Talk:Monofilament Wire (5e Equipment)

Rarity

While anachronistic weapons do not have rarities listed in the DMG, this wiki explicitly states that modern/futuristic weapons should more-or-less be treated like magic items. As such (and as discussed below), it was deemed fit that such rulings should extend to rarities. —Ref3rence (talk) 16:32, 17 December 2020 (MST)

Modern Tag

Two cents: I'm not sure the modern tag is applicable here for balance. The wire in fantasy is indeed very powerful. But I have seen it used in more historic fantasy settings.--Yanied (talk) 22:04, 25 November 2020 (MST)

I agree, but the specifics of a monofilament wire, especially with the connection to Hellsing, means that this specific weapon would require modern methods to create. I think a weaker wire-based weapon could certainly find its way on this wiki, this simply isn't the right namespace. --Ref3rence (talk) 22:16, 25 November 2020 (MST)

To Avoid an Edit War

As far as I understand, the modern/futuristic tag does not balance horrible weapon balance. While many weapons like this with these tags exist, it doesn't mean they do not massively jeopardize 5e and encounter balance.

By all means this should be a magical weapon. 90% of futuristic weapons should be.--SwankyPants (talk) 22:34, 25 November 2020 (MST)

Didn't realize there already was a section, my bad--SwankyPants (talk) 22:36, 25 November 2020 (MST)

I personally have to disagree with you. The absolute baseline weakest weapon given by the DMG (pg. 268) for modern weapons is a basic pistol that deals a greatsword's damage with a crossbow's range that can make multiattacks. The only thing this page has compared to that beyond 1:1 tradeoffs is the special property, and even then that was a holdover from a previous state of this weapon that I have been rolling around the idea of nerfing/removing for a while.

On your second front, as stated in the modern and futuristic weapon page headers, you're right and these literally are magic items, as is every single gun page: "These weapons should usually be treated as rare and priceless as magic items, but in specific campaigns these items may be considered "mundane" and have relevant costs listed." Without a shadow of a doubt or debate, modern and futuristic equipment fundamentally do not operate on the same scale as typical equipment, and that applies to encounters as well.

Beyond all of this, the main conflict between Someone and I was a misunderstanding between "why is this beyond the bounds of typical 5e" and "this isn't made for typical 5e play, check the tags" [conflict we've had before]. In summary, I don't understand the complaint of future tech > modern tech > renaissance tech > medieval tech when the DMG literally says the same thing. --Ref3rence (talk) 23:02, 25 November 2020 (MST)

I understand that even the DMG balances weapons this way, yes, but that doesn't mean it remains balanced.

As far as I understand, players are the only ones that get these weapons without any consideration. CR is still balanced the exact same way, there is no modern/futuristic creature creation table. If the monsters aren't balanced against players that deal way more damage, the game is unbalanced, and stuff kinda falls apart. Even a potential solution, throwing in higher CR creatures, could have some repercussions, where either side deals too much damage to eachother.

Might just be my own gripe. I don't know.--SwankyPants (talk) 06:58, 26 November 2020 (MST)

Call me 404! Someone404 (talk) 10:15, 26 November 2020 (MST)

Right, that's been quite enough from all of you. Speaking as an admin, Ref3rence is clearly in the right here, and this weapon does not have to be balanced in comparison to mainline 5e weapons for the already stated rationale that it is a modern invention and therefore operating under different assumptions than the ones used for mundane weaponry. If I see the needsbalance template be added even one more time for the same faulty reasons, I'm going to start administering warnings. Natsumi super fan (talk) 10:29, 26 November 2020 (MST)

I totally disagree. The assumption the modern weapons somehow don't need to abide to balance standards doesn't make sense to me. "Modern" settings for dnd still operate under 5e rules, and this weapon clearly disrupt that. This should be equated to a magic weapon and have a rarity, since rarity indicates at what level a character should have this weapon. Anastacio (talk) 11:45, 26 November 2020 (MST)

As I stated above, the understanding of modern and futuristic weapons is that they should be treated in the same manner as magical weapons by default, and this isn't even all that strong compared to even a basic DMG automatic handgun. I'm all for slapping rarities on all modern equipment, I think that would massively benefit modern weapons as a whole. I personally believe the issue isn't that this is somehow better than anything else it would be used instead of in modern settings, but that modern equipment exists in a void. --Ref3rence (talk) 11:56, 26 November 2020 (MST)

I totally agree with the "void" of modern weapons. This is Wizard's fault, who insist in putting not fully developed modern weapon rules in DMG's across editions. Slapping rarity on modern and futuristic weapons would be a great solution! Anastacio (talk) 12:12, 26 November 2020 (MST)

Be back in a minute! --Ref3rence (talk) 12:13, 26 November 2020 (MST)