Weapon Balance: How can we balance the weapons of NWN?

[Subutai]

With the ongoing discussion about light flails in the goblin topic, I thought this might be a good time to bring up one of my ongoing troubles with NWN, which is that so many of the weapons in the game are worse (sometimes significantly worse) mechanically than other weapons. The game has a ton of cool weapons, but other than a few that can be used decently by particular race/class combos (like longsword, bastard sword, a few others), most weapons are choices of flavor of power.

Is there any way, with haks or without, of making every (or most, or at least more) weapons more equally useful and desirable? It would be awesome to see more people running around with a wider array of weapons than the current.

[Reallylongunneededplayername]

Because many of the weapons in life are worse (sometimes significantly worse) mechanically than other weapons?

Before posting, I actually did "research" Light flails were in the times long ago more a torture device than actual weapon to use in combat, A heavy flail, Two handed, Was actually used but not that often compared to swords etc due to the risk of recoil.

My conclusing: Light flails are ment to vacuum, and I might actually be right?. O.o

[Shadowy Reality]

Real life should have no influence on this, this is a fantasy setting.
They should be balanced. If not in terms of numbers then in terms of identity. It is alright if a weapon deals less damage than another if it has some sort of advantage, or unique niche.

Right now many weapons are just plain worse than others.

[Volograd]

Because many of the weapons in life are worse (sometimes significantly worse) mechanically than other weapons?

Before posting, I actually did "research" Light flails were in the times long ago more a torture device than actual weapon to use in combat, A heavy flail, Two handed, Was actually used but not that often compared to swords etc due to the risk of recoil.

My conclusing: Light flails are ment to vacuum, and I might actually be right?. O.o

You are correct, but it’s a bit of unnecessary realism that doesn’t help solve the issue.

I’d say just balance the weapons in terms of critical range and threat and call it a day. The damage dice don’t seem to count for much and I would greatly enjoy seeing more variety in weapons used.

This would also been a boon for the weapons found in most shops that rarely, if ever, get purchased.

[NauVaseline]

There needs to be a connection to real life or the suspension of disbelief falters.

[Sea Shanties]

I'd be more interested in seeing a bigger variety of special custom race and class weapons. Right now it is pretty scattered and lopsided.

[Reallylongunneededplayername]

There needs to be a connection to real life or the suspension of disbelief falters.

Also, I think the creators had that in mind when they designed the weapons.

[Subutai]

Because many of the weapons in life are worse (sometimes significantly worse) mechanically than other weapons?

Before posting, I actually did "research" Light flails were in the times long ago more a torture device than actual weapon to use in combat, A heavy flail, Two handed, Was actually used but not that often compared to swords etc due to the risk of recoil.

My conclusing: Light flails are ment to vacuum, and I might actually be right?. O.o

Flails aren't really my main concern. I'd love to see more love for polearms (which historically, were extremely popular), maces (again, very common, especially against opponents in heavy armor), and even longswords (since DnD longswords are just arming swords, by far the most commonly used sword in Europe during the period).

Historical accuracy, though, is obviously more of a side note in NWN. If we wanted to go for that, rapiers would be all but useless against anyone where the least bit of armor, bows would require high strength to be effective, and melee rogues would just die instantly against anyone in fullplate. What's more important, to me, is more viable options for characters. Instead of going on the build forum or build discord channel and being recommended one of a tiny handful of weapons, it would be fantastic to go there and be given a list of a good half 5-6 equally good choices for any build.

[Cortex]

Ideally, there'd be categories of weapons with specific niches instead of a load of different weapons. Using a simplified example: 1h weapons, 2h weapons and dual wield weapons each being a category, where weapons that fall under the same category share the same baseline stats.

But I'm pretty sure there'd be a lot of objections to it...

[Seven Sons of Sin]

I always ask this question.

Is the answer in race-specific or class-specific weapons of the hardly used variety? I mean, a great example is the Orcish Blood Ax essentially defining a new subset of builds.

Is the answer in dungeons being blatantly tied to damage types? Like, should fighting undead with slashing/piercing weapons just be really, really hard, compared to bludgeoning?

With how Arelith has been designed, it has always rewarded the Weapon Focus -> Improved Crit -> Weapon Spec route. So is our goal to just widen that up so people can pick Heavy Mace without feeling "ugh"? Or is the goal so that weapon-using characters have to adapt to different situations?

There's also mechanical limitations, that are not explored in D&D but could be here. Would using small weapons in tight spaces provide an inherent advantage of trying to swing a great axe?

I think there's also a good reason 5e moved away from the 3.5's "weapons have different threat ranges." Weapons were another tool of optimization, rather than a tool for flavour and character-building.

I think a short-term, and clean solution, would be that "the most unpopular weapons" are easier to enchant and 5% than the rest. You can keen your morningstar with a 10% or 15% chance, instead of 5%.

[Zavandar]

Why should an exotic weapon do the same (and often less) than martial when you've spent a feat to use it?

why should a simple weapon beat out martial weapons? (Spear vs rapier (spear outperforms vs higher ac), xbow vs longbow)

Not every weapon should be equal imo. If they are to be balanced, it should be simple < martial < exotic. I would be okay with that. You should get returns for spending feats and taking certain classes.

The thing is, there will still always be a "meta" weapon type by virtue of versatility. There are a lot of longswords. There are a lot of waraxes. Asking the team to balance all these and then make every weapon pick just as valuable as the rest is a tall order for the dev team over a problem that isn't that big

[Sea Shanties]

More flexibility might help, like if you focus feats on one weapon you could get the same bonuses with similar weapons. Is a light crossbow so different than a heavy crossbow or a short sword from a rapier? Monks obviously get something along these lines for free and rogues to a limited extent but maybe it could be opened up further (why is rogue limited to dagger and either short sword or rapier, for example? A hand axe/dagger user ought to be possible too.)

The idea of a weaponmaster who's completely devoted to a single weapon is cool for weaponmasters and their improved AB and crits should remain specialized but perhaps a fighter or rogue could be a jack of all trades who would be competent at a range of tools.

[Orian_666]

Why should an exotic weapon do the same (and often less) than martial when you've spent a feat to use it?

why should a simple weapon beat out martial weapons? (Spear vs rapier (spear outperforms vs higher ac), xbow vs longbow)

Not every weapon should be equal imo. If they are to be balanced, it should be simple < martial < exotic. I would be okay with that. You should get returns for spending feats and taking certain classes.

The thing is, there will still always be a "meta" weapon type by virtue of versatility. There are a lot of longswords. There are a lot of waraxes. Asking the team to balance all these and then make every weapon pick just as valuable as the rest is a tall order for the dev team over a problem that isn't that big

^This

I'm all for better balancing of the weapons so that 9/10 people aren't all walking around with the same weapon simply because it's most optimal, however I completely agree with Zavandar that there should be a scaling (albeit small) "strength" in weapons based on feat or class investment.

Martial should absolutely be superior to simple, exotic however should be for the most part the "same" but just with some extra unique flavor for the feat investment otherwise we'll be back to square one and 9/10 people will just be walking around with their favorite exotic weapon because it'd be most optimal.

I'd see it to be more like this; Simple < Martial =ish Exotic, but Exotics get some sort of flavor bonus that isn't a mechanical advantage.

This is also absolutely a good time to be discussing these things considering with HaKs the variety of weapons at our disposal is likely to increase considerably. We may even see a new category behind a feat, who knows!?!

[Baseili]

I'd go for a rock, paper, scissors route.

Bludgeoning = high AB and damage, low threat (20) low crit x2 damage) - Easy to hit anywhere and it'll hurt, but you'll be lucky to hit somewhere vital.

Piercing = Low damage, low AB, high crit threat (18-20) and damage (x3) - Hard to hit yet when it does its usually very effective.

Slashing = Low damange, moderate AB, moderate threat (19-20) low crit (x2) - Easier than a stab but harder than just smashing, can do decent damage when it hits a vital spot.

[TimeAdept]

I'd go for a rock, paper, scissors route.

Bludgeoning = high AB and damage, low threat (20) low crit x2 damage) - Easy to hit anywhere and it'll hurt, but you'll be lucky to hit somewhere vital.

Piercing = Low damage, low AB, high crit threat (18-20) and damage (x3) - Hard to hit yet when it does its usually very effective.

Slashing = Low damange, moderate AB, moderate threat (19-20) low crit (x2) - Easier than a stab but harder than just smashing, can do decent damage when it hits a vital spot.

The problem with this is that mathematically a long crit range is always the most powerful. This is why rapiers and scimitars are uniersally powerful despite only being a 1d6 base weapon. Following this schema would flatly put bludgeoning damage as the worst in the game and piercing as the best. We don't need to buff rapiers.

[Cerk Evermoore]

Because many of the weapons in life are worse (sometimes significantly worse) mechanically than other weapons?

Before posting, I actually did "research" Light flails were in the times long ago more a torture device than actual weapon to use in combat, A heavy flail, Two handed, Was actually used but not that often compared to swords etc due to the risk of recoil.

My conclusing: Light flails are ment to vacuum, and I might actually be right?. O.o

Go watch deadlier warrior a flail produces enough force to turn a skull into powder. Never undetestimate the mechanical advantage of a weight on a rope on a stick. People may hit themselves but as a weapon a flail is as dangerous as they get.

However without driving too far off topic. Weapons could use more variety, especially large races like ogres who need a larger size catagory 2her. Be it good or bad.

[Baseili]

The problem with this is that mathematically a long crit range is always the most powerful. This is why rapiers and scimitars are uniersally powerful despite only being a 1d6 base weapon. Following this schema would flatly put bludgeoning damage as the worst in the game and piercing as the best. We don't need to buff rapiers.

Ah, a very good point. I'll blame the lateness of the hour and heat for that glaring oversight.

It honestly seems like weapon balancing would be made much easier without the improvements in crit threat and damage, at least mathmatically. You can't raise the damage of a weapon to compensate as that'll just shift the focus of builds and simplying bringing the crit down would change it to the next calculation, damage dice.

Perhaps giving lesser "optimal" weapons some special feature, such as being able to use -twohand or adding an effect chance would be a more interesting route?

[Scraps]

Why should an exotic weapon do the same (and often less) than martial when you've spent a feat to use it?

why should a simple weapon beat out martial weapons? (Spear vs rapier (spear outperforms vs higher ac), xbow vs longbow)

Just chiming in, Crossbows require an extra feat too. Otherwise you're sitting at 1 APR. (Two with haste!)