Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game

Starfinder


Pathfinder Society


Pathfinder Adventure Card Game

Colossal +1 Impact Butchering Axe.


Rules Questions


Suppose someone forges a masterwork butchering axe (or any colossal melee weapon really, but the butchering axe is interesting) of colossal size, enhances it to +1 and applies the Impact special ability to it.

What damage does it deal? A colossal Butchering Axe deals 12d6 damage, in case this helps you figuring out an answer.

If you need some excuse for how this might be happen, consider a gish casting Greater Object Possession on a colossal statue and grabbing the axe.

Just to get you started, I've ruminated a bit on the subject. Extending the progression yields 16d6, up from 12d6.

Of course, it's entirely possible that the fact that Colossal is the largest size around means that a weapon cannot be bigger than colossal for the purpose of dealing damage. This is my main problem.

Discuss. I'd be glad to see arguments founded in RAW, but I acknowledge that such RAW is scarce and tangential at best, which is why I come to you.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Answer: 16d6.

Sczarni

Starfinder Charter Superscriber

I think the OP knows it would be 16d6.

The question is whether there can be something "greater than Colossal".

I think the answer is "yes". It's just number crunching. Although you can't create a weapon physically larger than Colossal, you can crunch the numbers to figure out its damage.


Nefreet wrote:
The question is whether there can be something "greater than Colossal".

I feel like if it actually comes up, it's easy to rule "yes an axe the size of the local supercluster deals more damage than an axe the size of the solar system" but I don't think that's ever going to come up naturally.

The existing size categories are easy to extrapolate, it's just that Paizo can only devote a finite amount of space to them and frankly they get tricky to name after a while.


Nefreet wrote:

I think the OP knows it would be 16d6.

The question is whether there can be something "greater than Colossal".

I think the answer is "yes". It's just number crunching. Although you can't create a weapon physically larger than Colossal, you can crunch the numbers to figure out its damage.

Hmmm, what I see is he is asking what a 12d6 weapon would be if it were 1 size larger (via impact). He is making a supposition of 16d6 and I showed him that it is in fact 16d6 via the FAQ.

Perhaps I missed the part where it is more than 1 size increase?

Sczarni

Starfinder Charter Superscriber

This is what I focused on:

Jeb Gardaxe wrote:

Extending the progression yields 16d6, up from 12d6.

Of course, it's entirely possible that the fact that Colossal is the largest size around means that a weapon cannot be bigger than colossal for the purpose of dealing damage. This is my main problem.


Nefreet wrote:
This is what I focused on:
Jeb Gardaxe wrote:

Extending the progression yields 16d6, up from 12d6.

Of course, it's entirely possible that the fact that Colossal is the largest size around means that a weapon cannot be bigger than colossal for the purpose of dealing damage. This is my main problem.

Perhaps we are reading it differently. I see it as a pair of questions, not statements.

Question 1: Is 16d6 the correct extension of 12d6 going up 1 size?
Question 2: Can sizes even go above Colossal? (The weapon's size starts at colossal.)

I answered question 1.
I made no statement regarding question 2 though size increases without names should be feasible.


Gauss wrote:
Nefreet wrote:
This is what I focused on:
Jeb Gardaxe wrote:

Extending the progression yields 16d6, up from 12d6.

Of course, it's entirely possible that the fact that Colossal is the largest size around means that a weapon cannot be bigger than colossal for the purpose of dealing damage. This is my main problem.

Perhaps we are reading it differently. I see it as a pair of questions, not statements.

Question 1: Is 16d6 the correct extension of 12d6 going up 1 size?
Question 2: Can sizes even go above Colossal? (The weapon's size starts at colossal.)

I answered question 1.
I made no statement regarding question 2 though size increases without names should be feasible.

1. yes and 2 it should still be able to there are some creatures who if made into pathfinder would be well beyond colossal size so it would make sense to keep going, if you made a warmachine Ifestus they would wield a weapon 2 size categories larger than colossal, if you make that weapon also have impact it deals damage one size category more than that, add in a few levels in abyssal bloodline bloodrager and you get another size category and a few levels of titan fighter will net another size category boost thus making a creature who is one size category larger then colossal that is wielding a weapon 4 size categories larger then colossal and deals damage as if it were 5 size categories larger then colossal for about 64d6 damage die


Lady-J wrote:
Gauss wrote:
Nefreet wrote:
This is what I focused on:
Jeb Gardaxe wrote:

Extending the progression yields 16d6, up from 12d6.

Of course, it's entirely possible that the fact that Colossal is the largest size around means that a weapon cannot be bigger than colossal for the purpose of dealing damage. This is my main problem.

Perhaps we are reading it differently. I see it as a pair of questions, not statements.

Question 1: Is 16d6 the correct extension of 12d6 going up 1 size?
Question 2: Can sizes even go above Colossal? (The weapon's size starts at colossal.)

I answered question 1.
I made no statement regarding question 2 though size increases without names should be feasible.

1. yes and 2 it should still be able to there are some creatures who if made into pathfinder would be well beyond colossal size so it would make sense to keep going, if you made a warmachine Ifestus they would wield a weapon 2 size categories larger than colossal, if you make that weapon also have impact it deals damage one size category more than that, add in a few levels in abyssal bloodline bloodrager and you get another size category and a few levels of titan fighter will net another size category boost thus making a creature who is one size category larger then colossal that is wielding a weapon 4 size categories larger then colossal and deals damage as if it were 5 size categories larger then colossal for about 64d6 damage die

I think you misread my post, I was not asking any questions.


How about vital strike + lead blades + enlarge person.
I was thinking about a 1/2 orc ranger with butchering axe.
Start with 3d6, enlarged 4d6 at level 1, level 4 lead blades 6d6,
level 6 vital strike 12d6
Level 11 imp vital 18d6
Level 16 greater vital 24d6 plus whatever bonuses you get from power attack, strength belt, enchantment, .....

Almost lile pounce :-)

Paizo / Messageboards / Paizo / Pathfinder® / Pathfinder RPG / Rules Questions / Colossal +1 Impact Butchering Axe. All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.

©2002-2017 Paizo Inc.® | Privacy Policy | Contact Us
Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours, Monday through Friday, 10:00 AM to 5:00 PM Pacific time.

Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, Starfinder, the Starfinder logo, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc. The Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Legends, Pathfinder Online, Starfinder Adventure Path, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.