|
After a couple of months dealing with Oversized Weapons, I have a question. Why would a Large Bastard Sword do an additional 6 points of damage? (1d10 -> 2d8) After a small amount of reading the Oversized Weapons rules, I have happened upon a more balanced way of doing oversized weapons.
For every size catagory above Medium, the weapon deals +1 damage however, you still impose the attack penalty. Weapon damage cannot go past Medium size (a Large Bastard Sword would still do 1d10 not 2d8 and would right off the bat deal 1d10 + 1).
What do you guys think, it's pretty simple and easy to work with. This will keep all weapons from getting up to an additional 4 - 6 points.
restricting damage would make no sense at all, and would be counter-productive
why would then a shortsword, which is basically be a medium dagger have d6 instead d4 damage? why does a greatsword cause 2d6 damage if it is basically a large longsword? (all these questions made due to your houserule)
Weapons hurt more if they are bigger, this is a basic, simple fact, many (including me in some weapon cases) would actually argue that the damage difference is too low already. The idea you have would make some classes like Titan Mauler totally useless (and not just "nearly", as they are now)
After a couple of months dealing with Oversized Weapons, I have a question. Why would a Large Bastard Sword do an additional 6 points of damage? (1d10 -> 2d8) After a small amount of reading the Oversized Weapons rules, I have happened upon a more balanced way of doing oversized weapons.
For every size catagory above Medium, the weapon deals +1 damage however, you still impose the attack penalty. Weapon damage cannot go past Medium size (a Large Bastard Sword would still do 1d10 not 2d8 and would right off the bat deal 1d10 + 1).
What do you guys think, it's pretty simple and easy to work with. This will keep all weapons from getting up to an additional 4 - 6 points.
hmm, I admit it seems rather haphazard sometimes.
Lets look at the weapon averages.
M. Bastard Sword
Min: 1
Max: 10
Avg: 5.50
L. Bastard Sword
Min: 2
Max: 16
Avg: 9.00
So while it is capable of hitting +6 harder it only averages +3.50 damage more. Which is still damned impressive. Thats approximately a 82 percent increase in base damage.
Curiously a Small Great sword does 1d10, and a medium Great Sword does 2d6.
Roll: 2d6
Statistics
Min: 2
Max: 12
Avg: 7.00
2d6 would only be a 2.5 point increase on Average and seems less crazy, but all the big swords have issues like this. The benefit of going from a medium to a large rapier is relatively little, but these big weapons... especially with extra weapon dice get a huge benefit from it.
So again M. Great Sword
Roll: 2d6
Statistics
Min: 2
Max: 12
Avg: 7.00
Large Great Sword
Roll: 3d6
Statistics
Min: 3
Max: 18
Avg: 10.50
Thats a +3.5 average damage increase. thats a 50 percent increase in average base damage.
Lets try a 1h weapon like the Rapier.
Roll: 1d6
Statistics
Min: 1
Max: 6
Avg: 3.50
vs Large Rapier
Roll: 1d8
Statistics
Min: 1
Max: 8
Avg: 4.50
1 point average increase in damage, which is about a 29 percent increase in base damage.
for fun lets try a 1d12 weapon
Roll: 1d12
Statistics
Min: 1
Max: 12
Avg: 6.50
L is 3d6 so
Roll: 3d6
Statistics
Min: 3
Max: 18
Avg: 10.50
+4 increase in base damage 70 percent increase in base damage.
Although these benefits do seem to be averaged out by the fact that most people swinging big swords are already going to be adding +3 or so to them or more from strength bonuses.
These percentages probably are similar for all 2 handed and 1 handed weapons. Bastard Sword being the exception because the exotic proficiency lets you swing it with one hand.
Looks like any weapon that goes from 1 dice roll to two benefits the most.
So you have to ask yourself, even with the most extreme examples, the 1d10 and 1d12 weapons, IS this unbalanced? a Large 1d10 weapon like the bastard sword benefits from +4.5 average damage for -2 to hit. This is very similar to the benefit from Power Attack. **** EDIT: Its only a 3.5 increase on the Bastard sword, so its worse than Power attack... Please escuse my poor math skills!
Slightly harder hitting, but you never get the option to 'shut it off' when your opponent is hard to hit. For the 1d12 weapons this is a +4 to damage for -2 to hit, and exactly the same as power attack. Now it will be most noticeable in the lower levels, of course the lower levels is when your -2 to hit makes a huge difference. Going to a large Great Sword is even less effective than simply power attacking. Of course Power Attack does stack with this. All for double weapon cost, double weapon weight (and the big ones are heavy) And all of this pretty much only benefits martial characters.
As a Bard I would not benefit at all from a large rapier. Indeed I couldn't use weapon finesse so i'd be in extra trouble... Of course while I was swinging my now useless rapier around failing to hit anything, a burley barbarian batting around my opponent with an oversized Earth Breaker would be a welcomed sight!
So theres some numbers crunched for ya. Is it to good? Thats up to you.
Who is going to a Large Greatsword? There is no medium race that can do so. The only class that is supposed to be able to do so (Barbarian-Titan Mauler) cannot due to how the rules on it were written.
Second: Attack penalties will hurt DPR far more than most of the damage bonuses you are talking about. The ratio is something along the lines of -1attack:+3damage is ok, anything less is not really worth it.
- Gauss
Some other weapon stuff numbers etc, Assuming wielding the damn things aren't an issue.
Heres the format
M > L: Average Increase: Percentage of increase
1d2 > 1d3: +.5 : +33%
1d3 >1d4: +.5 : +25%
1d4 > 1d6: +1 : +40%
1d6 > 1d8: +1 : +22%
1d8 > 2d6: +2.5 : +56%
2d4 > 2d6: +2: +40%
1d10 > 2d8: +3.5: +64%
1d12 > 3d6: +4: +62%
2d6 > 3d6: +3.5 +50%
Looks like my math was mistaken on the Bastard sword earlier I will correct it, its only a +3.5 increase in average damage. So its actually just a little worse than Power Attack not better.
Honestly the ONLY weapon that gives you the same trade off of -2 to hit and +4 to damage is the 1d12 weapons and theres only a couple of those. Its slightly ridiculous for the Bastard Sword because you can use it 1 handed. But most GMs probably won't let you use a Large Bastard Sword 1 handed.
And again about Power Attack, carrying around a big weapon is twice the cost, twice the weight, and you can't ever shut off the -2 to hit if you need to make sure you hit. And at the higher levels im not certain its game breaking. But I am less experienced there. One thing to consider is by nerfing the big weapon bonuses you are hurting basically just the people who carry around big ass two handed weapons, who i'd think tend to be the guys who pretty much JUST hit things for a living.
****NOTE: I am not up to speed on the rules about who can wield what, so this doesn't really take that into account, just flat out crunches the numbers.
One more thought, House Ruling weapon size damages will also effect the value of the spell Enlarge person.
Alexandrina:
Under current rules nobody can wield Large 2-handed weapons (except the Titan Mauler but that ability doesnt work yet so still nobody).
A medium one handed weapon can be made into a large 2handed weapon though. (Example: medium one-handed Longsword becomes a Large 2handed Longsword with a -2attack penalty and 2d6damage.)
- Gauss
Alexandrina:
Under current rules nobody can wield Large 2-handed weapons (except the Titan Mauler but that ability doesnt work yet so still nobody).
A medium one handed weapon can be made into a large 2handed weapon though. (Example: medium one-handed Longsword becomes a Large 2handed Longsword with a -2attack penalty and 2d6damage.)- Gauss
Ah I undestand, so it looks like most examples aren't even getting you more then 2.5 average damage for -2 to hit. So its even less of an issue than it seems to be by glancing at the weapon damage chart.
Yup, thats the point. Except for Enlarge (or similar spells) it really isnt a big deal.
- Gauss
Well, the issue is that bastard swords and dwarven war axes can be wielded two handed by proficient users for a 2d8 two hander, the next closest is 2d6 for damage. Not game breaking in my eyes, but there it is.
Glutton: true. For a -2 penalty and a feat you are doing 9points of damage (2d8) 2handed instead of a penalty of 0, no feat, and 7points of damage (2d6).
I would pass on the Large Bastard sword or Dwarven War Axe. -2attack +2damage results in a net damage loss.
- Gauss
So would a lot of people. Vital Strike users are not those people though.
Glutton: True, Vital Strike paired with this is better. However, it still increases the average by only 2points per Vital Strike tier. At best that becomes -2 for a +6damage increase. Not that big a deal to be honest.
- Gauss