I'm still waiting to hear from a single person who would use the new version of the spiked chain but who would never have considered using the previous version. We've gotten several folks say they won't use it now. We have a few that said they have or would have used it then and now (no change in preference). So where are the folks they say, "This fixed it for me. Now I finally can use it. Before, no way, but now hell yes!" Come on folks where are you at. Be truthful now, who wants to use it now for the first time.
The spiked chain with reach has only ever made cameo appearances in our games before- it was never too powerful. Now it still costs a feat and is worse? The main reason for its use was reach now no-one will use it.For mine a 2d4 2 handed weapon costing a feat and having reach was a good balance.
I would like to hear Jasons reason for this change. My current feeling is that in our games this will be houseruled back to 3.5 version.
For those that still want reach near and far, I mentioned earlier the Meteor Hammer found in the Legacy of Fire players guide. It has reach and is very similar to a spiked chain except it does blunt damage.
From my reading, it's a normal reach weapon, not a "super-reach" weapon like a spiked chain.
|
The spiked chain's advantages are thus;
1)It is wielded in two hands
2) It can be used with Weapon Finesse
3) It grants a bonus to disarm
4) It grants a bonus to tripOnly one other weapon in the book is finesseable, yet wielded two-handed; the elven curve blade. (The rapier explicitly cannot be wielded two-handed, despite being a one-handed weapon.) The curve blade does more damage and has a better threat range, but grants no bonuses to disarm or trip attempts.
As to why you'd want to use a weapon that qualifies for 3:1 Power Attack while being finessed and grants bonuses on disarm and trip attempts, I couldn't say. But that's why you use the spiked chain over the heavy flail.
I might also point out that the spiked chain had all of those benefits and it had reached. It is not like having reach would make you lose those benefits. It is not like those benefits were added in because reach was eliminated.
I'm still waiting to hear from a single person who would use the new version of the spiked chain but who would never have considered using the previous version. We've gotten several folks say they won't use it now. We have a few that said they have or would have used it then and now (no change in preference). So where are the folks they say, "This fixed it for me. Now I finally can use it. Before, no way, but now hell yes!" Come on folks where are you at. Be truthful now, who wants to use it now for the first time.
I'll be honest - I never would have used it before simply because of the bad experiences I had had with other players in my group abusing it which left a very munchkin taste in my mouth. I'd consider using it now if I came up with a character concept to fit, simply because I feel like I could use it now without fearing that I'd piss off the rest of the group (or the DM).
|
|
Im for the change.
Why?
Anytime a character build is seen as superior, to the point of being 'common' and viewed by the masses as representing a 'Power Gamer', something is wrong with it.
Go back to AD&D...who used anything other than the Longsword, unless you did it for role playing or you couldn't take a Longsword?...hmmmm who? anyone anyone?
When 3.0 came out and changed the weapons, things had a greater variable.
Now lets do the side by side comparison with the Heavy Flail (since this is the one folks are using)
Heavy Flail <vs> Spiked Chain
Martial Weapon-requires a Feat for Clerics/Wizards/Rogues/Druids/Sorcerers/Bards/Monks <vs> Exotic Weapon-Requires a Feat for Everyone
Cost- 15 Gold <vs> Cost- 25 Gold
Damage (Medium)- d10 {Greater Maximum Damage} <vs> 2d4 {greater Minimum damage}
Crit Range- 19-20/x2 <vs> 20/x2
weight- 10lbs <vs> 10lbs
Type- Bludgeoning vs Piercing
Both are two-handed weapons
Specials- +2 to CMB with disarm & can be used as weapon to trip <vs> +2 to CMB with Disarm & Can be used as weapon to trip Can be used with Weapon Finesse.
so
4 classes (Fighter/Barbarian/Ranger/Paladin) are at a disadvantage with the Spiked Chain over the Heavy Flail...everyone else is in the same playing field
It costs 10 gold more.
is at a 05% disadvantage for critical hits
does piercing damage (which is a minor, I dont see folks taking a light hammer over a dagger because of this so I dont think its a valid point....but since it was mentioned, its here.)
everything else is the same....
except a Spiked Chain can be used with dexterit through weapon finesse.
This then is its niche.....a dex fighter.
take a hard look at things and you will see, the only real reason to complain about this...is you cant have your cake and eat it too.
The loss of reach on this is only a loss for those that loved that character build...and us DM's are happy about that.
sorry, not meant to anger or upset anyone...but as with all things, take a step back and really look at things. The only reason to ever take the Spiked Chain was and always has been for a Dex based character...the reach thing made it unbalanced.
Im for the change.
...and us DM's are happy about that.
i.e. This is why fighters can't have nice things.
A nitpick, the heavy flail also has higher average damage (5.5 vs 5).
*chuckle* which gets rounded down to 5 ;)Im for the change.
...and us DM's are happy about that.i.e. This is why fighters can't have nice things.
A nitpick, the heavy flail also has higher average damage (5.5 vs 5).
*chuckle* you don't know how statistics work ;)
If we take into account crits and assume that an 11 is needed to hit, then:
The spiked chain will do on average: 2.625 points
The heavy flail will do on average: 3.025 points
so
4 classes (Fighter/Barbarian/Ranger/Paladin) are at a disadvantage with the Spiked Chain over the Heavy Flail...everyone else is in the same playing field
It costs 10 gold more.
is at a 05% disadvantage for critical hits
does piercing damage (which is a minor, I dont see folks taking a light hammer over a dagger because of this so I dont think its a valid point....but since it was mentioned, its here.)
everything else is the same....
except a Spiked Chain can be used with dexterit through weapon finesse.
This then is its niche.....a dex fighter.
take a hard look at things and you will see, the only real reason to complain about this...is you cant have your cake and eat it too.
The loss of reach on this is only a loss for those that loved that character build...and us DM's are happy about that.
sorry, not meant to anger or upset anyone...but as with all things, take a step back and...
So, your point is that it's inferior in every way (except minimum damage), but you can use DEX with it, so it should be an Exotic weapon? Is that really your point?
All those classes you listed that'd be out a feat? They just take a level of fighter, get a free feat and a FORT save boost out of it (though, admittedly, the cleric and other casters would lose a caster level, though they wouldn't likely bother anyway unless it was a favored weapon and they'd have gotten it for free anyway), while the fighter has to actually spend a feat to get an inferior choice but oh golly, he can use his DEX to attack!
Oh, and no, "us DMs" aren't happy about it. I primarily DM. I've only seen one PC use it - a multiclass fighter cleric, and one of the best PCs I've ever had the experience of running a game for. I've played around with it once or twice, but I never went for it as a super gun. And maybe it was common because, honestly, at high levels the fighter needed something like that to actually be functional next to the Gate spamming CODzillas and Wizards. I liked the item, and I wished the other exotics were actually worth the feat investment, but I guess I should to have my DM license revoked because I like my players to have nice things. Aside from spells.
Obviously the change won't change back - for some reason, Jason felt the need to render an exotic weapon inferior to a martial weapon. I'd love to know why - I mean, not just some short sentence that "it was too good" but a full fledged thought process that explains why he decided to make an inferior weapon more costly while not actually looking at why the weapon may have been "broken" before (it wasn't the weapon, it was a particular feat combination). It won't fix it back to the way it was (and preserve backwards compatibility, because lord knows there are plenty of old encounters and stat blocks that assume a spiked chain wielder has reach), but it'd be nice to know exactly why this was done. I don't expect every change to have to be justified, but this one really does mystify me. If I have to pay a feat above and beyond the pale for something, it really should be something worth doing. I'm pretty sure I could whip out the weapon generation system that the chaps on the WotC boards managed to put together for weapons (it's about 90% perfect for determining the balance of all the weapons out there) and the new improved spiked chain would rate no higher than martial. So, my choices are to
1) Let it stand and encourage people to just reflavor the heavy flail
2) House Rule it to Martial
3) House Rule it back to 3.5.
And if I'm going to have to houserule it back, how is that an improvement?
*chuckle* you don't know how statistics work ;) (and made some statistics about critting being .4 difference between the weapons:D sure sure. However do the same statistics at minimum damage :P
there's always two sides to every coin ;)
You do realize that the .4 in that analysis corresponds to a 15% more damage on average for the heavy flail right? I'm assuming you know some basic math, but I could be making a mistake about that. Also you comment about the "minimum" damage just shows you don't really understand how the statistic was done. I'll show you if you are interested.
For the chain there are 7 possible results, the following is each outcome and the different ways it could occur. I will include 1, 9, and 10 for completeness.
1 = none
2 = (1,1) = 1 outcome
3 = (1,2), (2,1) = 2 outcomes
4 = (1,3), (3,1), (2,2) = 3 outcomes
5 = (1,4), (4,1), (2,3), (3,2) = 4 outcomes
6 = (2,4), (4,2), (3,3) = 3 outcomes
7 = (3,4), (4,3) = 2 outcomes
8 = (4,4) = 1 outcome
9 = none
10 = none
Notice the nice bell-shape, that is the advantage to the chain, it is much more consistent as compared to the flail. To figure out the average, you take each score times the number of outcomes to get it and then divide it by the total number of outcomes. This is a weighted average. So we get:
(1*0 + 2*1 + 3*2 + 4*3 + 5*4 + 6*3 + 7*2 + 8*1 + 9*0 + 10*0)/16 [notice that the 1, 9, and 10 don't effect this score since they occur 0 times each] = 80/16 = 5 This is the average score you are expected to roll. Sometimes you will roll and 8, but you'll roll a 2 just as often and they will average out to 5.
Let's now look at the flail, the flail as a uniform distribution:
1 = 1 = 1 outcome
2 = 2 = 1 outcome
3 = 3 = 1 outcome
4 = 4 = 1 outcome
5 = 5 = 1 outcome
6 = 6 = 1 outcome
7 = 7 = 1 outcome
8 = 8 = 1 outcome
9 = 9 = 1 outcome
10 = 10 = 1 outcome
As we can see the outcomes are all equally likely. Calculating the average in the same fashion above, we get:
(1*1 + 2*1 + 3*1 + 4*1 + 5*1 + 6*1 + 7*1 + 8*1 + 9*1 + 10*1)/10 = 55/10 = 5.5. So we are expecting an outcome 5.5. This average is 10% higher than expected value for the chain (5). So on a given hit, the flail will do 10% more damage on average.
But what about if we take into account if we hit or if we crit. Well if we assume that we will hit on an 11 or better (50% of the time), then we see that for the chain:
2.5% of the time it will crit (5% of criting and 50% of confirming) and 47.5% of the time it will just be a hit. So calculating the average, in a similar fashion as above we get:
(.50*0 + .475*5 + .025*10)/1 = 2.625
For the flail we see:
5% of the time it will crit (10% of criting and 50% of confirming)
and 45% of the time it will just be a hit. The average then is:
(.50*0 + .45*5.5 + .05*11) = 3.025
So taking into accounts crits (which occur twice as often for the flail as the chain), we see that the flail actually does 15.2% more damage on average than the chain.
This overall percent does go down as we start adding on additional damage, but even if you add on 200 extra points (so 400 extra for a crit), the flail is still 5% better than the chain.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm pretty sure I could whip out the weapon generation system that the chaps on the WotC boards managed to put together for weapons (it's about 90% perfect for determining the balance of all the weapons out there) and the new improved spiked chain would rate no higher than martial.
I'm not sure if this is what you are talking about, it was one of the discussions I saw, and I happened to save it. I'm not sure who did it now, I didn't save the fellow's name, so if anyone knows, that would be great:
All weapons start at 1d4/x2 for medium characters and 1d3/x2 for small characters. They are improved by spending "points", where simple weapons get 1 point, martial weapons 2 points, and exotic weapons 3 points. One-handed weapons get 1 further point and two-handed weapons get 3 further points. So a 2H simple weapon has 4 points while a light exotic weapon has 3 points.
Here's what you can spend the points on:
Increased damage: 1 point per step, as
1d4 -> 1d6 -> 1d8 -> 1d10 -> 2d6 -> () -> 2d8 (medium)
1d3 -> 1d4 -> 1d6 -> 1d8 -> 1d10 -> () -> 2d6 (small)
1d6 -> 1d8 -> 1d10 -> 2d6 -> 2d8 -> () -> 3d6 (large)
Going from 2d6 to 2d8 takes two points for a medium weapon.
However, each weapon class has a damage cap you can't normally exceed:
- All light weapons: 1d4 (small) or 1d6 (meedium)
- All 1H weapons and 2H simple weapons: 1d6 (small) or 1d8 (medium)
- All other 2H weapons: 1d10 (small) or 2d6 (medium)
A weapon is allowed to exceed its cap by one step if it is exotic, or it can exceed it's cap by one step by spending an extra point.
For instance, the greatclub has 4 points to spend. Two points bring its damage up to 1d8, then two more are required to exceed the cap and reach 1d10.
Improved criticals: 1 point per step, either
x2 -> x3 -> x4
or
x2 -> 19-20/x2 -> 18-20/x2
A simple weapon can spend only 1 point on improved criticals.
For instance, the scimitar has 3 points to spend. One point increases its damage to 1d6, and two more increase the critical range to 18-20/x2.
Special Abilities:
The following abilities cost 1 point each:
- Thrown weapon (range of 10 ft or 20 ft)&ammp;llt;
- Weapon can be used to trip
- Weapon deals non-lethal damage
- Monk weapon (light or double weapon only)
- Reach weapon (2H weapons only)
- Full reach (5' and 10' -- requires reach)))
- Mounted benefits (as a lance)
- Whip traits (15' reach, no armor penetrattion, doesn't threaten, provokes AoOs)
The following abilities cost 1/2 point each:
- Set vs. charge
- +2 bonus to disarm (can be taken twice)&ammp;llt;
- Finesse weapon (1H or 2H only)
- +2 bonus to conceal
Simple weapons cannot add more that 1 1/2 points worth of special abilities.
The total point cost for the weapon is rounded down, so a single 1/2-point ability can be added at no cost. This should only be done if suggested by the nature of the weapon. (And I would recommend not allowing it for homebrewed weapons.)
For example, the heavy flail has five points. Three go to increasing the damage to 1d10, one goes to increasing the threat range to 19-20/x2, and one goes to the trip ability. The bonus to disarm costs an extra 1/2 point which is rounded down.
Double weapons simply pay separately for each end. Double weapons must be two handed, and can't have reach.
For example, the quarterstaff has four points. Two points go to increasing the damage of each end to 1d6. Two more points make each end a monk weapon.
The only significant difference between this system and the PHB system is that they seem to treat the trip ability as 1/2 point, rather than 1 point. I think 1 point makes more sense, but I'd be happy to hear any contrary opinions.
So, my choices are to
1) Let it stand and encourage people to just reflavor the heavy flail
2) House Rule it to Martial
3) House Rule it back to 3.5.And if I'm going to have to houserule it back, how is that an improvement?
I think it is an improvement for folks that just want it out of the game. By making it such a poor choice, nobody is going to use it and thus it will be dead by default. I wouldn't be surprised if in a future printing it was just dropped altogether. And it will be said, "Big deal, nobody ever used it anyway. The heavy flail was a better choice."
On a tangential note, can you imagine how much room you'd need to use a spiked chain that can hit someone ten feet away? In order to have any kind of impact, you have to keep it whirling at speed -- it can't be 'thrust' with, it can only be swung -- and swung hard enough to keep the whole chain airborne through the whole blow.
As a matter of fact, I risked life and limb today with a piece of rope in my backyard, swinging it around to get a vague feel for what using that chain would be like. All I can say is that you're astonished how many things there are to get it tangled with unless you're standing on a golf course. And you definitely don't want any friends within about 15 feet when you're using it ....
*yawn* Let's all play "Real Life" 3.75.
Who cares how "realistic" it is. Have you seen the huge piece of steel the barbarian icon is swinging around? That isn't realistic either, so what. It is a fantasy game. That means we can allow somethings, even things that are technically not "magic", to be fantastical. It is ok to do that.
When I see Bruce Willis's character get shot a bunch of times and not die and in fact gets up a minute later and starts kicking some more ass. That is ok. It is not real. It is not meant to be real. Same thing with fantasy games. It is ok if the fighter can swing around 5 yards of chain, because it is fun and fantastical. When you watch Legolas stab a guy with an arrow or slide down on shield or the trunk of giant animal or shoot some orc hundreds of feet away through the eye. It is ok. We know, none of that is really possible, so what. It is fantasy. Let it be that.
Something like this isn't possible either, but it is fun to imagine it could be.
|
Why don't we compare the differences between the spiked chain and the heavy flail to those between the elven curve blade and the falchion?
Both are exotic weapons, are finessable and have a damage differing from the one of the martial weapon.
If being finessable is such an advantage, why does the elven curveblade more damage than the falchion?
|
Why don't we compare the differences between the spiked chain and the heavy flail to those between the elven curve blade and the falchion?
Both are exotic weapons, are finessable and have a damage differing from the one of the martial weapon.
If being finessable is such an advantage, why does the elven curveblade more damage than the falchion?
Mabye because falchion isn't an exotic weapon. And I'm not 100% sure as my book is at home and the PDF isn't here yet, but I don't think it's finessable either. So your whole premise is off.
But even if you are right about both being finessable you have the curve blade doing higher damage with the same crit range. The exotic feat is paying for the higher damage bonus, just like a dwarven waraxe compared to a battle axe.
In the spiked chains case, it's less damage than the heavy flail but then it can be used with finesse. Personally, I think they should have fixed it by making it something you had to choose between attacking at range with as a swift action. That would have been all the balance it needed. you choose during your round if its a reach weapon or a close weapon and then that's set for the round. I think that's how I'm gonna houserule it, give it back reach but not the super reach it had in 3.5
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
Why don't we compare the differences between the spiked chain and the heavy flail to those between the elven curve blade and the falchion?
Both are exotic weapons, are finessable and have a damage differing from the one of the martial weapon.
If being finessable is such an advantage, why does the elven curveblade more damage than the falchion?
Better comparison though is Elven Curved Blade = Greatsword.
Great Sword: 2d6 19-20 X2
Falchion: 2d4 18-20 X2
Elven Curved Blade: 1d10 18-20 X2
So for EWP, you're getting a higher crit range than the great sword, and finessable, but less average damage (5.5 vs 7)
You're getting .5 more damage and finessable for the Falchion.
Seems to fit right in the middle for me.
As to the Spiked Chain, yes it was a niche weapon. Strangely enough, the image in Pathfinder looks more like a multi-function reach weapon than that <i>thing<i> that was the 3.5 spiked chain. (It also makes me want to yell "Get over here!" but that's beside the point)
Am I going to miss reach? Not really. I'll take Lunge. If I take a prof in it I will for the same reason I take the scimitar over the longsword, or the bastard sword over the great sword. Style. (Though I'll use the kastane from Cathay, Jewel of the East or the great scimitar from Sandstorm when I can.)
Edit: I like LastKnight's House rule though, consider it stolen.
|
|
So, your point is that it's inferior in every way (except minimum damage), but you can use DEX with it, so it should be an Exotic weapon? Is that really your point?
Look again. My point is the clamor that it's inferior in every way is false.
stop the hyperbole claptrap. I never said it should be an Exotic weapon. The Game Designers did, back in 3.0. All Im saying is is the fact they took reach away from it worth all this grumbling?
The differences between the two weapons are minor.
Diferences: the 4 classes who get martial weapons have to take a feat to use it without penalty....everyone else has to spend a feat to use either of them.
10 gold cost (very minor edge to the flail...very very minor that will only really see any negative at 1st level...though it costs less than a bow.....)
05% difference in crits. I dont see people taking the crossbow instead of the longbow for this....
the piercing weapon vs bludgeoning weapon is minor...because as I noted I never see folks decide to take a Light Hammer over a Dagger because of this.
2 point better max damage for the flail, 1 point better minimum damage for the spiked chain.
yes the weapon finesse thing is a balance for this.
Cmon now, do we have to get nitpicky about everything?
|
|
05% difference in crits. I dont see people taking the crossbow instead of the longbow for this....
That's not a fair comparison. The crossbows have very different reload rates, the bow gives you full attacks at no cost, with crossbows if you wanted itterative attacks you had to pay for them with a feat and still only use the light crossbow. Or go exotic and get the repeating crossbow. That's why you don't see people taking the crossbow over the longbow. And it's the same reason you won't see people taking the spiked chain over the heavy flail.
The only reason people use crossbows is because it's one of their proficiencies when the longbow or shortbow isn't, but no one gets the spiked chain as a proficiency and therefor the only people who will use the current version are people who don't care about mechanics and will take the feat for flavor reasons (for the record I'm one of those people but that doesn't mean I agree with the change)
Mabye because falchion isn't an exotic weapon. And I'm not 100% sure as my book is at home and the PDF isn't here yet, but I don't think it's finessable either. So your whole premise is off.Why don't we compare the differences between the spiked chain and the heavy flail to those between the elven curve blade and the falchion?
Both are exotic weapons, are finessable and have a damage differing from the one of the martial weapon.
If being finessable is such an advantage, why does the elven curveblade more damage than the falchion?
I believe Jadeite's statement should be read: "Both spiked chain and elven courtblade are exotic weapons, ...". I don't think Jadeite was saying that both a falchion and a courtblade were exotic and the rest. Basically, compare the spiked chain to the flail in the same way as comparing the courtblade and the falchion
Better comparison though is Elven Curved Blade = Greatsword.
Great Sword: 2d6 19-20 X2
Falchion: 2d4 18-20 X2
Elven Curved Blade: 1d10 18-20 X2So for EWP, you're getting a higher crit range than the great sword, and finessable, but less average damage (5.5 vs 7)
You're getting .5 more damage and finessable for the Falchion.
Seems to fit right in the middle for me.
Taking into account, the damage and crit differences, assuming we need an 11 to hit, then the great sword and the courtblade equal out on average damage when we do an extra 27.5 damage each hit (55 on a crit). Before this the greatsword is better, while after this the advantage is the the courtblade. While the falchion and the greatsword equal out when 39 extra damage for each hit (78 on a crit). The falchion is actually a bit underpowered for a martial weapon. The courtblade looks actually balanced against the greatsword. Add in the weapon finesse, then it being exotic is fine. Though, I think it would be fine as a martial actually. If you do weapon finesse, then you are going to do less damage on average, since Str is more important than Dex when it comes to damage.
Look again. My point is the clamor that it's inferior in every way is false.
In every way, nope. Certainly the spiked chain is better in minimum damage and is more consistent, getting 5 damage 25% of the time while the flail gets 5 or 6 only 20% of the time.
The Game Designers did, back in 3.0. All Im saying is is the fact they took reach away from it worth all this grumbling?
Well the game designers thought it should be exotic when it had reach. Without it, can we say what they would have thought? No, but we can do a reasonable analysis and see does it make sense for it be, from a game balance perspective versus just a personal preference one.
The differences between the two weapons are minor.
Diferences: the 4 classes who get martial weapons have to take a feat to use it without penalty....everyone else has to spend a feat to use either of them.
But those 4 classes are the ones most likely to use it in either case. Thus the classes most likely to use such a weapon already have proficiency in the heavy flail. That is why the extra feat cost for an inferior or even just an equal weapon is bad idea.
10 gold cost (very minor edge to the flail...very very minor that will only really see any negative at 1st level...though it costs less than a bow.....)
I agree, but it is a difference, and it effects things like cold iron versions of it. Again not a big issue, but an issue none the less. Look at the falchion and the greatsword. The falchion is more expensive and does less damage until you do at least 40 extra points of damage on each hit.
05% difference in crits. I dont see people taking the crossbow instead of the longbow for this....
*takes a deep calming breathe* Look, I know you haven't done any statistic analysis on these issues, so a statement like this might make sense. If you actually compare 19-20/x2 to 20/x3 they are balanced, in that they will do the same average damage. Well to be 100% honest, the 20/x3 is slightly better because of the case of needing a natural 20 to hit (the benefit of the 19-20 range is lost). So the crossbow is actually better, because of its higher damage dice, right? Well, there are other issues as well. Speed of fire is the biggest, which is the reason that the repeating versions (which allow a higher rate of fire) are exotic.
the piercing weapon vs bludgeoning weapon is minor...because as I noted I never see folks decide to take a Light Hammer over a Dagger because of this.
Well considering everyone has dagger proficiency and a light hammer has a lower crit range and a dagger does piercing OR slashing (slashing being the more useful of those types) where the hammer does only bludgeoning, I don't think your implication is 100% accurate. It should be noted that the dagger is actually balanced as a martial weapon, the fact that it is so iconic with any type of character is why it is made simple. Comparing a heavy pick to a warhammer would be a better comparison.
I might point out that the best place for piercing weapons to shine, is exactly the place most people would really nerf the spiked chain. That being underwater. How many people are going to say the spiked chain (or say the heavy pick) can be used without penalty underwater, while the battleaxe and flail do have penalties? But more creatures have DR/bludgeoning than DR/piercing. It is a fact.
2 point better max damage for the flail, 1 point better minimum damage for the spiked chain.
And better damage on average from the flail.
yes the weapon finesse thing is a balance for this.
I agree, this makes it balanced as a martial weapon. The reach is what pushed it into the exotic range. There are ways to justify it in that range without reach. Usually be addressing the damage and/or crit issues. Fix those (higher damage and/or crit) and it could be balanced as an exotic.
Cmon now, do we have to get nitpicky about everything?
Well, when changes are made to satisfy people that don't even use the thing and won't, which turn off people that do and have, I think it is reasonable to question, why the change? How has it improved?
I'm assuming you know some basic math, but I could be making a mistake about that.This was an insulting comment. Pres man I thought better of you. I can see I was mistaken.
I'm actually giving you the benefit of the doubt by assuming you know some basic math. Your statement if taken at face value would show you don't. That you consider a .4 difference not a big deal ever. Sure if we are talking about numbers like 100, then a .4 difference is not significant. But if we are talking about numbers like 3, it is significant. I assume you just made a comment without really thinking about it. On the other hand, I don't know your math skills personally. So it may be that you don't know the difference. I'm trying to tell you, I am assuming you know some basic stuff, so please stop and consider what you are saying before saying it because it might come off as ignorant.
The spiked chain with reach has only ever made cameo appearances in our games before- it was never too powerful. Now it still costs a feat and is worse? The main reason for its use was reach now no-one will use it.For mine a 2d4 2 handed weapon costing a feat and having reach was a good balance.
I would like to hear Jasons reason for this change. My current feeling is that in our games this will be houseruled back to 3.5 version.
One of the discussions about the spiked chain from Beta can be found here:
I'm still waiting to hear from a single person who would use the new version of the spiked chain but who would never have considered using the previous version. We've gotten several folks say they won't use it now. We have a few that said they have or would have used it then and now (no change in preference). So where are the folks they say, "This fixed it for me. Now I finally can use it. Before, no way, but now hell yes!" Come on folks where are you at. Be truthful now, who wants to use it now for the first time.
Chuck Norris will use the spiked chain now, but would not before. Of course Chuck Norris does not need a spiked chain, Chuck Norris just thinks it looks cool. Chuck Norris also likes refering to Chuck Norris in the third person. Chuck Norris has spoken, the discssuion is over.
|
|
...I don't think that diminishing Spiked Chain was the right way to balance the situation. Better, I think, would have been to augment other exotic weapons to bring them closer to parity.
Yes!
As well as the reach weapons...
I say this as someone who thinks that different weapons out to feel as different as possible. I admit I still have a soft spot for Weapon Speed Factors and Space requirements. (Greatsword in a sewer tunnel? I don't think so.)
As do I sir!
As do I.
|
|
One of the discussions about the spiked chain from Beta can be found here:
Another can be found
HEREalbeit with a reach weapons slant to it.
|
|
What about allowing anyone who wields the spiked chain to use the lunge feat only with the spiked chain without needing to have the feat. This also removed the AoOs out to 10ft as the extra 5ft reach would only be for that attack not all attacks in the round.
Seems a fair trade off. That way you are getting something a little extra for spending a feat on exotic weapon prof that helps to offset the extra cost and lesser damage for using the chain.
My only problem that occured with the spiked chain was the ability to threaten so many squares with the 10ft reach (15ft after I enlarged myself) and whirlwind attack. By taking those away you are toning the weapon down a little without completely nerfing it altogether. Because I agree, as it stands now there realy is no point wasting a feat for exotic weapon (Sp Chain).
What does everone else think.....free lunge for spiked chain wielders???
I would be interested to hear Jasons reason, mechanical and flavour, for the change to the spiked chain.
I would be interested to hear Jasons reason, mechanical and flavour, for the change to the spiked chain.
Agreed, especially given:
And this is exactly what I am currently considering. It should be noted, that I think that the spiked chain is fine as an exotic weapon. I have considered nerfing it a bit many times, but the feat cost to use the weapon effectively has kept me from doing so... Unless I hear some sort of outcry, this is probably the way I am going to go.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
|
|
I would be interested to hear Jasons reason, mechanical and flavour, for the change to the spiked chain.Agreed, especially given:
And this is exactly what I am currently considering. It should be noted, that I think that the spiked chain is fine as an exotic weapon. I have considered nerfing it a bit many times, but the feat cost to use the weapon effectively has kept me from doing so... Unless I hear some sort of outcry, this is probably the way I am going to go.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
Clearly he heard some sort of outcry.
|
|
Pres-Man said- "I'm actually giving you the benefit of the doubt by assuming you know some basic math. Your statement if taken at face value would show you don't. That you consider a .4 difference not a big deal ever. Sure if we are talking about numbers like 100, then a .4 difference is not significant. But if we are talking about numbers like 3, it is significant. I assume you just made a comment without really thinking about it. On the other hand, I don't know your math skills personally. So it may be that you don't know the difference. I'm trying to tell you, I am assuming you know some basic stuff, so please stop and consider what you are saying before saying it because it might come off as ignorant."
Look. Can you stop with holier than thou attitude? Being insulting should be beneath you...if you are as intelligent as you like to think you are.
I understand basic math just fine and 'get' that .4 can ammount to a lot to a statistican....however, within the framework of the game, when you always round down, many small fractions are lost.
So within the framework of the game, those statistics always become watered down.
Because of that fact, and the fact that I dont 'get' enjoyment from endless crunching of data, I chose to look at things from a Gamers point of view and not a statisticians point of view. You get enjoyment for over analyzing things, I understand that. To each their own.
In my gamers point of view, (which is subjective I admit) the very minor diferences between the two weapons are balanced because of Weapon Finesse. You dont see it that way? fine. Just please stop the insults.
Keep it to opinions, because after all...in the end thats all this really comes down to.
I will be houseruling the spike chain as a Monks Weapon, because to me that made a lot of sense...
But Ive never liked the thought of someone walking around with about 15 feet of chain on them (because to have a 10 foot reach, theyd need around that much at least..and god forbid the 15 foot reach that 3.5 had).
Most of the Chain Weapons from history are based on 5-10 foot lengths which wouldnt be able to support the reach that the weapon has. The weapon in 3.5 was created for the 'cool' factor, not for any real semblance to a real world weapon, like the majority of the others.
The biggest reason I am happy with the change, is like I said...being a DM that has a simulationist view on things, its more real and I dont have to suspend my disbelief of some 'Master of Chains' wrapped in loop after loop of chain.
If you like crunching stats so much...figure out just how long a chain would have to be to have a 15 foot reach, or a 10 foot reach even and be able to be effectively used in combat.....In a room with allies, or a dungeon, or even in the perfect setting of outside in a field.
The Mind boggles.
|
|
The biggest reason I am happy with the change, is like I said...being a DM that has a simulationist view on things, its more real and I dont have to suspend my disbelief of some 'Master of Chains' wrapped in loop after loop of chain.
I'm also a simulationist DM, and I agree that that is the main reason I'm not bugged by this change at all.
At the same time, costing a feat to use it it needs something. That's why I like the solution I offered. It can have reach but if you use it as a reach weapon and someone closes with you you'll need to use an action to use it up close and you can't have reach and up close fighting at the same time. And honestly that's also what I've seen from the videos with crazy ninjitsu people using it. I believe it can be used for distanced strikes.
I think the swift action mechanic to switch between reach and up close (which mimics a 3.5 feat for reach weapons which honestly is what I stole it from) balances the weapons OMG factor with enlarging while at the same time retaining the value of spending a feat on it.
|
|
The biggest reason I am happy with the change, is like I said...being a DM that has a simulationist view on things, its more real and I dont have to suspend my disbelief of some 'Master of Chains' wrapped in loop after loop of chain.I'm also a simulationist DM, and I agree that that is the main reason I'm not bugged by this change at all.
Agreed. Think aout it from a visual stand point. Both ends of the chain are spiked so to threaten 10 ft with the chain, you would need a spiked chain that is at least 22 ft long. It's going to need to be fairly thick chain to do damage, similar to what a biker would carry. Think bike chain. it would be extremely difficult to even carry such a length of chain, let alone to do so without injuring yourself.
Actually Exotic Weapons not being that great makes sense.
Lets looks at the weapons group:
Simple Weapons: All those weapons that can be mastered without extensive training (example a couple weeks for a crossbow vs. years for a longbow).
Martial Weapons: All those weapons that are generally useful, that require more than simple training to make use of.
Exotic Weapons: A couple categories,
Racial Weapons: Weapons that are only generally useful to creatures with a certain biology. Other creatures can learn to use these weapons, but with difficulty (example, an Orc Double Axe, a weapon quite difficult to use for anyone not built like an Orc).
Specialty Weapons: Weapons that require deep and specialized training to use effectively in combat. These weapons may have some situational advantages, but also have disadvantages modeled by the need to take a feat to overcome them. If an exotic weapon was both powerful and effective everyone would be trained in its use, and it would become a martial weapon.
Exotic weapons are the leftovers that aren't useful enough for everyone to train in, but that certain wielders may be able to put to good advantage. A spiked chain is the only two handed weapon that you are likely to be able to conceal without use of magic.
I understand basic math just fine and 'get' that .4 can ammount to a lot to a statistican....however, within the framework of the game, when you always round down, many small fractions are lost.
.4 isn't just significant to a statistician. If a kid gets $3 allowance, then $.40 is going to be a significant portion to that kid. That is why understanding how basic proportions work is important to people. Also I think you are confusing understanding the average expected value and things like calculating the movement speed within the game. Yes, you usually round down in the game, thus if you can show me how you can roll a 3.5 on a die, I will gladly conceed that it should be rounded down. Your argument is like someone who complains when told that the average family has 2.3 kids, "How do you have .3 of a kid?"
So within the framework of the game, those statistics always become watered down.
We are not talking about within the game, we are talking about basic design philosphy before you even get the game started.
Because of that fact, and the fact that I dont 'get' enjoyment from endless crunching of data, I chose to look at things from a Gamers point of view and not a statisticians point of view. You get enjoyment for over analyzing things, I understand that. To each their own.
As they say, ignorance is bliss. And just so you don't think I'm insulting you again, ignorance =/= stupid. Everyone is ignorant of a great many things. You choose to stay ignorant of the game theory behind the mechanics, as you say, each to his own.
In my gamers point of view, (which is subjective I admit) the very minor diferences between the two weapons are balanced because of Weapon Finesse. You dont see it that way? fine. Just please stop the insults.
Actually, I do think they (the spiked chain and the flail) are balanced with the only 5 ft reach, that is the problem. Why should one be martial and one be exotic then if they are balanced? You have a feat cost to access that Weapon Finesse option, why add an addition feat cost to get exotic weapon proficiency?
Keep it to opinions, because after all...in the end thats all this really comes down to.
Well that is an option, but remember you are choosing to be ignorant of the game design, not me. I see no reason to debate opinions when hard cold facts are available. We are not discussing which candy bar tastes good, we are discussing the game balance features.
But Ive never liked the thought of someone walking around with about 15 feet of chain on them (because to have a 10 foot reach, theyd need around that much at least..and god forbid the 15 foot reach that 3.5 had).
I'm not sure what you mean by the 15 ft reach in 3.5, it had 10 ft reach, perhaps you are confusing it with the whip? Or is this another situation where opinions should trump facts? You feel like it was 15 ft, just some folks in one of those other threads felt like it could be used as double weapon. And because you feel like that is the case, that is reason enough to nerf it, even if it actually wasn't the case?
Most of the Chain Weapons from history are based on 5-10 foot lengths which wouldnt be able to support the reach that the weapon has. The weapon in 3.5 was created for the 'cool' factor, not for any real semblance to a real world weapon, like the majority of the others.
The biggest reason I am happy with the change, is like I said...being a DM that has a simulationist view on things, its more real and I dont have to suspend my disbelief of some 'Master of Chains' wrapped in loop after loop of chain.
Really?
These aren't real world enough for you?If you like crunching stats so much...figure out just how long a chain would have to be to have a 15 foot reach, or a 10 foot reach even and be able to be effectively used in combat.....In a room with allies, or a dungeon, or even in the perfect setting of outside in a field.
The Mind boggles.
Sure I'll do that, when you figure out how someone is swinging around a longspear or another reach weapon in combat. How someone is using a greatsword in a narrow passageway. If you are going to get out the gimp hammer because of "realism", then don't be subjective about it, start applying it to everything. Let's see if we make fighters even more underpowered versus spellcasters, go realism-ho!
Clearly he heard some sort of outcry.I would be interested to hear Jasons reason, mechanical and flavour, for the change to the spiked chain.Agreed, especially given:
And this is exactly what I am currently considering. It should be noted, that I think that the spiked chain is fine as an exotic weapon. I have considered nerfing it a bit many times, but the feat cost to use the weapon effectively has kept me from doing so... Unless I hear some sort of outcry, this is probably the way I am going to go.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
I would actually find it more disturbing if the reason it was changed was because of lobbying against it retaining its reach.
|
|
hahahah...Pres-man look at those videos again. All you did with those is support my claim. Not one of those were attacks with reach.
If one of those attacks was closer than someone 5-7 feet away Ill eat your hat.
and remember within the game my figure in a 5 foot square and your figure in a 5 foot square are anywhere from 2-8 feet apart.. Once you put another 5 foot square in there we now are between 7-13 feet apart and adding a 4th we are now 12-18 feet apart.
Look at those videos again. With the excepton of the 'Rope'....which is a poor example of a chain weapon., they are hitting someone fairly close, and even the rope weapon in the first video could barely claim to be a reach weapon...
and as I said, try doing those things in a packed area. Theres a reason those are done in single weapon displays and not with a lot of folks doing it at the same time.
See there you go with using terms that are designed to put someone into a class of being inferior to you. I realize Im soo inferior I couldnt possibly know the difference between Ignorance and Stupidity. Anyone who'd think that I wouldnt know the difference and feel the need to tell me would have to be ignorant themselves.
You don't know how to have discussions without trying to use words that are designed to put the person back in their place and in awe of your analytical properties. If you did, you would try to be friendly and not use words that will always...always have a negative connotation.
I remember now why I decided a year ago not to try and get involved in discussions on this board, because there is a small crowd here that just likes to argue and try to prove their point.
Once more I will put to you...
Within the Game- I dont care whether I do 1-2 points more of damage as long as my view of my character stay's true to how I can envision him.
I have never used the spiked chain as a weapon with a character, because I cannot see my character using it, in my minds eye.
I dont care if a weapon has a 05% greater chance to do more damage than a different weapon.
I dont pour over the books looking for feats that will get me a greater advantage. I dont min-max my character. My time is BETTER spent than that.
This is a game for goodness sake. A GAME.
I have debated topics before with masters, and I know all of the techniques you are using, designed to slowly cause diffusion and spread the discussion so you can slowly prove individual points, and not look at the bigger picture.
Lets use your .4 example and show that using a larger number will net a greater result, like a 3 dollar allowance that it becomes a big deal....but oh great and mighty statistican, who forgets that most folks know that statistics can be bent however you want...
lets take that same .4 and use it the other way. If that same child finds a penny and puts into a savings account that has a .4 APR they will net themselves about another .4 of a penny over one year. I sincerely doubt that child will give a hoot about putting that penny in the savings account.
Anyway, you have succeeded again in making this discussion less than palatable to me. Once more I will drop off the boards discussions.
Have a good life and always remember...the two great commands of wisdom
1. Never sweat the small stuff
2. Its all small stuff
Dread out.
I bet that
I understand basic math just fine and 'get' that .4 can ammount to a lot to a statistican....however, within the framework of the game, when you always round down, many small fractions are lost.
Your premise is false. Averages aren't a game statistic and as such aren't rounded down (or up). In D&D where a player makes many hundreds - if not thousands - of attacks in a career the difference between 5.0 and 5.5 is absolutely meaningful.
10% is nontrivial. Witness the difference between a d8 and d10 character. 4.5 and 5.5 average rolls. Difference of 1. The d8 character will have 81% the hit points that the d10 character will. Sure, a ~20% difference is literally twice the 10% difference but here we are, excitedly differentiating in our classes. And hitpoints are simply the quantity that damage erodes.
A valid argument to dismiss this fraction would be to point out that base weapon damage is rapidly eclipsed by all the other bonuses stacked on top of it. Sadly, when discussing the relative merits of different weapons, such an argument is beside the point.
|
|
hahahah...Pres-man look at those videos again. All you did with those is support my claim. Not one of those were attacks with reach.
Actually did you look at those videos? A lot of those attacks were at a greater reach than you would get with a polearm and some of them were thrusting style attacks that show you don't have to swing the thing around in a circle to do damage as many others have stated in this thread.
I think the reach should have stayed and agree that it was the feat of improved trip that unbalanced the weapon. What with Imp trip being nerfed it has already effectively reduced the power of the chain as a weapon because just about anyone I have seen using it had imp trip.
The only other slightly unbalacing aspect of it was the ability to threaten so many squares. Which as I have mentioned before either give the wielder a lunge option or make them choose at the begining of their action if it is 10ft or 5ft reach for the round.
|
|
I did...and I think you are overestimating the distance.The person using the weapon is about 5'8 maybe. Use him as a guide and for the distances.
anyway. Im done here.
You guys want to argue that the change to the spiked chain has destroyed the game..feel free.
To me its a little thing, and will stop folks from taking advantage of a game loophole that was unbalancing.
Im all for that.
hahahah...Pres-man look at those videos again. All you did with those is support my claim. Not one of those were attacks with reach.
To quote the very first video at the very beginning of it.
"Most Kung-Fu fighting is done up close and personal, but sometimes hand-to-hand combat is not appropriate. One of the best weapons for long range attacks is the rope dart."
So your claim that not one was for attacks with reach is wrong.
|
It was never a matter of it neing to powerful, and I have never seen it commonly used. I have only seen two characters in different campaigns use a spiked chain. One was a shadow dancer and the other a hexblade. So in the four years I have been playing, I've only seen it used twice, and the characters that used it came close to dying or did actually die.
As the O.P., I think will point out that a good point was just made.
By nerfing "Improved Trip" you don't really need to also nerf the spiked chain. If keeping 'reach,' an Enlarged character could still threaten 20', but the bonuses in 3.5 that came from having a two handed weapon (+4) and being Large (+4) when disarming have been reduced or elminated to 0/+1 respectively. (There is no more +4 bonus to disarming with a two handed weapon, correct me if I'm wrong please, as I'm buying the book today.)
Therefore nerfing the spiked chain was a extra step that made a more 'difficult' choice (for those who want to focus on Combat Manuevers like Trip/Disarm) into a non-choice for the spiked chain.
|
|
As the O.P., I think will point out that a good point was just made.
Are you talking about my earlier post? Because if so: o_O.
That would be a rare event-saying I made a good point-for me.If you were not, carry on.
By nerfing "Improved Trip" you don't really need to also nerf the spiked chain. If keeping 'reach,' an Enlarged character could still threaten 20', but the bonuses in 3.5 that came from having a two handed weapon (+4) and being Large (+4) when disarming have been reduced or elminated to 0/+1 respectively. (There is no more +4 bonus to disarming with a two handed weapon, correct me if I'm wrong please, as I'm buying the book today.)
Therefore nerfing the spiked chain was a extra step that made a more 'difficult' choice (for those who want to focus on Combat Manuevers like Trip/Disarm) into a non-choice for the spiked chain.
I agree. I think it may have been Paizo overreacting to certain threads.