My group and I have noticed the absence of the Earthbreaker in the PFRPG. I want to go on record to lobby for it to make it into core on all of our behalf, so consider this post a sort of petition for it's inclusion. You may add your name to the list or debate for its exclusion. For the record we believe it is a much better compliment to the greatsword and greataxe than the great club ever was and strikes a much better balance. It brings bludgeoning to equal ground which has been badly needed for some time now....thoughts anyone ?
|
My group and I have noticed the absence of the Earthbreaker in the PFRPG. I want to go on record to lobby for it to make it into core on all of our behalf, so consider this post a sort of petition for it's inclusion. You may add your name to the list or debate for its exclusion. For the record we believe it is a much better compliment to the greatsword and greataxe than the great club ever was and strikes a much better balance. It brings bludgeoning to equal ground which has been badly needed for some time now....thoughts anyone ?
Save der Happystick!
My group and I have noticed the absence of the Earthbreaker in the PFRPG. I want to go on record to lobby for it to make it into core on all of our behalf, so consider this post a sort of petition for it's inclusion. You may add your name to the list or debate for its exclusion. For the record we believe it is a much better compliment to the greatsword and greataxe than the great club ever was and strikes a much better balance. It brings bludgeoning to equal ground which has been badly needed for some time now....thoughts anyone ?
Not to make myself a pariah, but I don't use the PCS much at all. I've come to PRPG as a 3.5 junkie and have been staying because Paizo's work is such high quality.
I would like to see bludgeoning weapons get a bit of a boost, though I'm not sure what that would be.
I brought a Half-orc Barbarian into one of HoustonDerek's games yesterday. We are going through Second Darkness and the Earthbreaker is the bludgeoning weapon of choice of my character. Even though starting at 3rd level allowed me to acquire a Masterwork Earthbreaker it was an awesome weapon through the game session.
So I for one would appreciate it if it would make it into the main rules. Although even if it doesn't it is available in Golarion so it would be easily available in any world the DM chooses to have his players in. It can be House-ruled just as easily as any other weapon from any other WotC book.
Just my two cp.
Agreed. More love for Bludgeoning.
But since Core Rules are "Setting Neutral", it can just be called "Great Hammer".
|
|
Actually not great hammer, it's a Maul, and I'm all in.
Where's the ball and chain anyway?
She went that way *points behind Pathfinder X*
As for the Earthbreaker, Call it whatever you want, Earthbreaker, GreatWarHammer, Maul, Bob, just please put it in the book.
Umm...if you call it Bob, please remember that its full name is Mr. Robert Smash Your Face In...otherwise it get's cranky and people get hurt.
Actually not great hammer, it's a Maul, and I'm all in.
Where's the ball and chain anyway?
According to the Arms & Equipment Guide (non-OGL), a MAUL is a d10 bludgeoning weapon and I believe its only benefit over the Greatclub is a higher crit range, but I don't have it readily available to check.
Ball & Chain is synonymous with Flail, Morning Star, and Spiked Chain... take your pick! D&D(TSR, Wotc, Paizo) has described each weapon above to us, so they're actually quite different, but depending on where you look, the descriptions from dictionary to encyclopedia and back again are sometimes the same with different names. Most descriptions involve a spikey ball on a stick, chain or both... used for exposing grey matter in a sudden manner.
Would I love to throw the spiked chain in the trash and buy a Flail that has reach? You betcha, think Castlevania goodness. :D
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32
|
[According to the Arms & Equipment Guide (non-OGL), a MAUL is a d10 bludgeoning weapon and I believe its only benefit over the Greatclub is a higher crit range, but I don't have it readily available to check.
Maul is in Complete Warrior p.154 & 157.
It is a Martial Two-Handed Hammer that does d10 with a x3 Crit Modifier.If you take Exotic Weapon Proficiency: Maul it confers the ability to wield it one-handed (there is no other benefit from the EWP Feat).
I like them and have a 6th Level Azerblood Fighter who uses one one-handed on combination with a Spined Shield.
EDIT: Oh and I agree with the OP. I would like to see a two-handed Hammer included in the Weapons List and the Earthbreaker would fill that slot quite nicely. The Starknife has already been added, so tossing in the Earthbreaker wouldn't break the backwards compatibility factor at all really.
As for the Earthbreaker, Call it whatever you want, Earthbreaker, GreatWarHammer, Maul, Bob, just please put it in the book.
I could've swore we agreed it was to be called... "Ghost Step"? Dwarven Ninjas everywhere are being mislead now. *shakes a fist at the sky in frustration.*
Anyhow, despite this not being a parliment, I vote YES to add this to the PF PHB. Bludgeoning needs a competative 2-hander, Great Club isn't cutting it and never did. I think "Great Hammer" is a good name.
Earthbreaker should remain optional, in a campaign setting book. It's just a nod to movie Conan the Barbarian, and to the current mania for ridiculously huge weapons -- no such weapon, nor anything like it, was ever used historically, and for good reason: no matter how high a hero's STR might be, he cannot swing a hammer with a head that weighs 2-3 times as much as he does.
If we don't stop now, I envision in a couple of supplements we'll be looking at stats for 15-foot-long swords, and maybe life-sized solid iron statues of people that are one-handed melee weapons.
Can we please just put a cap on how big weapons have to be before they're "cool" enough?
Would I love to throw the spiked chain in the trash and buy a Flail that has reach? You betcha, think Castlevania goodness. :D
Ah, so you want a meteor hammer?
I agree. Add the earthbreaker.
And use the same picture, too. It's wicked. I would make it my avatar if I could.
Would I love to throw the spiked chain in the trash and buy a Flail that has reach? You betcha, think Castlevania goodness. :D
Ah, so you want a meteor hammer?
That is actually pretty cool. The list of weapons underneath that lead me to this... Chain Whip.
I had thought up an idea of a Magical Flail that would do something similar to the Castlevania Chain Whip, "Vampire Slayer". It uses the "charges" mechanic that is in the 'Magic Item Compendium' quite a bit. Expenditure of charges increases the length of the Flail for 1 round, it has 6 charges which are renewed every day at Dawn.
But that is a world without a Spiked Chain and without 'incremental reach-increase power-ups' that drop from destroying inanimate objects like wall-candles.
Apologies for side-tracking the Earthbreaker board, I would like to see the Earthbreaker (Great Hammer) be a core weapon.
Earthbreaker should remain optional, in a campaign setting book. It's just a nod to movie Conan the Barbarian, and to the current mania for ridiculously huge weapons -- no such weapon, nor anything like it, was ever used historically, and for good reason: no matter how high a hero's STR might be, he cannot swing a hammer with a head that weighs 2-3 times as much as he does.
If we don't stop now, I envision in a couple of supplements we'll be looking at stats for 15-foot-long swords, and maybe life-sized solid iron statues of people that are one-handed melee weapons.
Can we please just put a cap on how big weapons have to be before they're "cool" enough?
Historically, a Spiked Chain doesn't exist either, closest you're gonna get is a flail or a plain ole chain. A large hammer(mallet) aka Sledgehammer, Maul, Warhammer, etc. might not be historically accurate for military combat arms, but it would(does) mechanically fill in a hole for the bludgeoning weapons. There is no 'huge weapon' mania surrounding this request.
A typical "Conan" style-Warrior would weigh approx. 250-350 lbs. without armor. Speaking in the fantasy make-believe world, not historically, I'm pretty sure 1st level characters with strength ranging from 16-20 could easily wield a sledge hammer weighing roughly 25-50 lbs. if necessary. An Earthbreaker weighs 14 lbs., all other 2-Handers weigh in at 8-12 lbs., I have personally never made a character that only weighed 3-6 lbs.
No one is asking to use Iron Golems as gigantic beat-sticks, you are exaggerating and remember this isn't historical, it's a game... much like "300" was a movie. (Goblins, Unicorns, Fireballs, etc.) Again, we are tryin to mechanically fill a hole in the Bludgeoning Weapons, Great Club isn't cutting it.
Encumberance chart
NOTE: Lifting over head = x2 Heavy Load/ Push & Drag = x5 Heavy Load.
|
|
stuff
He's referring to the picture. Iron (or steel) at that volume would require a bit more than a 20 strength to wield. I don't know if you lift weights, but a 15lb dumbbell is quite small. The head of the earthbreaker, as pictured, would weigh in excess of 500 pounds. Again, I don't know if you lift weights, but try swinging a 50 lb dumbbell around for a while.
I had a couple gamers in my campaign when I was in prison who could bench 400+ pounds in sets of three or four - my max bench was only @245 or so - and we experimented. Just swinging a 15lb dumb bell for a couple of minutes or so left us sore, and these guys were every bit the "Conan-Style warriors", at least physique wise, you describe.
Yeah, 14lbs for a weapon isn't excessive, but the artwork leaves a lot to be desired, when it comes to suspension of disbelief. And, frankly, there is a lot of "Cloud Strife sword WAY too big to use" stuff going on with the art work.
He's referring to the picture. Iron (or steel) at that volume would require a bit more than a 20 strength to wield. I don't know if you lift weights, but a 15lb dumbbell is quite small. The head of the earthbreaker, as pictured, would weigh in excess of 500 pounds.
That's making the assumption that the entire head of the weapon is iron or steel and not just plates over a wooden base.
But anyway, the greatclub as written is too weak compared to other weapons of its size and type, so the earthbreaker is needed to fill the mechanical gap.
Just an FYI, one cubic foot of Iron weighs in at 450 Lbs. one cubic foot of Silver comes in at 683 Lbs...
I know this becuase I had to figure out the cost of ten foot diameter seven pointed silver summoning circle for my wizard character recently...
By the way that costs 3,050 gp in D&D and I strongly recommend a shrink item spell.
Yes, I have problems with the spiked chain as well -- if it's really so awesome, then historically, every knight and soldier in the world would have used one.
I have no real issues with a sledgehammer-like weapon; I can work with that. But when the head is pictured as being 3 ft. across or so, that's where I cry "lame!" Because at that point, most people won't take it because they want a viable bludgeoning weapon: they'll take it because it's shown as being the biggest weapon.
A weapon the size of the one depicted, if it had a solid metal head, would weigh approximately 5,000 pounds (as Abraham pointed out, steel has a density of almost 500 pounds per cubic foot). 500 pounds would be a good estimate for a solid wooden head with plating. If the Earthbreaker is the volume shown, and weighs only 14 pounds (hollow aluminum alloy, filled with helium?), then wielding it as a weapon would be rather like swinging a life-sized cardboard cutout at someone.
So why not depict it as a sledgehammer, rather than the way they did? Because of the "arms race" in fantasy art of showing ever-larger weapons. Remember Orik's sword, in Burnt Offerings? It's gotten to the point where, in order to be "cool," a weapon has to be depicted at 2-3 times scale. Then the game rules change to accommodate the art: witness the "Monkey Grip" feat in 3e. And THAT's what I have a problem with. Where does it stop? Eventually swords will be the size of planets!
Agreed. More love for Bludgeoning.
But since Core Rules are "Setting Neutral", it can just be called "Great Hammer".
Great Sword
Great Axe
Great Hammer/(Earthbreaker)!I like it, put me in the ADD IT column!
I'd rather just get rid of the -2 penalty for incorrectly sized weapons. Then you can have weapons like:
- big-ass morningstar (morningstar for a Large creature)
- big-ass warhammer (warhammer for a Large creature)
- big-ass scimitar (bye-bye falchion...)
- big-ass (or small-ass) sword (bye-bye greatsword and shortsword...)
- small-ass spear (bye-bye shortspear...)
- etc.
...and it doesn't take up any more room in the weapons chart. In fact, it reduces the number of weapons overall.
That's one of the things I didn't like in the change from 3.0 to 3.5 -- all of the weapon changes. Especially reach weapons for halflings...blecch.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32
|
Yes, I have problems with the spiked chain as well -- if it's really so awesome, then historically, every knight and soldier in the world would have used one.
Personally I think that a minimum DEX requirement would do a little to minimize the impact of a Spiked Chain. Notice I said a little, as this is obviously not going to be a full solution as a lot of SC wielders will be DEX based anyway due to it's "Finessability".
I do think that your idea above suffers from the fact that as a weapon it does require extreme Dexterity to employ properly, which would do something to explain why every Tom, Dick and Prince Harold didn't (couldn't) wield one effectively. And yes, I do know that it isn't a real weapon, I'm just using this as an example.I have no real issues with a sledgehammer-like weapon; I can work with that. But when the head is pictured as being 3 ft. across or so, that's where I cry "lame!" Because at that point, most people won't take it because they want a viable bludgeoning weapon: they'll take it because it's shown as being the biggest weapon.
So why not depict it as a sledgehammer, rather than the way they did? Because of the "arms race" in fantasy art of showing ever-larger weapons. It's gotten to the point where, in order to be "cool," a weapon has to be depicted at 2-3 times scale. Then the game rules change to accommodate the art: witness the "Monkey Grip" feat in 3e. And THAT's what I have a problem with. Where does it stop? Eventually swords will be the size of planets!
I agree with the "over-sized weapons = cool" idea. I have a semi-large collection of fantasy artwork I have amasssed from tha interwebs as possible character creation influences. The number of really good pictures with spectacularly stupid looking over-sized weapons is astounding.
In saying this, I like the idea of the Sledgehammer style weapon and think that mechanically and visually it fills a gap in the two-handed weapon selection. I actually find Sledgehammer to be a perfectly acceptable name for this as a weapon as well, even though it has its basis in a workmans tool.
Yes, I have problems with the spiked chain as well -- if it's really so awesome, then historically, every knight and soldier in the world would have used one.
I have no real issues with a sledgehammer-like weapon; I can work with that. <snip> A weapon the size of the one depicted, if it had a solid metal head, would weigh approximately 5,000 pounds (as Abraham pointed out, steel has a density of almost 500 pounds per cubic foot). 500 pounds would be a good estimate for a solid wooden head with plating. If the Earthbreaker is the volume shown, and weighs only 14 pounds (hollow aluminum alloy, filled with helium?), then wielding it as a weapon would be rather like swinging a life-sized cardboard cutout at someone.
So why not depict it as a sledgehammer, rather than the way they did?
I apologize Kirth, for being a bit over-the-top when it comes to 'historically accurate' references in a fantasy game world, it's a pet-peeve I suppose.
Thank you "houstonderek" and "Abraham spalding" for actually running the numbers on weight, density, etc. of steel, iron and weight-lifting principals. It brings things some what into perspective...
As much as I hate to say it, the artwork is just that, artwork. Yes, I'm guilty for ranting about the Spiked Chain in a similar fashion... about how it is basically unusable, 3-rings or otherwise as depicted in the artwork, especially as a 2-hander weapon during a 10-foot-reaching swing. To get a 10 foot swing on that thing in the artwork, it would have to measure 15+ feet in length. (approx. 5 feet per length other than rings.)
HOWEVER, this is where the graphic artist in me kicks in and reminds myself as well as everyone else that "The whole purpose of artwork (and advertisements) is to SELL A PRODUCT." In this instance, that product is the Earthbreaker, followed by the larger product, Pathfinder. When someone says "OMFG! Did you see that kick-a$$(insert COOL) weapon on page #11 & 12 in CotCT!" the artist has done his or her job and done it well.
((The Barbarian Avatar(Pg. #12 PF PHB) could arguably be viewed as having the same issue, but it is more proportionate with the size of a Greatsword, it simply looks large with an (seemingly petite) athletic female holding it. Greatswords are(were?) typically sheathed on the back or simply carried due to large size, specifically length.))
|
|
I understand about the art, it's just the simulationist fuddy duddy in me coming out. I'm just not a fan of the comic book/anime style prevalent these days. My favorite D&D artist will always be Jeff Easley, with Dave Trampier and Todd Lockwood being close seconds.
So, I guess what i'm saying is just kinda bear with my fatbeard self when I go off on art rants...
I understand about the art, it's just the simulationist fuddy duddy in me coming out. I'm just not a fan of the comic book/anime style prevalent these days. My favorite D&D artist will always be Jeff Easley, with Dave Trampier and Todd Lockwood being close seconds.
FUDDY DUDDY! Funny, yet I can relate.
I prefer more realistic and gritty, borerline gothic artists myself... Boris Vallejo, Julie Bell, Jonathon Bowser, Brom, Luis Royo, Frank Frazetta.
Just have to say if we start making rules according to art work we are in deep deep trouble...lol
Just have to say if we start making rules according to art work we are in deep deep trouble...lol
Obviously I agree, which is why I've banned "Monkey Grip" from all my campaigns. I'd prefer a more definite separation between BESM and DND, whereas the trend is to merge them more and more in each new product.
Daniel, you're doubtless correct that goofy (in my opinion) or "kewl" (in others') artwork does sells more stuff, but that doesn't mean I have to like it... and when 50-ft. long greatswords make it into the rules because the artwork makes all the players want one, then me and houstonderek will have to go off quietly and start a 1st edition game somewhere in the corner where the Anime police won't find us.
Obviously I agree, which is why I've banned "Monkey Grip" from all my campaigns. I'd prefer a more definite separation between BESM and DND, whereas the trend is to merge them more and more in each new product.
I guess it's a matter of taste. I think there's enough fantasy stories with the trope of "huge musclebound guy who carries a weapon that's so big that a regular guy can barely even lift it" to justify a feat like that. Certainly I haven't noticed anyone abusing it in my games. YMMV.
I guess it's a matter of taste. I think there's enough fantasy stories with the trope of "huge musclebound guy who carries a weapon that's so big that a regular guy can barely even lift it" to justify a feat like that. Certainly I haven't noticed anyone abusing it in my games.
I am guilty for conceiving characters who would've abused 'Monkey Grip', but have never executed any of them. Reality sets in when you realize "Large" magical *insert weapon HERE* are never going to drop as treasure unless you fight nothing but giants, and that you have to foot the bill for a double cost masterwork magical weapon... not even looking at double weapons. This runs along the same concept of Monk weapons being found in treasure... not very realistic in most campaigns, but that is a topic in another thread. :)
I am however emmensely guilty of making large characters, characters with the Enlarge spell and in Marvel Universe - characters that have the Growth power, similar to Giant man.
Just have to say if we start making rules according to art work we are in deep deep trouble...lol
I thoroughly agree. The only place artwork verses function would even be remotely viable might be something like "Gammaworld" where you could make whatever the heck you want. Or some sort of parody game like "Teenagers from Outerspace" which is based entirely on Roleplay and no Roll-play. Call ACME and get the Sherman Tank in the giant parachuted crate delivered in 5 seconds! :)
Daniel, you're doubtless correct that goofy (in my opinion) or "kewl" (in others') artwork does sells more stuff, but that doesn't mean I have to like it... ... artwork makes all the players want one, then me and houstonderek will have to go off quietly and start a 1st edition game somewhere in the corner where the Anime police won't find us.
LOL Kirth! There's no Anime police around, if they show up I'll jam ya into a small vase and set the lid on top of whatever is protruding. If you play 1st edition, I better damn well get my invite! I have a Forest Gnome Fighter I've been hankering to play. (Ever make a small Fighter in 3.5e with 1 or 2 other (medium-sized)melee characters in the party? It's ugly, No speed, No damage, EXTREMELY INEFFECTIVE and No fun.)
...just making my point that I would like a blunt weapon that wasn't gimped.
I agree, the Earthbreaker would definitely fill the slot that the Great Club is currently slotted. Even if I made a savage/caveman I don't think I'd use a Great Club just out of principal and you know me and my character themes/concepts. Maybe you'll let me play a Half-Giant next campaign so I can swing around inanimate Iron Golems? *laugh* (Very kidding and Soooo not likely!)