Asian Weapons in 5e

One of my favorite aspects of the 1E version of Oriental Adventures was the weapon section. More than anything else, this was the flavor that really allowed my imagination to take flight. There is something about the image of temple guards armed with tetsubos that just says asian fantasy to me. You could keep virtually everything else about the game the same, have a list of asian-inspired weapons and my imagination would transport me to whatever asian-style fantasy world you want.

Thus, a very important aspect of continuing my current thought experiment, which I am tentatively calling Jade: The Land of the Ten Clans, was to get a weapon list full of asian-style weapons. In order to do this, I really didn’t want to re-invent the wheel. As far as I can see, the weapon list in 5e is just fine. It does everything I need it to do. Thus, the key was to find asian equivalents to each of the weapons on the list. There are a couple of things, though, that I really wanted to express through the weapons list that wouldn’t be necessarily possible, given the proficiencies of the Rogue and the Ranger.

Firstly, I wanted the katana and wakizashi to be exclusively Ranger weapons. This sets up a class divide between Rangers and every other class and allows these two weapons to be the outward symbols of that class divide.

Secondly, due the ubiquitous image of the ninja armed with a blowgun, I wanted Rogues to have access to that particular weapon. I will grant, that I could have done this via a specific background, but given my desire to make the katana and wakizashi exclusive to Rangers, I found it more useful to deal with it more generally.

Thus, to solve both problems with one simple change, I swapped out the Rogue’s proficiency with the Longsword (which is the best fit for describing a katana) for a proficiency with the Blowgun.

Here is a list of the 5e weapons and what I see as decent (though not perfect) asian equivalents:

Simple Melee Weapons
Club = Jo
Dagger = Knife
Greatclub = Tetsubo
Handaxe = (same)
Javelin = Sibat
Light Hammer = Tonfa
Mace = (same)
Quarterstaff = Bo
Sickle = Kama
Spear = Chiang

Simple Ranged Weapons
Crossbow, Light = (same)
Dart = Shuriken
Shortbow = (same)
Sling = (same)

Martial Melee Weapons
Battleaxe = Naginata
Flail = Nunchuck
Glaive = Chai-Dao
Greataxe = Nine-Dragon-Trident
Greatsword = No Dachi
Halberd = Ghi
Lance = (same)
Longsword = Katana
Maul = Wolf-Teeth-Staff
Morningstar = (same)
Pike = Yari
Rapier = Jien
Scimitar = Wakizashi
Shortsword = Sai
Trident = Dang Pa
War pick = Hook Sword
Warhammer = Three-Section-Staff
Whip = Chain Whip

Martial Ranged Weapons
Blowgun = (same)
Crossbow, hand = (same)
Crossbow, heavy = (same)
Longbow = (same)
Net = (same)

Thus, the swords of the Ranger class are the Katana and Wakizashi and the sword of the Rogue-as-rank-in-file-soldier is the Jien.

Again, I realize that several of these equivalents are not exact, but in the abstract they do just fine. Given that D&D combat has always been a gross abstraction of combat, this list suits me just fine.

Saintly Saturday: St. Botolph Abbot of the Monastery Icanhoh

Today is the Feast of St. Botolph, Abbot of the Monastery Icanhoh who is a British saint from the 7th century. Born in Britain, he became a monk in Gaul. King Ethelmund of East Anglia sent his sisters to Gaul to learn the monastic discipline. There they met St. Botolph and learned that he wanted to return to Britain. Therefore, they requested that their brother bequeath some land to the monk so that he could build a monastery.

St. Botolph asked that whatever land was given to him did not come from any man’s possession so to avoid gaining from someone’s loss. Therefore, King Ethelmund granted the monk a piece of wilderness called Icanhoh. The place, according to his hagiography, was crawling with demons. Thus, before he began establishing his monastery, he had to fight with the demons and drive them all off. He spent the rest of his life in prayer becoming known for working miracles and speaking prophecy. After a bout with a painful disease in the last several years of his life, he passed in A.D. 680. HIs relics were found later to give off a sweet fragrance and to be incorrupt.

Eventually, the area around Icanhoh became settled and was known as Botolphston, which can mean both Botolph’s stone or Botolph’s town. As the years passed, the name of the place was contracted to “Boston.”

I have often pointed out the fact that the lives of the monastic saints closely resemble that of the typical D&D campaign. They come from Christian Civilization, go out into the Demonic Wilderness and tame it so that Civilization can expand; however, I don’t recall ever reading a saint’s life that so explicitly followed this formula. The hagiography literally says that Icanhoh was a desolate place where he had to fight demons. This is yet another example of why I think the formula of Christian Civilization vs. the Demonic Wilderness in D&D works so well, because it mirrors the experience of the Church Herself.

In addition, it is really cool to know that the etymology of my old stomping ground suggests that not only is Boston Bean Town but also St. Botolph’s Town. It is too bad that the only Church of St. Botolph I know of is in Boston, Lincolnshire. Boston, Mass should have something dedicated to their namesake.

***

The Red Seax

This legendary +1 short sword/long knife was forged from the strange red metal recovered from a meteor. It was forged to be a holy weapon using incense as its carbon source, etched with a holy symbol and quenched in holy oil. In the hands of a Lawful character, it offers Protection from Evil 10’r when wielded. Against Chaotic creatures it is a +2 weapon and against the undead it is +3.

Its original owner was the King’s Champion Dreux who had it forged specifically to combat a demon that had began to terrorize the people in the borderlands. Unfortunately, the demon prevailed and the Red Seax became part of the demon’s growing treasure trove. As the Kingdom’s fortunes fell with the increasing influence of the demon, the king’s youngest son, Merovech, gave up his monastic training to quest after the sword. He managed to sneak into the demon’s lair and steal the sword right out from beneath the creature’s nose. He went on to use the weapon to fight against and finally rid the kingdom of the demon’s influence, although he did die from the wounds he sustained before managing to deliver the killing blow to the demon itself. In honor of his great deeds, the Red Seax remains in the prince’s tomb where it awaits to be used once again to defend the realm against evil.

For those interested, I used random tables here and here to come up with the properties and the background of the sword.

Playing with Abstraction (5e and BX)

There is an interesting pattern that exists in the way 5e describes armor and the way that BX presents armor. 5e has three categories: Light, Medium and Heavy. BX has Leather, Chain and Plate. Although 5e does have variable Armor Classes to different types of armor within each category, I think it very useful to abstract armor in the way that 5e does for the purposes of hacking 5e ideas into BX.

If one replaces leather, chain and plate with Light, Medium and Heavy armor with the same corresponding AC, it frees players and referees to describe armor anyway that they want to. Traditional D&D (including BX) is largely driven by the martial traditions of medieval and renaissance Europe. Abstracting armor to the broad categories of 5e suddenly allows a very simple way for players to imagine their characters from radically different martial traditions. For example, in my own Lost Colonies campaign, Medium Armor is crafted from the scales of giant fish from the Endless River and Heavy Armor from the chitin of giant insects.

To a limited extent, 5e also suggests a similar abstraction with weapons in context of Monk weapons usable with the Martial Arts feature of that class. 5e doesn’t bother to list nunchaku or kama in their weapon list. Rather, they offer the following advice:

[Y]ou might use a club that is two lengths of wood connected by a short chain (called a nunchaku) or a sickle with a shorter, straighter blade (called a kama). Whatever name you use for a monk weapon, you can use the game statistics provided for the weapon in chapter 5.

In other words, use the stats for existing European martial weapons and re-imagine them as a weapon from another martial tradition.

This got me thinking about taking this abstraction to the level of the armor abstraction. In other words, have broad categories of weapons, which are modified by weapon properties in order to provide generic stats to describe whatever kind of weapon the player or referee wants.

5e provides three of these categories: simple weapons, martial weapons and the subclass in each of ranged weapons. Simple weapons can be categorized as weapons that can be made of wood and/or stone. For example: clubs, hand axes, daggers. Martial Weapons are those that require the use of metal. For example, swords, polearms and heavy crossbows.

Each category would then have a base cost, which would be modified by weapon properties. The least expensive simple weapon (the club) in BX costs 3 gp. The least expensive martial weapon (warhammer or short sword) costs 5 gp or 7 gp. The most expensive melee weapon is the two-handed sword at 15 gp. Bows range in price from 25 gp to 40 gp

From this one could abstract weapons in the following ways:

• Base price of a simple weapon = 3 gp
• Base price of a martial weapon = 6 gp
• Each additional property = 3 gp for simple weapons and 6 gp for martial weapons.
• Ranged weapons have a short range of 10 feet which is doubled for medium range and tripled for long range. Every 10 feet added to the short range costs an extra 5 gp. For example: a short bow has a short range of 50 feet in BX. That would be an extra 40 feet for (4 x 5 gp) 20 gp. Having no other properties and being a simple weapon a short bow would cost 23 gp, which is comparable to the 25 gp cost in BX.

This system creates a set of properties that describe abstract ideas about a weapon which then can be used to create any weapon that a player or referee desires to exist in their campaign world. Since all damage is based on class, this system doesn’t punish players for wanting an exotic (non-sword) weapon.

For example, there are weapons in my Lost Colonies campaign similar to the macahuitl from the Aztec martial tradition. It is a simple weapon, being made of wood and stone, and has the Versatile property being able to be wielded either one-handed or two-handed. Thus, it would cost 6 gp.

The only wrench in this abstraction is the sling. According to this system it would cost 18 gp (3 for being a simple weapon, 15 gp for having a base range of 40 feet). In BX they are the cheapest weapon at 2 gp. If one is willing to include training in the abstraction of a weapon’s cost (because using a military sling isn’t easy) than this still works overall.

In the end, I am willing to live with hiccups like the sling if it gives me the freedom to imagine all kinds of weapons and have a simple way to mechanically describe them and assign a monetary cost to them.

Playing with Weapon Properties (5e and BX)

For years, I have used universal damage dice at my table while playing BX or LL. This decision, however, is not a partisan one as I have explained here. In recent years, I have subscribed to a class-based version of the universal damage die where magic-users use d4, clerics & thieves use d6 and fighters use d8. Anyone who is really familiar with my musings, however, knows that I do have a soft spot for tactical choice in weapons used by PCs. Several times over the years, for example, I have tried (and failed) at making Weapon vs. AC tables where different weapons do better versus different types of armor.

During my musings on combining Holmes with Cook, I took a stab at attaching some tactical choices to weapon variable damage here and here. I have yet to use this particular system at the table, because the siren song of a universal damage die just works for me.

With its various weapon properties, however, 5e may just very well allow me to have my cake and eat it too. The categories in question are as follows:

• Light weapons can be used in the off hand for two weapon fighting
• Finesse weapons allow the DEX bonus in place of the STR bonus
• Thrown weapons may used as either melee or missile weapons
• Versatile weapons can be used as either a one-handed or two-handed weapons
• Heavy weapons can’t be used by Small Creatures without disadvantage
• Reach weapons have an extra 5 ft range
• Two-Handed weapons require two hands, but do more damage

These properties can be adjusted to affect a class-based universal damage die in BX or LL:

• Light = 2 attacks per round at half-die damage ea.
• Thrown = base die damage
• Two-Handed = next die up damage but automatically lose initiative
• Versatile = use either as one handed (base damage) or two-handed (next die up damage but lose initiative)
• Reach = base damage and automatically win initiative on round one, but automatically lose it on subsequent rounds.
• Heavy = Dwarves and Halflings can’t use these weapons.

Thus, if a battleaxe were to be given the Versatile property as it is in 5e, then a magic-user would be able to do d4 damage normally or d6 damage as a two-handed weapon (and automatically lose initiative). A cleric or thief would do d6/d8 damage and a fighter would do d8/d10 damage.

A Light weapon, such as a dagger, would allow a magic user to attack twice in the same round doing 1d2 with each attack. A cleric or a thief would do 1d3 damage and a fighter d4. This property would only apply to melee combat. Thus, if a dagger were thrown, only one could be thrown in a round and would do d4/d6/d8 damage.

Bows would do normal damage (d4/d6/d8), slings would have the Versatile property and Crossbows would have the Two-Handed property.

Finesse weapons would work exactly like they do in 5e (allow DEX instead of STR if the player so chose).

Thus, there still exists a universal damage die based on class, but each class has a variety of tactical choices when it comes to the weapons they want to use. Given that no one weapon is universally better than every other weapon (as swords are in AD&D), this still allows players to use a wide variety of weapons without being punished for wanting something for purely aesthetic reasons.