blunt	Greatclub: 1d10 blunt
Ranged	Sling: 1d4 blunt	Shortbow: 1d6 piercing	Crossbow: 1d10 piercing

with the Ranged table collapsed into the general martial weapon table as well; say...

	Property	Light	Medium	Heavy
Muscle Bows	Ammunition	Dart: 1d4 piercing	Boomerang: 1d6 blunt	Longbow: 1d8 piercing
Mechanical Bows	Loading	Hand Crossbow: 1d6 piercing	Atlatl: 1d8 piercing	Arbalest: 1d12 piercing

What do you think?

[Potato_Priest]

I didn't want to make any one weapon too complicated. I figured that "devastating mounted weapon" was the most important part of the Lance. But you're right, it is crazy strong when combined with GWM. Given how uncommon mounted combat is, it might be better to drop altogether...


Bah, "realism." I was going more by archetypes--swords are usually associated with skillful fighters, and clubs with big strong brutes.


It doesn't make much sense as a weapon, given how differently it works from everything. I think it fits better as adventuring gear. Then again, maybe as a replacement for the Lance...

EDIT: I'm also...not entirely happy with "light weapons as simple, everything else martial." Maybe instead it would be better to have a separate table for simple weapons; say...

While I like the idea, I don't like the individual weapons on that table, because things like the longspear and greatclub (assuming the heavy property for both and the reach property for the longspear) are way outside of the quality that can normally be achieved with simple weapons. I think a better table might look like this.

	Light	Medium	Heavy
Bladed	Dagger: 1d4 piercing, finesse, thrown 20/60, counts as a light weapon	Hatchet: 1d6 slashing, thrown 20,60, counts as a light weapon	Longspear: 1d8 piercing, reach.
Blunt	Light Hammer: 1d4 blunt, thrown 20/60, counts as a light weapon	Quarterstaff: 1d6 blunt, can be wielded two handed for +1 damage.	Greatclub: 1d8 blunt, counts as heavy.

I also think that the ranged weapon grid from the first post was superior, since it covers everything in a really simple fashion with minimal changes from the phb, so I would stick with that for the ranged weapons.

Edit: Hmm, I'm still not really satisfied with that. Probably better to just stick with the format of your original post.

[SodaQueen]

I didn't see a PEACH or PEAR tag so I thought I'd ask if you're looking for critique before offering it.

[Grod_The_Giant]

I didn't see a PEACH or PEAR tag so I thought I'd ask if you're looking for critique before offering it.

Always happy to hear it if you're willing to give it.

I also think that the ranged weapon grid from the first post was superior, since it covers everything in a really simple fashion with minimal changes from the phb, so I would stick with that for the ranged weapons.

Fair.

Edit: Hmm, I'm still not really satisfied with that. Probably better to just stick with the format of your original post.

Yeah, I'm not entirely content either... I dunno, maybe keep the "all light weapons count as simple," and make another row for weapons specifically with a "simple" property? Something like, uh... sickle/quarterstaff/greatclub?

Another idea I had was to allow anyone to wield any weapon (or maybe just any light/medium one), but make a rule that those without martial weapon proficiency don't get to apply the properties. But that might wind up feeling weird?

[Potato_Priest]

Yeah, I'm not entirely content either... I dunno, maybe keep the "all light weapons count as simple," and make another row for weapons specifically with a "simple" property? Something like, uh... sickle/quarterstaff/greatclub?

Another idea I had was to allow anyone to wield any weapon (or maybe just any light/medium one), but make a rule that those without martial weapon proficiency don't get to apply the properties. But that might wind up feeling weird?

Seems like the only on of those people are likely to actually miss is the quarterstaff for wizard characters (great club and sickle always struck me as falling in the “improvised weapons that resemble another weapon” category.) Maybe make the quarterstaff a special weapon to replace the lance as a d8 damage 2-handed weapon that can be used as a spell focus and counts as a simple weapon?

[Grod_The_Giant]

Seems like the only on of those people are likely to actually miss is the quarterstaff for wizard characters (great club and sickle always struck me as falling in the “improvised weapons that resemble another weapon” category.) Maybe make the quarterstaff a special weapon to replace the lance as a d8 damage 2-handed weapon that can be used as a spell focus and counts as a simple weapon?

That's not a bad idea. I like it.

EDIT: Folded that in, along with a few minor naming tweaks. Also added the net and blowgun back in as adventuring gear.

[SodaQueen]

Always happy to hear it if you're willing to give it

I certainly am! To preface, I've been told that I come off a bit...sharp online so know that I'm geniunely trying to help you improve this work.

With that said, I don't feel like you've suceeded in making weapons more interesting. To me, they feel almost less interesting than the default weapons. There's no versatile property. It's similtaneously more restrictive than 5e's rules with the table layout but provides fewer weapons. No halberds, no light hammers, no war picks, no lance, no scimitar. Sling is a martial weapon now? Also I feel that the +1/-1 attack bonuses don't really jive with 5e's mechanics.

I appreciate that 5e has a decent variety of weapons and encourages re-fluffing to avoid having nearly identical stats for almost identical weapons like Pathfinder does. But I do agree that they aren't as interesting as they could be. However, I think your efforts would be better directed to creating more weapon properties for the default 5e weapons. Like give axes a heavy critical property that deals a little extra damage for example. That way you're working within an already solid framework and can add more options without restricting weapons.

[JNAProductions]

Perhaps, to make them more interesting, allow for different actions to be taken, or taken with (dis)advantage?

Flails could give bonuses to disarming, mauls and clubs to shoving, just for some off the cuff ideas.

[PhoenixPhyre]

With that said, I don't feel like you've suceeded in making weapons more interesting. To me, they feel almost less interesting than the default weapons. There's no versatile property. It's similtaneously more restrictive than 5e's rules with the table layout but provides fewer weapons. No halberds, no light hammers, no war picks, no lance, no scimitar. Sling is a martial weapon now? Also I feel that the +1/-1 attack bonuses don't really jive with 5e's mechanics.

Perhaps, to make them more interesting, allow for different actions to be taken, or taken with (dis)advantage?

Flails could give bonuses to disarming, mauls and clubs to shoving, just for some off the cuff ideas.

I agree. Static numbers aren't interesting--you write them down on your sheet and never care again. For something to be interesting, it should have active choices.

I wrote up a few (following 4e's model) that someone could crib and rework into something usable: Google Doc.

[Grod_The_Giant]

I was trying to stick to passive bonuses to avoid inflating complexity too much, but... yeah, I can work up some special abilities for each weapon class. Swords can disarm, say, polearms set against a charge, maces knock down...

There's no versatile property.

All Medium Weapons effectively get the Versatile trait.

It's similtaneously more restrictive than 5e's rules with the table layout but provides fewer weapons. No halberds, no light hammers, no war picks, no lance, no scimitar.

There are fewer options in absolute terms, but how many of those actually got used? Most of what's lost are either strait inferior to others (ie, the sickle and trident) or are functionally identical (halberd/glaive/pike). You're still welcome to refluff if there's something you really want.

Sling is a martial weapon now?

Nope, they're Simple-- they get an exception.

[Dienekes]

So, this is pretty great, only real problem I see is that since a lot of these weapons benefits are just static bonuses to damage or accuracy, there will mathematically end up being a strictly superior choice over the course of the game. And while I haven't exactly done the math, I believe that a +1 to hit scales better than the essentially +1 damage of axes, or the -1 to hit +2.5, 3.5, or 4.5 of maces.

[Potato_Priest]

And while I haven't exactly done the math, I believe that a +1 to hit scales better than the essentially +1 damage of axes, or the -1 to hit +2.5, 3.5, or 4.5 of maces.

I think -1 to hit, +2.5 to damage is likely to be superior, actually. That’s a better ratio than GWM’s infamous -5/+10.

However, I haven’t done the math either, and what’s optimal is totally going to depend on the enemies faced. The fact that some weapons are going to be better in some campaigns won’t be solved by switching to active rather than passive bonuses, and could only be changed by switching to a system where all weapons were exactly the same, and nobody wants that.

[Dienekes]

I think -1 to hit, +2.5 to damage is likely to be superior, actually. That’s a better ratio than GWM’s infamous -5/+10.

Good point I didn't think of that. Which means, the -1 to hit +4.5 damage of the Maul may be way too big.

So, I guess, my point is I agree with the others that static increases aren't really as interesting as potential non-comparables.

[Potato_Priest]

Good point I didn't think of that. Which means, the -1 to hit +4.5 damage of the Maul may be way too big.

So, I guess, my point is I agree with the others that static increases aren't really as interesting as potential non-comparables.

How are you getting +4.5? If you want to compare it to the closest alternative, the 2d6 greataxe is the obvious choice, in which case it’s -1/+2

Also, I think the “noncomparables” are more likely to lead to unbalanced outcomes, since they’ll probably interact more heavily with class and subclass features. We’ll see what grod comes up with, though. He is quite good at this, after all.

[Dienekes]

How are you getting +4.5? If you want to compare it to the closest alternative, the 2d6 greataxe is the obvious choice, in which case it’s -1/+2

Sorry was looking at the Maul and did bad math. 2d8 as opposed to 1d10 of a theoretical generic item. So it's 3.5.

Against the theoretical generic item.

Axes deal +1 damage, Swords gain +1 attack, Maces get -1 attack and +2.5 damage for light, +3.5 damage for medium and heavy.

Also, I think the “noncomparables” are more likely to lead to unbalanced outcomes, since they’ll probably interact more heavily with class and subclass features. We’ll see what grod comes up with, though. He is quite good at this, after all.

One of the best I'd say.

[Grod_The_Giant]

Against the theoretical generic item

Axes are the generic-- other weapon types get their die dropped by 1 for a property.

One of the best I'd say.

[Grod_The_Giant]

Update: I'm thinking... Maybe the unique move should be a Feat-based thing. Polearms get Polearm Master, Bows get Sharpshooter, etc. I have a bunch of weapon style feats that would match up really well...

[SodaQueen]

All Medium Weapons effectively get the Versatile trait.

Nope, they're Simple-- they get an exception.

Ah, the table format made some of the information difficult to follow since it's all kind of crammed in there. You might want to consider reformatting. I promise, I did read over everything before posting lol

Edit: Maybe make the top row a different color? I realized it might be because I'm on mobile but it doesn't look any less crammed on the normal layout

There are fewer options in absolute terms, but how many of those actually got used? Most of what's lost are either strait inferior to others (ie, the sickle and trident) or are functionally identical (halberd/glaive/pike). You're still welcome to refluff if there's something you really want.

Yeah but rather than expand on the existing albeit minor differences, you just cut them whole cloth. I just see a lot of missed potential with this homebrew. Refluffing helps expand the weapons available without too much minutiae but when you have such a small list you might as well not bother with individual weapons. Just make light weapon, two handed weapon, etc and assign properties modularly. That would actually be really cool.

I also strongly dislike the '3 weapons per category' format. It's very limiting in what it allows and again, as a table it can be kind of hard to read.

Edit: I hope I'm being clear. Like, for example why have quarterstaff in the heavy weapon column when it is neither martial nor heavy? (also you wrote blunt instead of bludgeoning) Same for the Estoc, it's heavy but not heavy, why even put it in the heavy weapon category if it isn't? And javelins under your system can't be thrown nearly as far And you had to cram in two weapons under dueling blades because they were different enough to justify distinction but not enough to be their own category. That's what I mean when I say your system is limiting

[SodaQueen]

Sorry for the double post but I think it would be more coherent than me continuing to edit the previous one.

Why did you reduce the javelin's damage dice?

And not having lances isn't fixed with a refluff. It's a unique enough weapon to justify being different from, say, a pike or spear.

There's no room for Piercing/Slashing weapons with your current format (although that is also a problem with vanilla)

The blowgun is fantastic. That's an awesome addition, I really like that!

Spears can't be thrown effectively with this format (which are distinct from javelins in the phb since javelins are meant for throwing with a much longer distance but you can still effectively throw spears)

I think you're on to something with the maces category, I like that they deal extra damage but I don't think it's implemented great with the penalty. Why is that even there?

Quarterstaff as an arcane focus is also a nice addition.

Also, clubs are kind of weirdly placed in the light weapons column. Although the idea of a thrown weapons build where you snipe targets 60 feet away by chucking a steel mace at their head is pretty dang hilarious.

Is adding proficiency to damage a good idea for 5e? I'm genuinely asking, I don't know if that would throw things off or not.

I really do feel that axes could use a new property. They're super boring right now.

Okay, I think that's all I have atm. Sorry my thoughts are so scattered!

[Grod_The_Giant]

I see where you're coming from about looking rigid and crowded. The former could be helped with better formatting (I need to find that old list of table codes), but... yeah. I'll see if I can't come up with better presentation. (Maybe present it as a more abstract Property + Size thing, with a table that's explicitly just examples? I'll certainly add a line about allowing refluffing and changing damage types)

Why did you reduce the javelin's damage dice?

Because it's a light melee weapon with a property (reach). The names aren't meant to be perfect correspondence to the original PHB options.

And not having lances isn't fixed with a refluff. It's a unique enough weapon to justify being different from, say, a pike or spear.

I see that; on the other hand, it's a really niche weapon... but hmm, maybe drop flails (they can just be refluffed clubs), shift quarterstaffs to medium, and add lances as heavy?

There's no room for Piercing/Slashing weapons with your current format (although that is also a problem with vanilla)

Agreed.

The blowgun is fantastic. That's an awesome addition, I really like that!

Thanks. It's always been presented as a weapon, and it's really never functioned as one-- it's a poison delivery system, may as well be treated as one.

I think you're on to something with the maces category, I like that they deal extra damage but I don't think it's implemented great with the penalty. Why is that even there?

The idea was that maces, axes, and swords were kind of a set-- clubs are ponderous but deadly, swords are accurate but less brutal, and axes are balanced.

Quarterstaff as an arcane focus is also a nice addition.

I think that was always legit, but it's worth specifying.

Also, clubs are kind of weirdly placed in the light weapons column. Although the idea of a thrown weapons build where you snipe targets 60 feet away by chucking a steel mace at their head is pretty dang hilarious.

Eh, apart from the name they're basically light hammers.

Is adding proficiency to damage a good idea for 5e? I'm genuinely asking, I don't know if that would throw things off or not.

I've seen "-Prof to hit, +2*Prof to damage" thrown around a lot as a more balanced trade-off for GWM/SS; I figured a 1:1 trade was fine to pass out for free.

I really do feel that axes could use a new property. They're super boring right now.

Any suggestions? I was brainstorming an axe feat and having trouble.

[Kane0]

4e had brutal weapons that had a higher minimum damage, just a thought.

[Grod_The_Giant]

Updated with... a few minor tweaks here and there, but mostly greatly improved formatting.

[SodaQueen]

Updated with... a few minor tweaks here and there, but mostly greatly improved formatting.

Oooh! I'll be back with some actual critique later but so far the formatting looks much better!

[Bjarkmundur]

Due to the added complexity of the design, you could see the Simple vs. Martial proficiencies as an opportunity for simplification to compensate. Since you are working with types of weapons, rather than individual weapon design, you could have Martial represent a different kind of weapon training, allowing a character to gain an added bonus over characters with only simple weapon proficiency.

Martial Weapon Proficiency
A character with martial weapon proficiency can increases his weapon's damage die by one size.

This simplifies by removing it as a weapon property and instead add it as one of your weapon types. You'd have to add some sort of sidebar regarding Elven and Dwarven Weapon Trainting

Dwarves can use this feature without Martial Weapon Proficiency, but it only applies to axes, as per the Dwarven Weapon Training race feature.

P.S. I'd love to see the Saber as a slashing dueling weapon, next to the rapier. Rapiers are silly as a war weapon anyways, being designed primarily for combat-for-sport. The needle-like point is decent at target weak points of plate armor though.

EDIT:

Axes are particularly devastating against unarmored foes. When attacking a creature with no armor or natural armor, they deal one additional die of weapon damage. This extra die is not doubled by critical hits. Axes deal slashing damage.

Very thematic, love it.

Bows are quick in the hands of an expert. They possess the Ammunition property. Bows deal piercing damage

.
Keeping with the theme of unique weapon properties and the design goal of making each weapon type more "interesting", how about emphasizing the quickness of bows by allowing an extra attack on crit instead of the extra damage?

Crossbows are slow but powerful. They possess the Loading property, but if you roll less than the average value on their damage die, you may round up to the average. For example, if you're wielding a Light Crossbow with a damage die of 1d6 and you roll a 2, you would round that up to 3. Crossbows deal piercing damage.

This is cool, but feels clunky. I think setting the minimum damage to 3 or 4 would work just as fine while being less clunky.

Dueling Blades are light and fast. They possess the Finesse property, allowing them to use either your Strength or Dexterity to attack. Dueling blades may deal either piercing or slashing damage, depending on their design.

I love existing mechanics in a new context, this works wonderfully here and feels like it was designed to compare directly with your other type bonuses.

Maces are clumsy, but absolutely brutal when they hit. You suffer a -2 penalty to attack rolls with maces, but may roll one additional damage die when you hit. Maces deal bludgeoning damage.
Polearms are long, allowing you to strike distant targets. They possess the Reach property. Polearms may deal any type of damage, depending on their design.
Swords are keen and deadly. You gain a +1 bonus to attack rolls when wielding a sword. Swords may deal either piercing or slashing damage, depending on their design.

All very thematic, and really give you the feel of th weapon you're wielding. Very good work.

[Grod_The_Giant]

Bjarkmundur,
Sabers are already listed on the table of examples--Dueling Blades can be either piercing or slashing. Your point about simplifying Simple/Martial weapon proficiency is interesting. I'd toyed with the idea of having all weapons usable by anyone, but have Properties require Martial Weapon Proficiency. I wound up deciding that it was too weird to let, say, a Wizard world a Greatsword, however inefficiently, but... Hmm.

Oh, and feats are up. (The Lance doesn't get a special feat because, well, it's a weapon for mounted combat and there's already a feat for that, but everything else should get one).

[Bjarkmundur]

What? Where? I just see the rapier and scimitar. Not that it's critical, just a preference ^^

Feats look amazing, and I love the use of advantage and disadvantage in Fell handed. I edited my earlier post, didn't notice you had posted and wanted to avoid double-posting. I'll edit this post too once I've looked and the feats long enough to form a more critical opinion.

I would love to see the "threatening reach: hostile creatures treat squares within your reach as difficult terrain while wielding a polearm", but it might be too much packed into one feat.

The "negate disadvantage when throwing a weapon within melee range" feels weird, but I don't really see any problem with keeping it. I just can't really picture it.

[Potato_Priest]

The bow feat seems a bit lackluster, as two of the bonus action options are available as always-on from the sharpshooter feat, making the bonus action-> extra damage die and finesse improvised weapon the only things worth taking this for.

[Bjarkmundur]

Sharpshooter and GWM needed to be taken down a peg anyway.