I'm making a custom magic weapon for my homemade campaign and I'm thinking about giving it a new magic weapon ability I call Crushing. Basically it allows the user to add 3x his str modifier to the damage instead of the normal 1½ when wielding it in both hands.
I was thinking of pricing it like a +2 modifier. Does this seem right? In general, do you think an ability like that is game breaking? Mind you, my players won't know of it in advance, so no one will be building a character around it.
Any thoughts/advice welcome.
You have considered this will also be doubled or tripled on criticals?
For a weapon that does, say 1d10 X2, and is only +1, wielded by a character with +4 strength bonus, that's a healthy 2d10+26 on a crit.
|
I'd pick that up over any other +2 enchant any day, heck I might pick that over holy and flaming together. The thing is Two-handed fighting is already the most powerful melee style in the game. This just makes it even more ridiculous. On top of that it isn't conditional at all and doesn't have any provisos, in other words, it is just too reliable.
I'm making a custom magic weapon for my homemade campaign and I'm thinking about giving it a new magic weapon ability I call Crushing. Basically it allows the user to add 3x his str modifier to the damage instead of the normal 1½ when wielding it in both hands.
3.5 had an ability that added a flat +5 Damage at the cost of a +2 modifier. I think that the triple Str mod on a two hander is a bit more powerful than that. Even just a 18 Str is getting an additional +6 damage from this add on.
Given that the power will increase as the users statistic increses as well I would go with +3 at least to balance it.
+1 per extar 6 points of damage
a d6 energy attack averages to about 3.5 damage. A typical character that is 2handing and can afford a +3 weapon (minimal for this) is going to have at least a 20 strength maybe 22. You are talking about doubling the strength bonus to damage, so +7 or +9 damage guaranteed damage. But for barbarians, or dragon disciples or other strength heavy characters that can be as much as +12 or so damage. And it will keep going up as you level. Even if it doesnt interact any differently with power attack or similar abilities/feats, I'd say this is probably closer to a +3 ability then a +2.
I was thinking that you could have the weapon have its weight magically enhanced, thus adding to the damage of the weapon. A hit penalty, speed negative, or even losing your lowest attack due to the encumbrance of the weapon might work to offset the heavy attack bonus. Or you could even make it an intelligent item and impose negatives that way.
That said, I would not allow this magic item in a game I was running.
Okay, so obviously this ability is a bit more powerful than I had initially thought (if unchanged, I would price it at least +3 now). Perhaps I should start by specifying that it will appear on a specific weapon (and that weapon only) that they might find (but will not be able to buy) and that it a bludgeon weapon. It's based on the Earth Breaker, so it has 1d12/x3. Also, of the crowd I usually play with, there is only one person who is really good at(and interested in) optimizing and taking maximum advantage of the rules, and he usually plays a caster. In addition, all of us are somewhat new to Pathfinder (which is our first P&P rpg). Finally, they'll all be rolling stats, not buying, so an 18 starting strength (or higher) is not all that likely (though a distinct possibility when adding the racial bonuses).
Still, the ability obviously needs work. How about if I placed on a one-handed bludgeon weapon like, say, a mace? And then reduce the bonus to 1½x when wielded in one hand and 2x when wielded in both?
I really appreciate all the feedback. Please keep it coming. I'd like to end up with something usable and cool that isn't game-breaking.
Is the goal to make it a two handed weapon boost? If not, what if the enchant gave a small flat + to damage, and maybe make the 1 handed mace count as if wielded two-handed for feats such as Power Attack, making it give more oomph with PA, but a smaller bonus when used otherwise?¨
[Crushing]
This ability makes a weapon handle as if held in two hands when used with feats such as Power Attack. Additionally, it adds +2 to sunder, disarm and bullrush checks due to the additional force behind each blow.
All I got top of the hat.
That sounds usable. I'll consider that. To answer your question, the goal was to have a weapon that allowed greater utilization of the strength modifier in order for it to feel like there really was some force behind each blow, but I guess your suggestion achieves that too.
Also, it's to gave a little more power to a player who's typically not quite as effective as some of the others.
Well, I'm really not well known on the up-to-date 'meta' of how things are. But from personal experience, a two-hand fighting has always outdone one-handed or finesse, but it's not like we really put it to the test, just a casual group and stuff like that.
There's also a cool weapon ability from 3.5. It's based on con, but you could easily base it on str bonus. Let's the wielder initiate a bullrush as a swift action on a successful strike with the weapon, provoking no aoo or moving the wielder with the one rushed. It makes the owner look real macho ;D
id also make it so that two handed weapons added 2x their strength. Also make the cmb bonuses +4 for sundering. Make sure to give this weapon enchantment out as a reward. Don't put it on the market.
There's a fighter archetype that gets 2x Str bonus to damage instead of 1.5x. "Crushing" would not be amiss at a +2 to allow such a bonus, but I agree that it should be restricted to bludgeoning weapons only. Three-times Str to damage is a bit much, but 2x is not.
One might even make the provision that it may grant this bonus one-handed if you are using a shield in the other hand. Give the ol' 'sword' & board crowd some love while helping out the hammer crowd as well. Just a thought.
Two-handed weapon damage, not even fully optimized, is hard to beat; fully optimized it's very difficult indeed to beat it. But again, 2x Str has a precedent in the game, so that would be just fine.
There's a fighter archetype that gets 2x Str bonus to damage instead of 1.5x. "Crushing" would not be amiss at a +2 to allow such a bonus, but I agree that it should be restricted to bludgeoning weapons only. Three-times Str to damage is a bit much, but 2x is not.
One might even make the provision that it may grant this bonus one-handed if you are using a shield in the other hand. Give the ol' 'sword' & board crowd some love while helping out the hammer crowd as well. Just a thought.
Two-handed weapon damage, not even fully optimized, is hard to beat; fully optimized it's very difficult indeed to beat it. But again, 2x Str has a precedent in the game, so that would be just fine.
Awesome. I think I'll reduce it to 2x then, make it on a one-handed bludgeon weapon (to help out shield users) and probably add a bonus to sunder, disarm or bull rush. Thanks a lot, people.
Awesome. I think I'll reduce it to 2x then, make it on a one-handed bludgeon weapon (to help out shield users) and probably add a bonus to sunder, disarm or bull rush. Thanks a lot, people.There's a fighter archetype that gets 2x Str bonus to damage instead of 1.5x. "Crushing" would not be amiss at a +2 to allow such a bonus, but I agree that it should be restricted to bludgeoning weapons only. Three-times Str to damage is a bit much, but 2x is not.
One might even make the provision that it may grant this bonus one-handed if you are using a shield in the other hand. Give the ol' 'sword' & board crowd some love while helping out the hammer crowd as well. Just a thought.
Two-handed weapon damage, not even fully optimized, is hard to beat; fully optimized it's very difficult indeed to beat it. But again, 2x Str has a precedent in the game, so that would be just fine.
A specific class feature is very different from a weapon quality IMO, so I do not think the first can be used to justify the latter.
Strength is easy to pump up, and you are looking at a LOT of damage. This is better than most enhancements since it will just help to blast through DR, and crits are going to terribly hurt. I think you will have problems with such an enhancement in the long run.
So I would say it is a +3 enhancement at least. Alternatively, make it "extra damage", so you add the strength modifier again on attack, but it is not multiplied on crits. That would drop it to a +2 modifier IMO.
Also, I have not thought this through, but instead of adding the strength modifier, the quality could be to substract up to str mod from attack and add it to damage. This could drop the price to +1 then.
Sangalor I want you to statistically justify why it should be at least a +3 enchantment considering no bludgeoning weapon has an 18-20 crit and considering speed is a +3 enchantment.
Sangalor I want you to statistically justify why it should be at least a +3 enchantment considering no bludgeoning weapon has an 18-20 crit and considering speed is a +3 enchantment.
I won't, I do not need to "justify". If you want a statistic analysis, you can do it - I do not care, quite frankly. I am offering my opinion, and this is based on gut feeling and comparison to other enhancements. And I am not limiting it to bludgeoning if you read my post.
Look at this: Crit is only one part of the discussion. You can easily have a 30th strength at high levels, which translates into a lot of damage which, if it is not extra damage, will be doubled/tripled as well. If you compare it with holy, already a +2 enhancement, it adds a mere +2d6 extra damage, which is an average of damage of 7 which again is not doubled/tripled on a crit. The DR overcoming good property does not really matter, with the bonus strength damage you blow past that. Also, spells help out here.
And speed is overpriced given that it does not stack with standard buffs like haste.
EDIT: Just to clarify: I replied to the last message for the class feature and in general. I would not limit it to bludgeoning only :-)
Classes like the paladin and magus get class features that allow them to freely change up their weapon enhancements a number of times per day, with these temporary enhancements easily outlasting the majority of combats the PCs will encounter. Obviously these weapon abilities are not so different that the game developers wouldn't use them as class features. Therefore I respectfully disagree with your entire counter-argument, Sangalor.
It has been suggested to limit the ability to bludgeoning weapons for multiple reasons, all of which are valid, but two of which stand out: crushing sounds like what blunt objects are used to do (as opposed to cutting or stabbing), and bludgeoning weapons don't get much love in favor of slashing weapons.
Classes like the paladin and magus get class features that allow them to freely change up their weapon enhancements
It eats actions and, as you say, has limited duration and limited number of uses.
a number of times per day, with these temporary enhancements easily outlasting the majority of combats the PCs will encounter.
I know of the supposed 3-4 rounds average. I have played in at least 7 different gaming groups during the last 5 years, and almost never have encounters been so short. Might be some special cases, but
- several waves of attackers- summoned creatures
- hit and run tactics
- opponents that spring traps
and other situations often make it last a lot longer. A permanent enhancement is something totally different IMO.
Obviously these weapon abilities are not so different that the game developers wouldn't use them as class features.
They are there to give those classes versatility and a boost. Which is great, I like them! :-D But you note that only very few classes get these kinds of abilities.
Therefore I respectfully disagree with your entire counter-argument, Sangalor.
Absolutely fine with me, Foghammer. I also respectfully disagree with your entire counter-counter-argument :-P
It has been suggested to limit the ability to bludgeoning weapons for multiple reasons, all of which are valid, but two of which stand out: crushing sounds like what blunt objects are used to do (as opposed to cutting or stabbing), and bludgeoning weapons don't get much love in favor of slashing weapons.
Well, maybe no weapon that is available now, I did not check them, but that may change. The name I get though, no problem there :-)
Since it's for a homebrew game, it really does not matter how objectively good or bad this thing is. It matters for the OPs specific game. I just gave my opinion since I have been down that road with homebrew features which turned out to be too powerful in the long run.
Have fun :-)
Thanks all. Considering that it is indeed a homebrew game, and that most of my players won't be crazy optimizing (I doubt I'll ever see 30 strength in any of my games), I don't think it's gonna be all that big of a problem.
So for now, I think I'll be sticking to the reduced bonus (2x) on a single bludgeon weapon.
I gotta say, I'm really loving these forums. People seem so eager to help, which is great when your understanding of the rules isn't all that great yet. Great community we've got here.
You know, considering it's a one handed weapon, a 1.5x would be enough by itself, if it worked with power attack, you'd be effectively giving out a one-handed-two-hand-weapon just like that. Slap on the CMD bonuses that actually involve the weapon, and bullrush and it's pretty herculean weapon in itself.