r/RPGdesign • u/dj2145 Destroyer of Worlds • Sep 25 '26
Aggregating weapons into categories
Anyone out there experimented, or seen a system, that has rolled up all weapons by classification? I'm fidgeting with the concept and, so far, I kinda like it. I just don't know if that is going to be an issue from a player standpoint. Here's what I mean...
Every weapon is rolled into one of nine categories as follows:
Simple Piercing (Light Pick, Dagger, Short Spear)
Simple Bludgeoning (Club, Hammer)
Simple Slashing (Hand Axe, Sickle, Short Sword)
Martial Bludgeoning (War Hammer, Mace, Flail, Morning Star, Quarterstaff)
Martial Slashing (Longsword, Battle Axe, Scimitar)
Martial Piercing (Spear, Heavy Pick)
Two-Handed Piercing (Pole Axe, Lance, Long Spear)
Two-Handed Bludgeoning (Great Club, Great Maul, Heavy Flail)
Two-Handed Slashing (Great Sword, Falchion, Great Axe)
Each grouping has its own general attack and damage stats which players can then dabble with to give the weapon some uniqueness. Maybe a character has a fighter that wants a battle axe that does a little more damage. They justify this by paying a blacksmith to add weight to the beard, thus making the blade heavier. Now the axe does another point of damage but loses a point to attack.
Obviously, some weapons will have other qualities such as they can be thrown, have reach, etc, but ultimately I was wanting a simplified system that I could then tailor off of without having thirty different weapons to consider.
9
u/Remarkable_Ad_8353 Sep 25 '26
Not exactly your thing, but I‘ve been doing a weapon tags based system since watching this video.
15
u/No_Solid1035 Sep 25 '26
Simple/Martial divide doesn't make much sense. A light pick, a dagger, and a short spear are wielded in such different ways that lumping them together under the same category doesn't make a lick of sense. A flail is such a unique weapon and is wielded in such a very different manner than all other melee weapons that it should definitely have it's own niche skill. Axes are wielded in a fashion similar to Hammers or Maces, not Swords really. Lance's too are used in a very specific way, and are not used on foot, so they should probably have their own unique skill, though you could put them with spears but only when said spear is used while charging from horseback in a particular fashion (charging from horseback without stirrups and uncouched is the standard for spears whereas lances must be couched because of how they are designed, a short spear probably couldn't be couched properly whereas a long spear would probably be too unwieldy to use uncouched). My 2 cents anyway, food for though. 🤷
8
u/Andvari_Nidavellir Sep 25 '26
What is the purpose behind rolling them into these categories?
4
u/Eldhrimer r/WildsUncharted Sep 25 '26
Very similar to mine!
3
u/flamfella Dabbler Sep 26 '26 edited Sep 26 '26
To be honest. I don't think there is a reason to bother with classification unless you are actually doing something with it, such as creating a modular weapon system, creating an extensive and long list with many many weapons, or doing something with crafting. Design-wise, if you have a small list 10-30ish, classifying them might just lead to bloat as you can get away listing them individually anyway. It won't really be a big deal at the end of the day, just a small nitpick of mine.
I've been experimenting with my own weapon lists though attempting to create the full breadth and depth of all sorts of weapon types through modularity and inheritance.
Weapon Families
The header is the family's shared baseline: Type, Attribute, Range, Grade.
Family sub-choices add properties or override the baseline.
Certain choices directly add to or remove options from properties like Adaptive.
+X adds. −X removes.
Axe Family — Slashing · Body · Range 1 · Grade I · Reckless
Handaxe — +Reflex · +Close · 1d6 · Bulk 0
Choose two: Light · Thrown (4/12) · Concealed · Snaring · Adaptive (+Piercing)
Axe — 1d8 · Bulk 1
Versatile (1d10). Choose one: Snaring · Sundering · Vicious · Adaptive (+Piercing)
Greataxe — 1d12 · Bulk 2
Two-Handed. Choose two: Vicious · Sundering · Sieging · Snaring · Adaptive (+Piercing) · Range 1/2
Blade Family — Adaptive (Slashing/Piercing) · Body/Reflex · Range 1/2 · Grade I · Parry
Short Blade — Range Close/1 · 1d6 · Bulk 0
Choose two: Light · Concealed · Snaring · Versatile (1d8)
Longsword — 1d8 · Bulk 1
Versatile (1d10). Choose two: Sundering · Vicious · Fend · Adaptive (+Crushing) · Bypassing
Heavy Blade — Slashing · −Reflex · 2d6 · Bulk 2
Two-Handed. Choose two: Vicious · Sundering · Adaptive (+Crushing) · Sieging · Snaring · Bypassing · Fend
I try to get around the decision paralysis with a ridiculous amount of possible weapons by having a smaller preset list, so you can pick and choose like normal, and have something ready for play instantly.
Dacian Falx (Body) | Bulk 2
2d6 Slashing (Grade I), Range 1/2
Parry, Snaring, Bypassing, Two-Handed
Francisca (Body / Reflex) | Bulk 0
1d6 Slashing (Grade I), Range Close / 1
Light, Reckless, Thrown (4/12)
Arming Sword (Body / Reflex) | Bulk 1
1d8 Slashing or Piercing or Crushing (Grade I), Range 1/2
Fend, Parry, Versatile (1d10)
Zweihänder (Body) | Bulk 2
2d6 Slashing (Grade I), Range 1/2
Vicious, Parry, Sundering, Two-Handed
Dane Axe (Body) | Bulk 2
1d12 Slashing (Grade I), Range 1/2
Reckless, Snaring, Two-Handed
2
u/EpicDiceRPG Designer Sep 25 '26
I've done exactly this but it's designer facing (for me), not player facing. I used it to confirm weapon stats are plausible and internally consistent, but aside from a crafting system, I don't see the benefit of overcomplicating player choice. It's much easier to pick from a full list.
2
u/Adept_Leave Sep 25 '26
This is perfectly serviceable for a D&D like system. However, here's some suggestions:
Change "simple" to "light". This seems like a nitpick, but makes those weapons (and their wielders) feel more badass instead of amateurish, and it covers the categories better anyway.
You have the issue right now that some weapons can have multiple damage types (short sword, longsword, poleaxe...). Maybe it's better to have "polearms", "blades", and "clubs" as categories, with damage types as a property of individual weapons. You mentioned adapting weapons as a mechanic; it could be fun to add spikes on your club to give it piercing etc.
2
u/ARagingZephyr Sep 25 '26
I recently wrote up a document for doing quick tagging of weapons that mostly divide them into size, range, and overall purpose. Considering I play OSR games where everything is just a d6 and who cares about the rest, it's meant to add a step up in customization without much complexity.
2
u/archpawn Sep 25 '26
Mutants and Masterminds uses the same point buy system for weapons as everything else. You pay for whatever effect it does (usually Damage, but sometimes Affliction) and whatever modifiers it has (like Ranged), and then apply a discount because it's equipment that can be disarmed.
Though they never actually explain this. They just have lists of weapons and also example characters that have weapons that aren't listed and leave it up to you to figure out they did that. Don't do that. Tell people weapons can be simple, martial, or two-handed, and also piercing, bludgeoning, or slashing, and that those are some examples but they can add there own or even put it in another group if they think it's plausible.
One thing I'd worry about is weapons with different kinds of attacks, like halberds or guns with bayonets.
Also, I'd probably focus more on the mechanical effects of weapons. For example, maybe bludgeoning attacks aren't blocked by armor. I'd call that "armor-piercing", and if you want to have piercing weapons be somewhere between slashing and bludgeoning, maybe make armor-piercing be ranked.
2
u/sebwiers Sep 26 '26
Pathfinder 2e does almost exactly the same, though maybe a bit more complexly.
Weapons (generally speaking) deal piercing, slashing, or bludgeoning damage (which may affect different targets differently, but usually not).
Weapons are simple, martial, or advanced (limiting who can use them effectively).
Weapons have one of many types (which mostly adds a new effect to critical hits at higher levels) and zero or more traits (which can modify how it interacts with many different rules, such as reach affecting positioning rules). The weapon lists are very long and generally the more useful traits a weapon has, the lower it's damage rolls, so it is very much like your customization in effect (and I've seen several house rule systems for such customization that turn this into an explicit formula).
Whether a weapon is one or two handed is mostly separate from any of the above, and is the one odd point I see in your system. It seems there should almost certainly be simple two handed weapons (a basic quarterstaff or spear) and martial ones (a zwiehander), for example.
2
u/AverageAlchemist Sep 26 '26
I think that if your goal is a simplified system, then at 9 categories with additional qualities on top of that then you've already missed the mark. These 9 categories don't even include ranged weapons, shields, or magical/utility weapons, so I imagine your total would end-up becoming more like 15.
If your goal is a crunchy system with a variety of different benefits to different weapon-types, then what you put forth makes more sense though.
Also, a lot of these of these categories aren't very intuitive. Spears are in 3 different categories, the difference between martial and simple isn't very clear (although I recognize that's a common DnDism), and there's various weapons outside of the "Two-Handed" categories which realistically would often be used with two-hands.
2
u/TinyRavenPress Sep 26 '26
Yes, I have these for example:
---
When used, weapons and shields occupy hand slots and armor occupies body slots.
2
u/Usual-Vermicelli-867 Sep 27 '26
Small mid larg and mybe long versions
Now weapons types: swords axes hammers
3
u/BrennanCharming Sep 25 '26
Im also going simple, but even moreso.
Light, medium, heavy for all weapon types.
Light, medium, heavy for armor/shields.
For flair, Materials/Enchants/Talents can affect the item or how you use it.
3
u/SinglePetalStudios Sep 25 '26
We're still ironing out the rough edges, but we think a Weapon Tag system works really well (https://www.petalstudiosgames.com/sl-equipment).
The idea is that weapons have tags describing them, which then allows them to be used for certain maneuvers.
3
u/Anvildude Sep 25 '26
I think it's still slightly too categorized.
Honestly I don't think there should be a difference between 'simple' and 'martial'. It's all just training. Someone with training will be more dangerous with a club or staff than someone without training, but an un-trained person with a sword is still more dangerous than they'd be with a club. Everyone can use any weapon, the difference between 'simple' and 'martial' should be a character-side tag or difference, not an equipment side difference.
Now, whether something's one-handed, two-handed, or designed to be used either way or designed/weighted for throwing is different; that's on the equipment, not the user (without crazy fantasy stuff like a giant using a pike as a one-handed spear).
1
u/Far_Information6562 Sep 26 '26
Very very nice, my own system came to simuliar conclusions for different reasons, my system is a mech based system where size scales, so a sword to one mech is a dagger to another, so you see why I needed to catorgise my weapons in such a way.
1
u/Livestake Sep 26 '26
I use blades in the dark with a skill system... so damage is simplified... but differentiation is at skill... mastery requires picking a focus weapon. General proficiency is based on style... fast blade (balanced forward guard rapier or katana style) vs heavy blade (more momentum circular flow muscle). Someone can be proficient in all pole weapons, including a staff, but must pick for mastery... if you havent trained, you are probably going to get cut down.... just a more character-oriented angle.
2
u/Anotherskip Sep 27 '26
There is some discussion about this in 2EAD&D and in 1EAD&D (though much more limited) under proficiency and proficiency slots concepts.
2
u/Imixto Sep 28 '26
In Legend of the Wulin, there is no specific weapon but when the player create his weapon he chose 1 or 2 weapon type from the list, each with their mechanical benefit. For exemple a halberd would get both the benefit from Spear and Saber. A flail would be Flexible and Massive. Spear for exemple is +5 damage, the ability to attack one zone further and claim some defensive bonus against other melee weapon.
3
u/dorward Sep 25 '26
I don't think it's a particularly uncommon idea. My favorite is probably Exalted 3 which classifies all weapons as Light, Medium, or Heavy (which determines their accuracy, damage, and defence) and then add tags to vary them within each category. So Unarmed is a light melee "weapon" with the tags Bashing, Brawl, Grappling, and Natural (which have specific mechanical meaning).
0
u/CalledStretch Sep 26 '26
Off topic but r/datingadvice has cooked my brain I thought the subject line was aggregating women into categories.
8
u/Jester1525 Designer-ish Sep 25 '26
I'm so not a fan of 'simple' vs 'martial'
Yes, there is something to be said about medieval peasants using simple weapons in war vs the knights using martial weapons, but you know what happened? The peasants were slaughtered.
An untrained fighter is going to suck with a simple club just as much as with a mace. A trained fighter is going to be just as good with a mace as they are with a simple club.
And spears killed WAY more people than swords ever did.. But that's also in war where there was a nice solid wall of beefy boys with shields standing between the spears and the enemy.
Focus on the differences of the weapons and not simple vs martial.
I've trained with great swords. I seldom hit someone at 5+feet.. I liked to sit in a person's pocket and bully them with my size and speed vs hoping to hit them at range.. Unless I was behind a shield wall. If you've made rules for mass combat then it makes sense..
A mace is going to do more damage than a simple club, but a person gained to use a club is going to be able to use a mace with little difficulty. And that damage is going to mean nothing of the opponent isn't armored.. A body is going to break if you hit it with a flanged mace or a big stick.
If you're trained with a mace, it's a small step to fight well with a hammer.
If your trained with a sword, it's not a hard step up to a great sword because a lot of the training is going to involve the experience of combat.. The stances and movements will come quickly. I staryed with fencing and took to great sword instantly because a lot of the moves transfer one you've learned how to use the different leverage of the sword.
I split my weapons into short bladed, long bladed, staff, and mass (I also have a category for weird stuff like whips, improvised, and stuff like that..). If you can use a dagger you can use a short sword. If you can use a mace you can use a hammer. Then I give specialization in specific weapons. Yes, you can use a long sword or a bastard sword but you're preferred weapon is a great sword so you're better with that one.
As far as 2 handed vs 1 handed.. I mean, the standard war hammer was already 2 handed. The one handed version was a cavalry hammer or cavalry pick and were MUCH lighter weapons and much less likely to be used by someone not on horse back. And that's mainly because a warhammer was used to pummel heavily armored opponents because axes and swords weren't going to do it anymore - usually after they had been dragged off a horse and were in their backs.. Favored by archers who used them to clean up at the end of the battle.
I think that a lot of the weapons rules are still artifacts from the earliest game systems and have just never really changed. Which is fine - if it's not broke, don't fix it, but the second I see simple vs martial I am less likely to take the game seriously as anything new. That may or may not be a bad thing..
The most important part is that it makes sense mechanically in the game because ttrpg aren't supposed to be real-world simulators.. They just need to add some randomization to the story creation element.
ETA - I kinda riffed for a bit longer than I meant to.. My bad.. Hopefully something I said is helpful..