Is this right, weapon size

Would a TWF druid shaped as a huge creature wielding a quarterstaff with shillelagh cast on it be hitting for 4d6 on the dice? I can't find a paizo size for weapons larger than Large size. I think this is the right size per 3.5 rules.

If that is accurate would a huge creature wielding an oversized gargantuan club two-handed casting shillelagh and taking the -2 for oversized deal 4d6 also, as it is increased 2 size categories and there is no size past colossal, or would it just continue the trend of 4d6 jumping to 6d6?

Actually on second though this probably belongs in the rules area, anyone know how to move a thread?

I was also thrown by 1d10 scaling to 2d8. I guess, it makes sense, but I've already had a player inquire about monkey grip in a way that makes me uncomfortable.

Fortunately, the rules have the good sense to make it clear that a weapon that increases in size also increases in handedness (thus ruling out dual-weilding katanas dealing 2d8 damage each).

Edit: To answer your question, I'm pretty sure it would be 3d8. Find 2d6, increase it in size to 3d6 then move down the table once. I could be wrong.

I was also thrown by 1d10 scaling to 2d8. I guess, it makes sense, but I've already had a player inquire about monkey grip in a way that makes me uncomfortable.

Fortunately, the rules have the good sense to make it clear that a weapon that increases in size also increases in handedness (thus ruling out dual-weilding katanas dealing 2d8 damage each).

Edit: To answer your question, I'm pretty sure it would be 3d8. Find 2d6, increase it in size to 3d6 then move down the table once. I could be wrong.

a large size shillelagh does 3d6(gargantuan club) as per spell description, and lines up with the d20srd.com chart.. I'm going by that since I don't know where to find one for pathfinder. The next step would be 4d6 for a huge shillelagh according to that chart. My question is that is basically a colossal sized club. A huge creature wielding an oversized club as a two-handed weapon and casting shillelagh on it would not be on the chart. Would it cap out or continue the pattern of 4d6 going to 6d6(based on the colossal longsword, which is one step higher than a club)

source http://www.d20srd.org/srd/equipment/weapons.htm#weaponSize

Yeah, I see your argument.

It's either

2d6->3d6->3d8

or

2d6->3d6
3d6->4d6

Either we're saying the medium is the defining base for the weapon in general or we're saying that each new size is the base for the next size. Not sure which to go by.

Wait. The Huge Storm Giant's Greatsword deals 4d6.

That would be
2d6->3d6
3d6->4d6

That's how it seems to be intended.

The huge cloud giant's mornigstar does 4d6 as well. That makes my head hurt. I can only assume they mean 3d6.

The huge cloud giant's mornigstar does 4d6 as well. That makes my head hurt. I can only assume they mean 3d6.

I think you're still misunderstanding me :)

Look at the line with shortspear, it is same weapon damage as a club.

Look at huge(assuming huge sized druid), go up one, that's a druid using an oversized club as a huge creature.

Druid casts shillelagh and raises weapon size by 2, that goes off the chart totally. That is where my question lies. Does it use the colossal longsword damage, or does it max out at the colossal sized club as there is no size defined past colossal.

Loopy wrote:

The huge cloud giant's mornigstar does 4d6 as well. That makes my head hurt. I can only assume they mean 3d6.

I think you're still misunderstanding me :)

Look at the line with shortspear, it is same weapon damage as a club.

Look at huge(assuming huge sized druid), go up one, that's a druid using an oversized club as a huge creature.

Druid casts shillelagh and raises weapon size by 2, that goes off the chart totally. That is where my question lies. Does it use the colossal longsword damage, or does it max out at the colossal sized club as there is no size defined past colossal.

My bad. The cloud giant has the oversized weapon SQ.

Well, I'd say that since the spell says "as if" it were larger, you'd just recalculate the damage for a medium sized weapon and apply new damage as if going from medium to large. I'd also do this in general for any size increase because that's what it seems to be doing with these giant entries.

Medium Morningstar: 1d8
Large Morningstar: 2d6
Huge Morningstar: (unknown but probably 3d6)
Gargantuan Morningstar: 4d6

I'd bet dollars to doughnuts that Colossal Morningstar is 5d6 and that WTF Colossal +1 Morningstar should be calculated as 6d6.

The chart may not say it, but you can extrapolate an extednded chart by looking at the monster entries and come to a logical conclusion that if a weapon does 3d6 or better, you're just increasing the die code by +1d6.

Loopy wrote:

The huge cloud giant's mornigstar does 4d6 as well. That makes my head hurt. I can only assume they mean 3d6.

I think you're still misunderstanding me :)

Look at the line with shortspear, it is same weapon damage as a club.

Look at huge(assuming huge sized druid), go up one, that's a druid using an oversized club as a huge creature.

Druid casts shillelagh and raises weapon size by 2, that goes off the chart totally. That is where my question lies. Does it use the colossal longsword damage, or does it max out at the colossal sized club as there is no size defined past colossal.

There's a pattern to the size progression Grasshopper.

It really depends on the wording of the Shillalleigh spell (AFB right now and my connection is too slow to even try hitting up the PRD)

If it says "Treated as two sizes larger" Then the damage stops at Collosal because that's the highest size.

However, if it says "Deals damage as if it were two sizes larger" then you apply 'effective size increases' to the damage, which ignores the size cap.

For the record, below is the size progression for a club, I'll include two past collosal for your convenience.

1d6 < 1d8 < 2d6 < 3d6 < 4d6 < 6d6 <8d6

(for the record, if the guy comes up with another effective size increase somehow, it would then go up to 12d6. The way it works is that the damage doubles every other notch.)

Edit: You know, I just realized, Shillaleigh matches a club's damage to that of a Greatsword of the wielder's size, I could have just saved time and told you if the wording supported extending the damage progression to use the damage of a gargantuan Greatsword lol.

1d6 < 1d8 < 2d6 < 3d6 < 4d6 < 6d6 <8d6

(for the record, if the guy comes up with another effective size increase somehow, it would then go up to 12d6. The way it works is that the damage doubles every other notch.)

Isn't the sample a little small to extrapolate a pattern like that?

And by that I mean, don't you think that's a bit much balance-wise? I think that the vague possibility of an exponential increase in die code as size increases is solely a necessity based on the actual dice available.

The table in the Equipment chapter probably shouldn't be the only source of evidence. Page 302 of the Bestiary shows the 1d6 bite of a creature which increases in damage thusly:

d6 > d8 > 2d6 > 2d8 > 4d6

I would think that, although this does not specifically state that it is a manufactured weapon extrapolation, it should be considered for intent past 2d6. It may very well be that there is an exponential component to this, but it's not double. It's 2 points.

So....

d4 > d6 (+2) > d8 (+2) > 2d6 (+4) > 2d8 (+4) > 4d6 (+6) > 4d8 (+6) > 5d8 (+8) etc...

Edit: This might be backed up by the Tarrasque's bite attack which deals 4d8 and may have started out as a d8 instead of a d6 at medium size.

kyrt-ryder wrote:

1d6 < 1d8 < 2d6 < 3d6 < 4d6 < 6d6 <8d6

(for the record, if the guy comes up with another effective size increase somehow, it would then go up to 12d6. The way it works is that the damage doubles every other notch.)

Isn't the sample a little small to extrapolate a pattern like that?

And by that I mean, don't you think that's a bit much balance-wise? I think that the vague possibility of an exponential increase in die code as size increases is solely a necessity based on the actual dice available.

The table in the Equipment chapter probably shouldn't be the only source of evidence. Page 302 of the Bestiary shows the 1d6 bite of a creature which increases in damage thusly:

d6 > d8 > 2d6 > 2d8 > 4d6

I would think that, although this does not specifically state that it is a manufactured weapon extrapolation, it should be considered for intent past 2d6. It may very well be that there is an exponential component to this, but it's not double. It's 2 points.

First off, no I don't think it's too much balance-wise. I've had extensive experience with this chart in 3.5, especially with monks, and it doesn't disbalance things at all.

Secondly, here's the table from Savage Species, that was not changed in 3.5. (note I'm changing the 1d20, which was the old monk damage, into 2d10, and leaving 1d12 there, but keep in mind the same progression applies to 2d6 as well)

Yes, a monk who deals damage as a creature 2 sizes over collossal deals 24d6 damage. And no, I've never seen it get that bad in play (worst I saw/used/allowed was 16d6, effectively Collossal with Improved Natural Attack)

I'm not doubting your recollection of 3.5., I'm just saying I'd rather use anecdotal evidence from the Bestiary rather than anything from Savage Species or the Arms and Equipment guide.

Would a TWF druid shaped as a huge creature wielding a quarterstaff with shillelagh cast on it be hitting for 4d6 on the dice? I can't find a paizo size for weapons larger than Large size. I think this is the right size per 3.5 rules.

Refering to PRPG p. 145. I would say the damage should be 3d8.

3d8 averages 13.5
4d6 averages 14.0

If that is accurate would a huge creature wielding an oversized gargantuan club two-handed casting shillelagh and taking the -2 for oversized deal 4d6 also, as it is increased 2 size categories and there is no size past colossal, or would it just continue the trend of 4d6 jumping to 6d6?

From 3d8 I take it to 6d6.

I think both of our methods are equally valid and since we both end up with 6d6 for the last example it goes to prove that.

From 6d6 => 9d6 =>9d8 => ...

So....

d4 > d6 (+2) > d8 (+2) > 2d6 (+4) > 2d8 (+4) > 4d6 (+6) > 4d8 (+6) > 5d8 (+8) etc...

Edit: This might be backed up by the Tarrasque's bite attack which deals 4d8 and may have started out as a d8 instead of a d6 at medium size.

By PRG p. 145 the next step from 2d6 is 3d6.

grasshopper_ea wrote:

Loopy wrote:

The huge cloud giant's mornigstar does 4d6 as well. That makes my head hurt. I can only assume they mean 3d6.

I think you're still misunderstanding me :)

Look at the line with shortspear, it is same weapon damage as a club.

Look at huge(assuming huge sized druid), go up one, that's a druid using an oversized club as a huge creature.

Druid casts shillelagh and raises weapon size by 2, that goes off the chart totally. That is where my question lies. Does it use the colossal longsword damage, or does it max out at the colossal sized club as there is no size defined past colossal.

There's a pattern to the size progression Grasshopper.

It really depends on the wording of the Shillalleigh spell (AFB right now and my connection is too slow to even try hitting up the PRD)

If it says "Treated as two sizes larger" Then the damage stops at Collosal because that's the highest size.

However, if it says "Deals damage as if it were two sizes larger" then you apply 'effective size increases' to the damage, which ignores the size cap.

For the record, below is the size progression for a club, I'll include two past collosal for your convenience.

1d6 < 1d8 < 2d6 < 3d6 < 4d6 < 6d6 <8d6

(for the record, if the guy comes up with another effective size increase somehow, it would then go up to 12d6. The way it works is that the damage doubles every other notch.)

Edit: You know, I just realized, Shillaleigh matches a club's damage to that of a Greatsword of the wielder's size, I could have just saved time and told you if the wording supported extending the damage progression to use the damage of a gargantuan Greatsword lol.

Thank you. I too noticed that it matched the greatsword after having posted this :) I think I would just use the greatsword progression. the wording on shillelagh is deals damage as if it were two sizes larger, so I'm going with 6d6 for huge wielding an oversized club.

If you go back to the original Arms & Equipment Guide from WoTC, it has a nice chart for scaling weapon damages.

Quarterstaff = 1d6.

First Increase : 1d8
Second : 2d6
Third : 3d6
Fourth : 4d6
Fifth : 6d6
Sixth : 8d6

So, Medium Quarterstaff -> Large 1d8
Large QS -> Huge 2d6
Huge QS -> Colossal 3d6
Colossal QS -> Colossal +1 4d6
Colossal +1 -> Colossal +2 6d6
Colossal +2 -> Colossal +3 8d6

You can extrapolate beyond that, either 10d6 or 12d6. I gave up on it because it's weird honestly if you compare different starting values it goes weird. I actually streamlined the process in my game and came up with a weapon damage sliding scale.

1, 1d2, 1d3, 1d4, 1d6, 1d8, 1d10, 2d6, 3d6, 4d6, 6d6, 8d6, 12d6, 16d6, 24d6, etc. Once you're past 6d6 it's just (Previous * 1.5)d6, round down if necessary. So, 8*1.5 = 12, 12 * 1.5 = 16, 16 * 1.5 = 24, 24 * 1.5 = 36, etc. Makes things SO much easier (I have a Half-Giant with the Half-Dragon template in my game with a sizing weapon and another guy with an eternal wand of enlarge, so weapon size/damage was changing so often it gave me a headache). Now I just add up how many 'bumps' in damage and move the damage along the line to get the new damage. And vice versa for moving damage down.

In lieu of an official word, here is my houserule.

1, 1d2, 1d3, 1d4, 1d6, 1d8, 1d10, 2d6, 3d6, 4d6, 6d6, 8d6, 12d6, 16d6, 24d6, etc. Once you're past 6d6 it's just (Previous * 1.5)d6, round down if necessary. So, 8*1.5 = 12, 12 * 1.5 = 16, 16 * 1.5 = 24, 24 * 1.5 = 36, etc. Makes things SO much easier (I have a Half-Giant with the Half-Dragon template in my game with a sizing weapon and another guy with an eternal wand of enlarge, so weapon size/damage was changing so often it gave me a headache). Now I just add up how many 'bumps' in damage and move the damage along the line to get the new damage. And vice versa for moving damage down.

Except that 12*1.5 = 18 lol.

Trust me, it's doubling every other mark, starting at 4d6.

2d6 doubles to 4d6
3d6 doubles to 6d6
4d6 doubles to 8d6
6d6 doubles to 12 d6
8d6 doubles to 16d6
12d6 doubles to 24d6

etc etc etc.

mdt wrote:

1, 1d2, 1d3, 1d4, 1d6, 1d8, 1d10, 2d6, 3d6, 4d6, 6d6, 8d6, 12d6, 16d6, 24d6, etc. Once you're past 6d6 it's just (Previous * 1.5)d6, round down if necessary. So, 8*1.5 = 12, 12 * 1.5 = 16, 16 * 1.5 = 24, 24 * 1.5 = 36, etc. Makes things SO much easier (I have a Half-Giant with the Half-Dragon template in my game with a sizing weapon and another guy with an eternal wand of enlarge, so weapon size/damage was changing so often it gave me a headache). Now I just add up how many 'bumps' in damage and move the damage along the line to get the new damage. And vice versa for moving damage down.

Except that 12*1.5 = 18 lol.

Trust me, it's doubling every other mark, starting at 4d6.

2d6 doubles to 4d6
3d6 doubles to 6d6
4d6 doubles to 8d6
6d6 doubles to 12 d6
8d6 doubles to 16d6
12d6 doubles to 24d6

etc etc etc.

LOL,

LOL,
Man, and I have a degree in math too. ;) Shows what happens when you post after doing the whole work 12 hours a day for 2 weeks straight.

The math should be:

For damage as level x -> x+1, use nd?, where:
n = [((number of dice at current size)+(2 x number of dice at current size))/2)]
and
? = your die type.

Use this except where directly contradicted by existing tables.

Under Pathfinder rules, wouldn't the Quarterstaff meld into the character's body?

Page 212, CRB

When you cast a polymorph spell that changes you into a creature of the animal, dragon, elemental, magical beast, plant, or vermin type, all of your gear melds into your body. Items that provide constant bonuses and do not need to be activated continue to function while melded in this way (with the exception of armor and shield bonuses, which cease to function). Items that require activation cannot be used while you maintain that form. While in such a form, you cannot cast any spells that require material components (unless you have the Eschew Materials or Natural Spell feat), and can only cast spells with somatic
or verbal components if the form you choose has the capability to make such movements or speak, such as a dragon. Other polymorph spells might be subject to this restriction as well, if they change you into a form that is unlike your original form (subject to GM discretion). If
your new form does not cause your equipment to meld into your form, the equipment resizes to match your new size.

I'm not sure about 3.5 rules, however.

mdt wrote:

LOL,
Man, and I have a degree in math too. ;) Shows what happens when you post after doing the whole work 12 hours a day for 2 weeks straight.

The math should be:

For damage as level x -> x+1, use nd?, where:
n = [((number of dice at current size)+(2 x number of dice at current size))/2)]
and
? = your die type.

Use this except where directly contradicted by existing tables.

And...... math fail.

Under Pathfinder rules, wouldn't the Quarterstaff meld into the character's body?

Only if he was carrying it at the time he polymorphed. He can carry a huge staff around (which isn't easy - around 20 feet long?), put it down, wild shape, and then pick it up again. Assuming he has a huge wild shape form available that can use weapons - I can't think of any.