I'm curious if I'm reading the rules for energy burst magic weapons correctly. The general rules for magic weapons state, "On a successful critical roll, apply the special effect, but do not multiply the weapon's regular damage." The "burst" weapon descriptions state they deal "an extra 1d10 points of [type] damage on a successful critical hit" (2d10 for x3, etc.).
So let's say I'm Medium size with 18 Str and I'm wielding a +2 flaming (non-burst) greataxe. My confirmed critical hit damage would be 3d12 +24 (Str, two-handed weapon, +2 enhancement)+1d6 (flaming), yielding 47 mean damage.
Now let's say I upgrade to a +2 flaming burst greataxe. My confirmed critical hit damage would be 1d12 +8 (Str, two-handed weapon, +2 enhancement) +1d6 (flaming) + 2d10 (burst), yielding 29 mean damage.
Is this reading of 'burst' magic weapons really correct? If so, why on earth would anybody ever want a energy 'burst' weapon? And my example isn't even particular robust, as it doesn't include other kinds of bonus damage like Power Attack or Critical feats that also would apply to critical hits. It seems really dubious to carrying around that 'flaming burst' weapon that does so much less damage on average on the off-chance I might get a critical hit on an ice elemental.
Yeah Burst Weapons don´t cut it.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Not a big rules lawyer, but:
Magic Weapons and Critical Hits: Some weapon qualities and some specific weapons have an extra effect on a critical hit. This special effect also functions against creatures not normally subject to critical hits. On a successful critical roll, apply the special effect, but do not multiply the weapon's regular damage.
What I think it's trying to say is, that specifically against creatures immune to critical hits, the critical hit effect (i.e. the energy burst) would happen, but the weapon's damage itself would not be multiplied (because the creature is immune to crits).
So your calculations on that +2 flaming axe are correct, *against creatures immune to critical hits*. Against other creatures, it's 3D12 + whatever + 2D10 fire etc.
I agree with cannon fodder's interpretation - it's describing how those items work against creatures immune to critical hits, not those weapons in general.
Cannon Fodder's got it right. Burst takes your example's average crit damage from 18 to 29 vs an ooze, and from 47 to 58 vs an orc.
However, even assuming every threat confirms, that's still just adding .55 average damage (1.1 with improved critical) given the rarity of crits on an only 20 threat range weapon, so Sleet Storm's correct that burst effects don't cut it.
Unless you're specialing in coup-de-grace, in which case a 20/x3 or x4 plus a burst would be the weapon of choice.
Cannon Fodder's got it right. Burst takes your example's average crit damage from 18 to 29 vs an ooze, and from 47 to 58 vs an orc.
However, even assuming every threat confirms, that's still just adding .55 average damage (1.1 with improved critical) given the rarity of crits on an only 20 threat range weapon, so Sleet Storm's correct that burst effects don't cut it.
Unless you're specialing in coup-de-grace, in which case a 20/x3 or x4 plus a burst would be the weapon of choice.
Similarly if you've got a friend in the party (using a keen scimitar or similar weapon) setting you up with the Buttterfly's Sting feat energy burst weapons can be quite nice.
Now let's say I upgrade to a +2 flaming burst greataxe. My confirmed critical hit damage would be 1d12 +8 (Str, two-handed weapon, +2 enhancement) +1d6 (flaming) + 2d10 (burst), yielding 29 mean damage.
Umm... no.
The weapon damage still multiplies on a crit. What doesnot multiply is the flaming and the burst damage.So, you're looking at 3d12+24 (critting greataxe at Str 18, and +2 enhancement) +1d6 fire (flaming) +2d10 fire (flaming burst) in case of a confirmed crit.
My thanks to everyone for pointing out the clarification to me. Wow, do I feel dumb now. After re-reading, the part about it relating to applying the damage to creatures otherwise immune to critical hits is fairly obvious.