Ranged siege weapons don't have their damage cut in half when used against objects. They also have the ability to crit objects (which are normally immune).
Is that really the only real difference between siege weapons and conventional weapons? Do they not also ignore hardness or anything like that?
They just seem...weak and useless to me. My players were complaining in my skull and shackles game last night that they could run up and do more damage to enemy ships with conventional weapons then they could with the siege weapons on their ship.
they could run up and do more damage to enemy ships with conventional weapons then they could with the siege weapons on their ship.
Did the siege equipment have as many "plusses" as their normal weaponry? 'cause Its a bit odd to complain that magical gear is better than mundane equipment, even if the latter is really really big.
Well admittedly, they do much higher amounts of dice damage, which can be devastating at lower levels. And imagine critting on 6d6. Yeesh.
Yes, PCs and their enemies are usually relatively unfazed by the use of siege weaponry. However, put siege weapons on a battle field where 90% of all combatants are level 2 or less and see what happens.
PC above a certain level. I'd say most of the siege weapons (especially the firedrake and firewyrm) stay scary pre-10. Maybe not auto-kill scary, but scary enough. I've seen a bard get shot by a ballista and it was not pleasant.
A typical sailing ship can mount 10 firedrakes, three each in the port and starboard banks and two each up on the forecastle and sterncastle.
Seven of those can fire in the same direction. 7 x 6d6 = 42d6 damage = ~147 average damage.
Scary at any level.
Also, lets think about how siege weaponry was really used on the battlefield. Many weapons weren't designed so much to be super effective man killing machines. They were designed to chnage how combat took place. The catapult was designed to break up enemy lines by forcing them to move out of position. The trebuchet was used to break down walls or defensive structures. A lot of siege equipment wasn't so much to kill people as it was to change and control how troops were deployed by threatening troops.
Can you enchant a siege weapon like a range weapon ?
+1 flaming unholy human bane catapult ?
Take a Siege Mage to use gargantuan Siege engines ... for example:
Bombard, heavy DMG: 9d6 (crit: x4), range: 200 ft.(100 ft. min.)
+ 9x3 DMG / +9 Attack (max)
As a swift action, a siege mage can sacrifice one of his spells to empower the next attack he makes before the end of his turn with a siege engine he is bonded with. When he does, the siege engine attack gains a bonus on its attack roll or targeting roll equal to the level of the spell he sacrificed, and a bonus to damage equal to 3 × the level of the spell.
I imagine a heroic PC that is focused on using a magical weapon would most effectively be compared to a heroic PC that is focused on using a magical siege weapon. In such a case, I imagine the siege weapon would have its advantages.
Unique siege weapon enchantments ... now there's an idea for Wayfinder. I can already imagine a property that bull rushes every creature away from the center of its area of effect.
Catapults can fire at squares they cannot directly see (so over walls). This lets a castle have catapults inside the courtyard firing out over the walls at approaching enemies (with an observer relaying feedback).
As far as practicality for PCs? Not really. Might as well just summon a giant to throw boulders for you.
All I have to say is, Summon siege weapon.