So the other day I was thinking about the inherent difficulties that a dual wielder runs into compared to two-handers. Beyond feats, one such problem dual wielders encounter is having to shell out twice as much gold for weapon enchantments. I came up with a pair of ideas that could lessen weapon cost impact.
The first idea I had was basing weapon enchantment price on the size of the weapon. Trying to work such a system off a weapon's weight would be too complicated, in my opinion. The much more simple way of doing it, I think, would be to base the cost off of the weapon's damage. Roughly, I think the prices would work decently as:
1d10 or larger 100% base price
1d8 75% base price
1d6 and lower 50% base price
This system will, however, impact other areas of the game. The first that comes to mind is the bastard sword. Paying the feat to become proficient with a bastard sword seems even less worth it if enchantments would cost more than they would on a long sword. Also, all small characters would be able to buy weapon enchantments at a much lesser rate than their medium-sized counterparts. Maybe set enchanting cost as above, but for two-handed, one-handed, and light weapons, respectively?
My second idea was one of 'weapon sets.' When enchanting a pair weapons, so long as you are applying the same enchantment to each, you may enchant them as a set. Enchanting a weapon set costs 150% of the price of enchanting a single weapon. Only a one-handed weapon and light weapon, or pair of light weapons, may be enchanted as a set. The enchantments applied the weapons as a set only function when they are both possessed by the same character. The enchantments applied to weapons as a set count against each weapon's singular weapon enhancement bonus, and maximum weapon enhancement bonus. When enchanting a weapon set that has one weapon with a higher enhancement bonus than the other, use the highest enhancement bonus among the two weapons to determine the price of further enchantments.
That's it. I'd love to hear feedback. Thanks for your time!
Everyone would just go around using a scimitar in two hands.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think with +X enchantment dual wielders are disadvantaged, but with other enchantments like flaming, they're actually at an advantage, because having the flaming quality twice equates to a +2 bonus, but it costs them less than a single +2 weapon.
I think with +X enchantment dual wielders are disadvantaged, but with other enchantments like flaming, they're actually at an advantage, because having the flaming quality twice equates to a +2 bonus, but it costs them less than a single +2 weapon.
That's a good point.
I think it could be plausible to rework this on a light/onehanded/twohanded basis, with weapons like bastard swords counting as two handed.
Also on the Flaming thing, having two weapons: you could have one be flaming and the other corrosive.
Also, I believe eventually, focusing equally on both weapons may be better than one.
My ranger plans to have (not optimized):
+1 Holy Bastard Sword
and a +1 Flaming Burst Keen Kukri
this costs about 50,000.
Having a single +1 Holy Flaming Burst Keen Great Sword
All these would cost 98,000.
Even though it's not to both weapons, there can be a little more variety at a cheaper price.
You're right. I never thought of it that way.
I would base the cost like this:
Average Damage of weapon times percentage increase of crit damage, times number of stops on a threat range * X, where X = 2.
A x2 Critical is a 100% increase in damage
A x3 Critical is a 200% increase in damage
A x4 critical is a 300% increase in damage
A 19-20 threat range is a "two stop" threat range
A 18-20 threat range is a "three stop" threat range
A longsword has an average damage of 4.5 * 2 * (100+100) = 1800
A battleaxe has an average damage of 4.5 * 2 * (200) = 1800
A bastard sword has an average damage of 5.5 * 2 * (100+100) = 2200
A kukri has an average damage of 2.5 * 2 * (100+100+100) = 1500
A falcata has an average damage of 4.5 * 2 * (200+200) = 3600
A greatsword has an average damage of 7 * 2 * (100+100) = 2800
A greataxe has an average damage of 6.5 * 2 * (200) = 2600
A pickaxe has an average damage of 4.5 * 2 * (300) = 2700
A scimitar has an average damage of 3.5 * 2 * (100+100+100) = 2100
A katana has an average damage of 4.5 * 2 * (100+100+100) = 2700
This also means you can price keen by simply doubling the number of "stops" on the calculation above.
This also demonstrates just how scary a Falcata actually is in relative damage potential.