Fighters and Weapon Specialization

[Lobo316]

Is anyone out there using "weapon groupings" with the fighter specialization? Instead of a "single weapon", the fighter can specialize in a group of "like weapons" (slashing or cleaving, or maybe swords, axes, polearms, etc)?

[Lord Dynel]

I don't see a problem with that, hoss. I don't think it would be particularly game breaking. I use it as is, but that's me - I don't see a need to beef it up, in my opinion. But if you want to change it to a weapon group instead of one specific weapon, I say go for it.

[Go0gleplex]

From a general play standpoint I don't see a major issue with this. Like LD said, it doesn't seem game breaking.

That said, from a fundamentalist standpoint, someone whom specializes in a weapon is one whom learns everything there is to know in the use of that particular type of weapon. There is a lot of difference in how one fights with a short sword vs a long sword, or how one would use a hand axe vs a battle axe. Even polearms have a variety in the forms of their use. Allowing specializing in groups sort of detracts away from what specialization really is. With the fighter having a Base to Hit of +1, which is better than any other class, one could argue that such specialization for groups is already built into the class with a wider latitude that a singular grouping could achieve.

[Lobo316]

With the fighter having a Base to Hit of +1, which is better than any other class, one could argue that such specialization for groups is already built into the class with a wider latitude that a singular grouping could achieve.

You know what, that my friend, is an excellent observation. Makes sense!

[Omote]

Is anyone out there using "weapon groupings" with the fighter specialization? Instead of a "single weapon", the fighter can specialize in a group of "like weapons" (slashing or cleaving, or maybe swords, axes, polearms, etc)?

No. As mentioned above, the extra +1 to hit is already bonus enough. Having the fighter be +2 with a whole range of weapons at 1st level is a bit too awesome IMO.

~O

[Lord Dynel]

I was actually going I say something similar to what Go0gle and Omote said, but I know I take a "Devil's Advocate" approach sometimes, so I kept my post kind of bland in regards to my preferences. I still stand by my opinion of it not being terribly broken, but I think the flavor and the spirit of weapon specialization works fine (at least for me) as is.

[Omote]

Lord D knows. That's why he's a lord, don'tcha know?!

~O

[zombiehands]

Personally I do it another way. I make the bonus for the fighters "weapon of choice" being a specific weapon. Not a longsword but a specific longsword. You change the weapon with 1 day of intense training and after 1 fight. That way the fighter can utilize more magic items. It has not broken anything yet.

[alcyone]

It might be realistic but it's no fun buying the shortbow you can afford, specializing, then finding a nice composite longbow a few adventures down the road. Then again, I think archers don't have a good class to use in C&C unless you use the Archer or Marksman from the community. At least for my totally unrealistic vision of a Legolas/Robin Hood short range dungeon skirmisher.