Weapon triangle

[clash]

Hey Guys,

For those of you that have played fire emblem you are familiar with the weapon triangle. For those of you that havnt it is basically like rock paper scissors giving each weapon type a benefit over another. So in fire emblem Swords are effective against Axes, Axes against Lances and Lances against swords. I like the system and find it makes weapon combat more interesting. I wanted to know how I could implement this is d&d.

So my first thought was that piercing, bludgeoning and slashing would work as a weapon triangle, but I am unsure of what bonus to give the "winning weapon". Advantage seems like the obvious choice but is it too powerful to potentially get advantage every turn by just equipping the right weapon? Let me know if you have any thoughts.

[Knaight]

Weapon triangles tend not to make a lot of sense, but one that is at least somewhat coherent and doesn't lead to weirdness around resistances (e.g. skeletons always wanting the anti-bludgeoning weapon) is to have the categories of two handed weapons, two weapons, and a weapon and shield.

As for the effect, Advantage is much too strong. An advantage like effect on damage rolls might be fine, although it's worth being picky about which damage dice get that effect.

[Nifft]

2-Hander > Shield.

Dual-Weapon > 2-Hander.

Shield > Dual-Weapon.



Pole-Arms > Giants.

Swords > Dragons.

Blunt > Constructs.

Arrows > Formation-Fighters (humanoids I guess).

[clash]

I don't like the idea of advantage on damage just because I have something similar I place already. Any other ideas? 5e tends not to like flat bonuses

[Grod_The_Giant]

+1d6 damage?

[Logosloki]

A weird option might be that if you have the weapon advantage then you can move away from that NPC/PC without triggering attacks of opportunity. This gives characters an escape vector or re-engage options rather than straight damage or increased chance of damage.

[clash]

1d6 damage could work. I'm also not opposed to an option like not provoking OA's but I dont think I want that specifically.

What would you guys think of either having the better weapon allowing another circumstance to provoke OA?

Another option I thought of is weapons dont give you advantage/disadvantage but they can cancel it? So if you have the "winning" weapon you cant have disadvantage and likewise with the losing weapon you cant gain advantage?

[Laurefindel]

Hey Guys,

For those of you that have played fire emblem you are familiar with the weapon triangle (...) So my first thought was that piercing, bludgeoning and slashing would work as a weapon triangle, but I am unsure of what bonus to give the "winning weapon". Advantage seems like the obvious choice but is it too powerful to potentially get advantage every turn by just equipping the right weapon? Let me know if you have any thoughts.

Intuitively, I would have said that "first strike" could be the deciding factor, but this would be hard to mesh with D&D's initiative system. It could work if you use side initiative.

Alternatively, weapon A could have an easier time breaching weapon B's user AC. This could translate in a bonus to hit either static (e.g. +2), dynamic (e.g. +1d4) or via advantage. As you said, advantage might be a bit much...

You could also turn this concept around and give weapon A's user a bonus to AC against weapon B. Again, causing disadvantage on weapon B's attacks seems too much.

Granting resistance to weapon A's user against weapon B is another variable offered by 5e, but like advantage, seems way too much.

Lastly, like Grod suggested, weapon A could have increased damage against weapon B's user. Again this can be a flat bonus like dueling fighting style (e.g. +2) or similar to most low-level buff spells level spell (e.g. +1d4).

Alternatively, you could go 2e AD&D route and grant armors bonus/penalties vs weapons. Something like:
Leather strong against bludgeoning but weak against slashing
Chain strong against piercing but weak against bludgeoning
Plate strong against slashing but weak against piercing

'findel

[Knaight]

Mechanically there are ways to implement partial advantage, where you only sometimes get a second die. The obvious method is a conditional reroll based on the result of the first die (before modifiers), with two main ways to implement it. One is to get a reroll when rolling low enough (10 or less, or 8 or less, or 5 or less) which is generally fairly strong. The other is to get an optional reroll when you miss on some sort of multiple (odds, evens, multiples of 3, multiples of 4). Getting one reroll at 5- or on odds is probably fine.

2-Hander > Shield.

Dual-Weapon > 2-Hander.

Shield > Dual-Weapon.

I'd probably flip the order here - a shield is a real problem when using a two handed weapon*, two weapons are very much not.

*With the caveat that every time I say two handed weapon I mean spear, and also some other stuff, because that's what I personally favor.

[Calen]

You could add a minor bonus effect to attacks with the right weapon.

When you hit with an attack using a favorable weapon you may then move 5 feet without provoking AoO from the target.
You knock the target down the initiative order by 2 points (cannot reduce below 0)
You give the next creature to attack the target advantage. (A free help action in effect)


Or

Treat it like the UA Feats

If you have a favorable weapon and attack with advantage: If both rolls would hit the target get such and such a bonus. (damage and a minor effect like help or shove)

If you have favorable weapon and attack with disadvantage and the better roll would hit the target get such and such a bonus. (could be same or different as above.)

[clash]

I kinda like the free help action bit. Give the next person advantage by kinda throwing them off balance. Although a straight +1d4 to hit isnt bad either and bless is a first level spell for most of the party for an entire combat so this doesnt seem to far off for power level.

[Talamare]

I would recommend introducing to the game then Combat Spears.

1 Handed, Non-throwable, Same Stat line as the Longsword / Battleaxe / Warhammer


By the Way...

Where does Hammers fit into this?

In Fire Emblem, they are a subsection of Axe; the 3 Physical Types are Sword, Axe, Spear.


In DnD they are a primary weapon option; the 3 Physical Types are Piercing, Slashing, and Bludgeoning.

This means that, Swords and Axes use the same design space. While Hammers are their own entity.

[clash]

I would recommend introducing to the game then Combat Spears.

1 Handed, Non-throwable, Same Stat line as the Longsword / Battleaxe / Warhammer


By the Way...

Where does Hammers fit into this?

In Fire Emblem, they are a subsection of Axe; the 3 Physical Types are Sword, Axe, Spear.


In DnD they are a primary weapon option; the 3 Physical Types are Piercing, Slashing, and Bludgeoning.

This means that, Swords and Axes use the same design space. While Hammers are their own entity.

The idea isnt to divide the weapons based ont he groups from fire emblem but rather to create a similiar mechanic using existing weapon groups in 5e.

[Talamare]

The idea isnt to divide the weapons based ont he groups from fire emblem but rather to create a similiar mechanic using existing weapon groups in 5e.

I remember in the past reading house rule that

Bludgeoning deals additional damage vs Heavy Armor
Piercing deals additional damage vs Medium Armor
Slashing deals additional damage vs Light & Unarmored.

[Andrezitos]

Fire Emblem uses the weapon triangle to change the outcome of duels through two different parameters: chance of hitting and damage per hit. The game puts a lot of strength behind this method also, specially as the game progress as enemies and allies hit harder, and harder. A reason for that is because the game don't have many others forms of influencing the results besides unity level, attack modifier, etc. If one would try to adapt this to DnD, it should keep these things in mind (both variables, really impactful bonuses).