Weapons and Armor

Weapons

Damage

• If the character has a Class Feature that grants proficiency in all Martial Weapons (representing significant martial training): All weapons do 1d8+(Attack Ability Mod) damage.
• All other weapon proficiencies: Weapons do 1d6+(Attack Ability Mod) damage.
• Non-proficiency with a weapon: 1d4+(Attack Ability Mod) damage.

Two-handed melee weapons

• Wielding a melee weapon with two hands (Two-handed or Versatile property) adds +1d4 damage and +1 to the critical range (critical on a natural roll 19 - 20 without other enhancements).

Off-hand weapons

• Off-hand weapons (with proficiency): 1d6 damage. This lines up with off-hand weapons needing to be Light weapons.
• Off-hand weapons do not add the ability modifier to damage unless you have Two-Weapon Style (RAW).
• Off-hand weapons do not benefit from bonus damage using the Weapon Specialization Feat (bonuses to hit and critical range still apply).
• Off-hand weapons may still benefit from the Dual Wielder feat. In such cases, if the wielder has proficiency in all Martial Weapons, the off-hand weapon does 1d8 damage.

Armor

Armor is simplified into the three classes: Light, Medium, Heavy. A particular suit of armor’s appearance/construction is up to the GM or Player.

Light Armor

• AC 11
• Dex cap +5 (max AC 16)
• No Stealth penalty
• 10 lbs.
• Generally used by those with a high Dex
• Standard cost: 10 gp

Medium Armor

• AC 14
• Dex cap +3 (max AC 17)
• No Stealth penalty
• 30 lbs.
• Generally used by those with an above-average Dex
• Standard cost: 100 gp

Heavy Armor

• AC 17
• Dex cap 0 (max AC 17)
• Disadvantage on Stealth
• Min Str 13
• 50 lbs.
• Plate has damage reduction = 1/2 (Proficiency Bonus), rounded down
• Generally used by those with a low or no Dex bonus
• Standard cost: 500 gp, 1500 gp for Plate

Shield

• +2AC (RAW)

Non-Proficiency

• Disadvantage on any Ability Check, Saving Throw, or Attack roll, and can’t cast spells (RAW)
• Applies to both armor and shields
• Dex cap 0

Thoughts on Game Design

Having an array of weaponry and armor is natural to a game born from wargaming. In older editions, there were a great variety of weapons that had damage ranges all over the place. In my earliest experiences with D&D, I didn’t question the amount of damage each weapon was capable of, nor why certain types of armor were intrinsically better from a game mechanic standpoint. However, as time went on, I realized that the damage values assigned to weapons was somewhat arbitrary, and actually favored some weapons over others. The same went for armor.

In a game that is built for more abstract fantasy combat than realism, there is no particular reason one weapon should do more damage than another. In fact, doing so limits the imagination. For example, the classic “dual knife fighter” trope common to fantasy is at a disadvantage mechanically to the more traditional “sword and board” or other two-weapon fighters with larger weapons. If one wants to wield two daggers and be effective, the common answer is to take short swords and “skin” them as daggers. Also, if a person finds a particular magic weapon but it does not maximize their damage output, they may ignore it (”That Mace +1 is cool and all, but my Longsword +1 is better”).

As far as game design goes, I see the draw of having different “tiers” of weapons. In 5e there are roughly five: 1d4, 1d6, 1d8, 1d10, and 1d12, all matching the standard dice. This tier system adds some variety to the game. However, if a player puts a minimal effort in to maximizing weapon damage output (because combat is a core feature of D&D), they will often pick the highest damaging weapon they can. Usually, this is 1d6 for simple/light weapons, 1d8 for standard one-handed weapons with a shield, 1d10 for polearms, and 1d12/2d6 for large, two-handed melee weapons. This tier system preserves the view that some weapons innately do more damage, even though there is no real justification for it in a fantasy setting.

What if we turn intrinsic weapon damage inside-out? If HP are an abstract measure of not only the amount of physical damage a character can take, but also training, effort, will, staying power, and luck, why shouldn’t weapons — a mechanic that removes HP — be based on the same thing? What really does the damage, the weapon or the person using it? Does the person using it know how to use the weapon to maximize its threat to HP and, therefore, damage?

I see a possible way to simplify weapon damage while opening more possibilities for roleplay and imagination using this perspective: Have all weapons do the same amount of damage based upon how much training a character has with weapons, i.e. weapon proficiency. This way a character trained to use a variety of weapons can actually choose any they would like to use from a roleplay perspective without having to consider how much damage it will do. The suggested damage output is still within the scope of RAW and ties into the existing system of proficiencies. It also emulates the maximizing effect that players often do anyway. The math is good to walk through, but for brevity’s sake, the average damage output from using a weapon is roughly the same across all Classes if one considers the player is optimizing for damage output (picking the intrinsically most damaging weapons available to that Class). The only Classes to have an apparent decrease from this are the Rogue, (non-Valor) Bard, or other class that has access to a single Martial Weapon rather than all. This difference is 3.5(1d6) vs. 4.5(1d8) average damage, an overall average of 1 less damage per hit. These classes generally only have one Attack per action, so that’s an average difference of 1 damage per round. This quickly becomes insignificant for the Rogue, as Sneak Attack damage accumulates every other level. For other classes, their magical attacks (even cantrips) make this weapon damage difference an insignificant change to that class’ other damage options. It also increases the damage of many simple weapons by an average of 1, from 2.5(1d4) to 3.5(1d6), so there is a balance in that direction, too.

There are special modifications for wielding weapons with two-hands (a two-handed weapon or one with the versatile quality) and two-weapon fighting that, again, average out to the same damage output one would have when optimizing. Most two-handed weapons are wielded by those with all Martial Weapon proficiency. The standard damage for various two handed weapons is 5.5(1d10), 6.5(1d12), or 7(2d6). This method gives 4.5(1d8)+2.5(1d4) = 7, so the damage output is roughly the same if not a little bit higher. Extending the critical range along with the 1d4 bonus damage adds a little extra incentive to use a two-handed weapon in lieu of using a shield, also reflecting the extra control one might have while using two hands.

Not only does this system help a player simplify how much damage is done (it’s always the same for any weapon they have proficiency with), but it also opens up the imagination to allow a player more options without the burden of trying to optimize weapon choice based on an arbitrary intrinsic weapon damage. Find a cool magic dagger? Sure, your Fighter can use it without sacrificing damage output.

A similar system is done with armor. Using the existing classes of Light, Medium, and Heavy armor, all armors of the same class have the same AC, regardless of its construction or appearance, as long as a character has proficiency with that class of armor. Let the armor’s appearance be creative and enhance imaginative play rather than constrain it. Medium Armors in general benefit the most from the modifications above, to make them more appealing to those that want to use them. Those with an above average Dex who only have Light armor proficiency might now consider taking Medium Armor proficiency. There is a special case for Plate by adding damage reduction to make up for downgrading the RAW AC. This adjustment should not be game-breaking as it is tied to the level-dependent Proficiency Bonus.