|
To the OP:
Remember that greater magic weapons can improve you weapon straight plus but it can't add special abilities. You can get some nice synergy with a weapons with special abilities and a wand of greater magic weapon at a appropriate caster level (or even better with someone in the party casting the spell).
Now you can bane your weapon, making the enh. +2 higher, and thus, your bonus to morale bonuses from the weapon just went up by one, making it a +4 to all morale bonuses.There is argument over this in two parts.
1. If the weapon is already +10 then you cannot give it any other abilities without dropping abilities first.
2. I've heard discussion that the +5 enhancement cap is a hard cap -- I'm not so sure on this one but felt it should be mentioned.
1. This is true, but not the point of concern on my tip.
2. This is the point of issue, and actually isn't one due to the wording of bane and furious. They both increase the enhancement bonus, above and beyond the normal hard cap of + for straight enhancements, and +10 for ability enhancements.
This is why you can have a +5 furious, courageous, bane, keen, called weapon. It's current toal is +10 for ability enhancements, but furious allows it to go above that. It says increase the enhancdment bonus by " +2 better than it's actual bonus", never stating there is a cap, like with magic weapon, or other abilities.
So, your + 5, just became a +9 if both furious and bane activate for you.
Just mentioning the fact that these things will come up.
Didnt read everything - but dont forget that its not effectively just +1/+1, the bonus damage is multiplied on a critical hit so its up to +1.4. now it just requires one line in excel to find out when thats worth more than +3.5 - and actually that is most of the time.
+1/+1 is also more effective with crits. +1d6 mods don't do anything on crits.
Buying off the TH bonus with Greater Magic weapon is a viable tactic if the party is up for it...that's the kind of buffing that lets a party punch above its weight, by stacking modifiers together and effectively having higher level weapons then otherwise. But note what you're doing...adding +1 enhancement AND the +1d6 mods.
==Aelryinth
I also think people focus way too much on average performance when determining which way to go. Firstly, because encounters, hell, even many campaigns, don't take long enough for the averages to even pan out. But also, and mostly, because rpgs are fundamentally a game of psychology, not math. You chose the option you enjoy best for the psychological benefit-- Some like the feel of just knowing that they do 1.75 dpr more than with their given choice, but they can never really appreciate that. You can't see in an encounter when your 1.75 dpr is actually relevant (and it won't be 99% of the time). But when you chose something that affords you a large swing in damage, like extra dice do, you can really notice it when they kick in... Gravity, shocking, electrical... 4d6, four or five times per round. Occasionally all those d6s are going to produce near-max results, which is going to destroy whatever...
When your attacks hit exactly by the opponent AC, or confirms the critical for exactly the opponent AC, you see a large swing in damage too. With a +1 to hit, those "almost hit" or "almost crit" become hits or crits instead, and that's a damn good swing of damage, in my opinion.
Actually, +1d6 enchantements are a good choice for characters that don't do a lot of damage. Characters like AD's druid, which is secondary an archer, but when the gloves are off, goes back to caster mode. In those cases, missing by one isn't that big issue, as the damage isn't very high anyways. Adding +1d6 on the other hand, improves that damage by a lot (if you use a short bow, with no STR bonus, your +1d6 fire nearly doubles your damage).
But for a dedicated archer, one of those that add deadly aim, greater weapon specialization/favored enemy/smite evil, point black shot, etc, it's simply not worth it. Your arrows do way too much damage by themselves for an extra +1d6 being noticed, and if you miss one single hit (or crit), you lose a big bunch of damage.
To the OP:
Remember that greater magic weapons can improve you weapon straight plus but it can't add special abilities. You can get some nice synergy with a weapons with special abilities and a wand of greater magic weapon at a appropriate caster level (or even better with someone in the party casting the spell).
Yes, that's true, except for Damage Reduction. Not a big issue with Bows (adamantine/silver/cold iron arrows are cheap, and clustered shot is available), but can be important in melee.
But for a dedicated archer, one of those that add deadly aim, greater weapon specialization/favored enemy/smite evil, point black shot, etc, it's simply not worth it. Your arrows do way too much damage by themselves for an extra +1d6 being noticed, and if you miss one single hit (or crit), you lose a big bunch of damage.
There is some validity to this argument. However, I don't believe it's black and white, there is still some gray area.
I should do a full progression analysis and see at which point in the magical enhancement progression an energy d6 starts to lose effectiveness compared to other options.
I've really only done the analysis for my own characters and the highest level archer I've ever played was level 12, most of my characters tend to get retired around level 9. So at that level it actually does frequently become a choice between a +2/+2 bow or a +1/+1&d6 energy bow. Once you get to the point of adding your third or fourth enhancement bonus, it might well turn out that the energy d6 becomes less effective.
I've never done that analysis since I've never had a character that high. But it's possible. In fact reading gustavo's note and some other notes, it might well be probable. It could well be that the "sweet spot" for the energy enchantments just happens to be more or less where my archers tend to end up retiring.
Couragous seems like it would be a great option if you have a bard in the party. Double inspire courage!
If you think there might be a fear effect coming, stand by the paladin for a +8 save bonus!
Hmm, is Bravery a Morale Bonus?
Couragous seems like it would be a great option if you have a bard in the party. Double inspire courage!
If you think there might be a fear effect coming, stand by the paladin for a +8 save bonus!
its only half the weapons enhancement bonus, so it maxes out at +2. It does however, work for all bonuses that are morale based. That can really add up.
It maxes out actually at +4, as I stated earlier. Typically about +3 morale bonus, with a +4 furious weapon. Norm is +2 for all users.
It maxes out actually at +4, as I stated earlier. Typically about +3 morale bonus, with a +4 furious weapon. Norm is +2 for all users.
not sure what your saying here, half of five rounded down is +2. It only uses enhancements, not properties.
Furious adds to the increase as well.
I've really only done the analysis for my own characters and the highest level archer I've ever played was level 12, most of my characters tend to get retired around level 9. So at that level it actually does frequently become a choice between a +2/+2 bow or a +1/+1&d6 energy bow. Once you get to the point of adding your third or fourth enhancement bonus, it might well turn out that the energy d6 becomes less effective.I've never done that analysis since I've never had a character that high. But it's possible. In fact reading gustavo's note and some other notes, it might well be probable. It could well be that the "sweet spot" for the energy enchantments just happens to be more or less where my archers tend to end up retiring.
Between a +2/+2 and a +1/+1d6 weapons, and around 9 level, the energy weapon comes ahead in most encounters (those without energy resistance to the weapon's energy). This is specially true for archers, and double so for non-pure specialized archers (like your druid)
Around level 12 or so, the basic damage modifiers start to be so big, than adding an extra +1d6 isn't really that strong, but missing one of the itterative attacks by 1 (or not confirming a crit by 1) is incredibly hurtful. My Kingmaker fighter finished the game being 17th level. I was doing 2d4+49 in the first attack, 2d4+53 in the rest, if I recall correctly. More when the bard was singing. I also had 15+ crit range, and my crits stunned the opponent (so the +1 was often a +2, while the +1d6 wont), and if I miss the confirmation just by a +1, not only I lose a very heavy amount of damage, but I also lose the chance to stun/stagger the oponent.
Also, at that level, several enemies have some energy resistance. While they don't always have resistance to your own energy, sometimes they do. Specially true with several kinds of monsters who have resistance 10 to a very large amount of different energy attacks, which is enough to shut down energy weapons. At that level, also, DR/silver or /adamantine is common (and stoneskin a staple). So having a +4 weapon is way much more interesting than having a +1/+3d6, by far.
So if your campaign is not going to go beyond level 11+ or so, you can go with energy producing weapons, which will give you a great bang for your bucks (it¡s like a free extra power attack or deadly aim, sort of). But if you plan to go beyond level 12 (ie: playing a full AP), and you plan to keep and upgrade your current weapon (instead of selling them and buying new ones when you level), then go for a +2 weapon. Even if it does not break any DR/metal, it's easier to increase it's enchantement to +3 later. Or you can take the +1d6, then sell it and buy an new one once you can afford a +3.
PS: on a side note, Rogues for example, should always try to go for pure +1 enhancements. The chance to miss a lot of +1d6 is too heavy a penalty just for adding another +1d6, in my opinion. Rogues have a very low Attack to start with, they shouldn't trade to hit for damage often.
What about just doing the math and you will see how wrong you are with some of your statements.
I do not like threads like this one on these boards. Its so easy to just calculate when which bonus is better but still people always throw in wrong assumptions and confuse people who really are interested in that stuff. In most caes +1/+1 is more effective, but to make sure if that also applies to your build, take those 2 minutes and just calculate it yourself.
If you are calculating it in two minutes, I'm quite sure you are calculating it wrong.
Such as not calculating the average AC for the creatures in the +-3 Challenge Rating of your character level, the average damage reduction type of those monsters and the average resistance to the energy type of your weapon, for example. It takes more than two minutes to go through the bestiaries and search for those.
Doing more damage against a test Dummy without DR, energy resistance, or high variance in AC, isn't the same than doing more damage in game.
2 minutes. There are tables that contain all the important average values - you will have to do it for resistance and for no resistance - but 90% of the time this doesnt have influence on the results as +1/+1 is better anyway.
Using Excel you can even do it for all levels and all CR at a time. Without having to do anything but entering your stats after you made up the equotations once. I can üromise even that is faster than posting on these boards, hoping for helpful answers.
And even if you just do rugh calculations that do not care for DR or energy resistance you still get better results than "at level 9 this is better because shut up and at 12 that is better because I say so".
2 minutes. There are tables that contain all the important average values - you will have to do it for resistance and for no resistance - but 90% of the time this doesnt have influence on the results as +1/+1 is better anyway.
Using Excel you can even do it for all levels and all CR at a time. Without having to do anything but entering your stats after you made up the equotations once. I can üromise even that is faster than posting on these boards, hoping for helpful answers.
And even if you just do rugh calculations that do not care for DR or energy resistance you still get better results than "at level 9 this is better because shut up and at 12 that is better because I say so".
I think you should read the whole thread before you jump into conclusions, as I have been defending that a +1/+1 is better for most circumstances since the begining, and only corner cases (specifically below 11th level, for non-specialized characters such as AD's druid) the +1d6 is better.
I was not only refering to you, even though your last post on that finally made me post here. And Im not talking about what conclusion you're supporting here, I'm talking about the way they're presented and justified.
Hmm...
Here this can be used for some of the discussions that are going on here.
Here is the math for a character with a +6/+1 BAB using PBS, rapid shot, many shot and with a dex of 18 and no str bonus within 30 feet:
With +2/+2 bow against an AC of 20:
Each arrow that hits will do 1d8+3 base damage
Manyshot attacks only crit on one arrow. A crit will do an additional 2d8+6 damage (the 1d8+3 is already counted in the "hit")
Attack 1 (two arrows):
60% chance to hit, damage of 2d8+6: avg dmg = 9
3% chance to crit, damage of 2d8+6: avg dmg = 0.45
Total avg dmg = 9.45
Attack 2 (one arrow):
60% chance to hit, damage of 1d8+3: avg dmg = 4.5
3% chance to crit, damage of 0.45
Total avg dmg = 4.95
Attack 3 (one arrow):
35% chance to hit, damage of 1d8+3: avg dmg = 2.625
1.75% chance to crit, damage of 2d8+6: avg dmg = 0.2625
Total avg dmg = 2.8875
Total average damage = 9.45 + 4.95 + 2.8875 = 17.2875
With +1/+1&d6 energy bow (no DR):
Each arrow that hits will do 1d8+2+1d6 damage
Manyshot attacks only crit on one arrow. A crit will do an additional 2d8+4 damage (the 1d8+2 is already counted in the "hit")
Attack 1 (two arrows):
55% chance to hit, damage of 2d8+4 + 2d6: avg dmg = 11
2.75% chance to crit, damage of 2d8+4: avg dmg = 0.3575
Total avg dmg = 11.3575
Attack 2 (one arrow):
55% chance to hit, damage of 1d8+2 + 1d6: avg dmg = 5.5
2.75% chance to crit, damage of 0.3575
Total avg dmg = 5.8575
Attack 3 (one arrow):
30% chance to hit, damage of 1d8+2 + 1d6: avg dmg = 3
1.5% chance to crit, damage of 2d8+4: avg dmg = 0.195
Total avg dmg = 3.195
Total average damage = 11.3575 + 5.8575 + 3.195 = 20.41
In this case the energy bow does an average of 3.1225 damage more per round than the +2/+2 bow.
As you go higher in AC, the +2/+2 improves, as you go lower in AC the +1/+1&d6 bow improves.
Now, if the character has a str adjusted bow and a +4 str bonus, both bows would receive the additional str damage and critical hit bonus, so the overall result will be the same.
Guided is also a great ability for wisdom bow users, especially zen archers. It allows you to use your wisdom modifier instead of strength for attacking and damage, if a str. Bow.
Guided is also a great ability for wisdom bow users, especially zen archers. It allows you to use your wisdom modifier instead of strength for attacking and damage, if a str. Bow.
Yeah, I've thought about this for my druid archer. Seems a perfect (albeit expensive) fit.
UPDATE: Ah, wait, I remember now. This is actually what I wanted for my druid archer, but the GM did not allow non-core content, so it was not available.
[snip...]
Now, if the character has a str adjusted bow and a +4 str bonus, both bows would receive the additional str damage and critical hit bonus, so the overall result will be the same.
Nice breakdown of math, but that last sentence is not correct. If both get a +4 str bonus, the +2/+2 gets better. In a sequence of 20 rounds, a +1 to hit means an extra hit per arrow (two with manyshot), which means the +2/+2 does +4 extra damage per arrow over 20 rounds, while the energy bow does not. Further, the crit threats also have an extra 5% base chance to confirm crit, which means you have extra chances to do +8 extra damage (the first +4 is already counted)
That's why the +2/+2 is ussually better for dedicated archers (and even more for melee characters, who get extra damage from STR with Two Handed weapons and can power attack for more). That +4 extra per arrow every 20 rounds doesn't sound THAT great. it's nice, but not a big deal.
However, if our friend the Paladin Archer STR 18 (might be with Bull Str for example), has deadly aim, point blank shot, and smite evil, then he is adding +20 damage per arrow every 20 rounds (plus extra chances of crit confirmation, which deal a whooping ~3d8+66 or so when connect). An inquisitor Archer would add Destruction Judgement and Bane, a Ranger will add (hopefully) favored enemy, and fighters add greater specialization, weapon mastery, improved critical and a ton of feats that modify the crit
A variant Barb weapon.... +4 Furious Courageous Keen Cruel LifeSurge.
{yes hypothetically speaking of course...]
Lifesurge will add plus 6 temp hitpoints whenever a foe is killed or knocked unconscious (vis Cruel) to make 11. Also as a Barb you WANT Righteous Vigot before raging. The Lifesurge again will grant bonus temp hitpoints and with Come and Get ME your Barb will be 'self-healing'
[snip...]
Now, if the character has a str adjusted bow and a +4 str bonus, both bows would receive the additional str damage and critical hit bonus, so the overall result will be the same.
Nice breakdown of math, but that last sentence is not correct. If both get a +4 str bonus, the +2/+2 gets better. In a sequence of 20 rounds, a +1 to hit means an extra hit per arrow (two with manyshot), which means the +2/+2 does +4 extra damage per arrow over 20 rounds, while the energy bow does not. Further, the crit threats also have an extra 5% base chance to confirm crit, which means you have extra chances to do +8 extra damage (the first +4 is already counted)
That's why the +2/+2 is ussually better for dedicated archers (and even more for melee characters, who get extra damage from STR with Two Handed weapons and can power attack for more). That +4 extra per arrow every 20 rounds doesn't sound THAT great. it's nice, but not a big deal.
However, if our friend the Paladin Archer STR 18 (might be with Bull Str for example), has deadly aim, point blank shot, and smite evil, then he is adding +20 damage per arrow every 20 rounds (plus extra chances of crit confirmation, which deal a whooping ~3d8+66 or so when connect). An inquisitor Archer would add Destruction Judgement and Bane, a Ranger will add (hopefully) favored enemy, and fighters add greater specialization, weapon mastery, improved critical and a ton of feats that modify the crit
Math is math gustavo. All of the things you are claiming happen above are already factored into the comparison. If you add a +4 str to the equation, BOTH the +2/+2 and the +1/+1&d6 bow get the same advantages, the end result for a 60% and 55% chance are EXACTLY THE SAME for the str adjusted bow, the energy bow will STILL GET slightly more than 3 damage per round compared to the +2/+2 bow. That's because no matter how high the str bonus is, the +2/+2 bow still only gets one point more bonus damage per hit while the energy bow still gets a d6 more energy damage. It's always 1 vs 3.5. Always.
I don't have a clue what you are asserting here. The math is the math. It's up above. Find a problem with the math or else it is clear that for the situation described above (and MOST OTHER ACs) the energy bow is better. In the spreadsheet I have prepared for this the AVERAGE IMPROVEMENT over the full range of ACs is roughly 2 damage per round advantage for the energy bow. That's just the math.
Anyway, when math won't win the argument, it's clear that there is no way to win.
Math is math gustavo. All of the things you are claiming happen above are already factored into the comparison. If you add a +4 str to the equation, BOTH the +2/+2 and the +1/+1&d6 bow get the same advantages, the end result for a 60% and 55% chance are EXACTLY THE SAME for the str adjusted bow, the energy bow will STILL GET slightly more than 3 damage per round compared to the +2/+2 bow. That's because no matter how high the str bonus is, the +2/+2 bow still only gets one point more bonus still only gets one point more bonus damage per hit while the energy bow still gets a d6 more energy damage. It's always 1 vs 3.5. Always
Math is math, but your assertion wasn't supported by your own math, that's what I'm saying. If you add +4 to both bows in your own equation, the result is NOT the same.
Let's make an example. You claim that, whatever the STR bonus is, the energy bonus comes ahead, right? Wrong.
Let's check with +20 str bonus.
So first bow (+2) does:
Attack 1, two arrows:
60% chance to hit, damage of 2d8+46: avg dmg = 33
Attack 2 (one arrow):
60% chance to hit, damage of 1d8+23: avg dmg = 16,5
Attack 3 (one arrow):
35% chance to hit, damage of 1d8+23: avg dmg = 9.625
Total avg dmg = 59,125
With +1/+1&d6 energy bow (no DR):
Attack 1 (two arrows):
55% chance to hit, damage of 2d8+44+2d6: avg dmg = 33
Attack 2 (one Arrow):
55% chance to hit, damage 1d8+22+1d6: avg dmg = 16,5
Attack 3 (one arrow): damage 1d8+22+1d6: avg dmg = 9
Total avg dmg = 58,5
And that's before including crits, which favor the +2 bow, because it's multiplied (while the +1d6 does not) and also gets a better chance to confirm the crit.
This is why you are wrong about the STR modifier (or any other modifier, such as smite evil, weapon training, favored enemy, etc): Becouse you aren't taking in acount that the +2 weapon does not only increase the damage in +1, but also increase the chance to hit in 5%. Sure, 60% of 1d8+3 is less than 55% of 1d8+2+1d6. But the 60% of 1d8+50 is more than 55% of 1d8+49+1d6.
With itterative attacks this is increased (the lower the chance to hit, the higher the effect of +1 to hit becomes)
gustavo and Emmitt, I tried to respond last night but the site apparently went down.
Basically you're right. If you can pull off a +50 bonus per arrow then you'll gain from a +2 over a +1 flaming bow.
Now, in my defense, I had considered situations like a +50 bonus per arrow to be such an extreme edge condition that I had never modeled such a huge per arrow bonus, but you've made a pretty compelling case that an optimized archer build could pull it off.
So I concede that in the case of extreme bonuses of +30 or more damage bonus per arrow a +2 bow is better.
I sort of doubt the vast majority of players are dealing with such massive damage bonuses, but I could be wrong. Maybe it's more common than I realize.
But the bottom line is that your comments have convinced me that my modeling was too restrictive and I should have considered even extreme bonuses like you have brought up.
My players normally get to around +25...
As soon as the fixed bonus is +20, it favors the enhancement bonus. If you have keen/improved crit, it's at +10.
==Aelryinth
Aren't we talking more of Archery?
gustavo and Emmitt, I tried to respond last night but the site apparently went down.
Basically you're right. If you can pull off a +50 bonus per arrow then you'll gain from a +2 over a +1 flaming bow.
Now, in my defense, I had considered situations like a +50 bonus per arrow to be such an extreme edge condition that I had never modeled such a huge per arrow bonus, but you've made a pretty compelling case that an optimized archer build could pull it off.
So I concede that in the case of extreme bonuses of +30 or more damage bonus per arrow a +2 bow is better.
I sort of doubt the vast majority of players are dealing with such massive damage bonuses, but I could be wrong. Maybe it's more common than I realize.
But the bottom line is that your comments have convinced me that my modeling was too restrictive and I should have considered even extreme bonuses like you have brought up.
No, you need such a big bonus, if the to hit chance is 50% or bigger. The lower the hit chance is, the lower bonus makes for it. For example, if you hit with 19+, then you have that 0.1*(1d8+10)=1.45 average damage is more than 0,05*(1d8+9+1d6)=0.95 average damage.
This is of special importance when you are using itterative attacks, such as the third attack a fighter gets at 11th level (which is done at -10 to hit). Having extra to hit chances, make those attacks more worthwhile, while having extra +1d6, does not. And when one of those attacks from a 11th level fighter connect (for 40+ damage), the impact is muuuuuch bigger than a few extra d6 (which might not being doing damage at all at that level, if the creature has elemental resistances)About that damage bonuses, sure, they aren't common for a 9th level druid that use his bow as a mock up until the real BBEG comes and "the gloves are off". But for a real archer? A full time archer does that, or more.
Let's see what a 12th level fighter, ranger, paladin or inquisitor can do:
At that level, a +3 composite bow (+3 str)
Fighter: 1d8 +3 (str) +3 (enhancement) +2 (weapon training) +2 (dueling gloves) +4 (greater specialization) +8 (deadly Aim)= 1d8 +20 (plus +2d6 bleed on crits)
Paladin: 1d8 +3 (enhancement) +3 (str) +8 (deadly aim) +12 (smite evil) +3 (divine favor) = 1d8 +29
Ranger: 2d6 (gravity bow) +3 (enhancement) +3 (str) +8 (deadly aim) +6 (favored enemy) = 2d6 +20
Inquisitor: 1d8 +3 (enhancement) +3 (Str) +8 (deadly aim) + 5 (destruction) +4 (divine favor) + 2 (bane) +2d6 (bane)= 1d8+2d6 + 27
And that's with bows. Two handed weapons add way much more (STR bonus is as high as +8 (or even +13 for barbarian/alchemists), and you add 1.5x or 2x, plus power attack is 1:3).
Aren't we talking more of Archery?
20 x3 on crits is the same as 19-20 x2 as far as extra damage goes.
Extra crits help fixed bonuses more. Enhancements bonuses give more crits, elemental bonuses do not.
==Aelryinth
Aren't we talking more of Archery?20 x3 on crits is the same as 19-20 x2 as far as extra damage goes.
Extra crits help fixed bonuses more. Enhancements bonuses give more crits, elemental bonuses do not.
==Aelryinth
I was getting at the fact that Archery benefits from getting the +5 as quickly as possible rather than a elemental bonus.
I was getting at the fact that Archery benefits from getting the +5 as quickly as possible rather than a elemental bonus.Aren't we talking more of Archery?20 x3 on crits is the same as 19-20 x2 as far as extra damage goes.
Extra crits help fixed bonuses more. Enhancements bonuses give more crits, elemental bonuses do not.
==Aelryinth
This depends on how much damage the archer does (as well as the average AC of his foes, and their DR and elemental resistance), but for a dedicated archer, it's often true.
About crits, bows do 19+/x3 at around level 4-5, because every archer is going to buy Bracers of Falcon's Aim
I was getting at the fact that Archery benefits from getting the +5 as quickly as possible rather than a elemental bonus.Aren't we talking more of Archery?20 x3 on crits is the same as 19-20 x2 as far as extra damage goes.
Extra crits help fixed bonuses more. Enhancements bonuses give more crits, elemental bonuses do not.
==Aelryinth
This depends on how much damage the archer does (as well as the average AC of his foes, and their DR and elemental resistance), but for a dedicated archer, it's often true.
About crits, bows do 19+/x3 at around level 4-5, because every archer is going to buy Bracers of Falcon's Aim
Or will have the Improved Critical Feat. Especially if they can't get the Gold.
|
So I'm looking through all of the weapon abilities in the Ultimate Equipment guide and frankly hardly any of them are worth it in my opinion. Out of all of them, unless I already have a +5 weapon the only ones I'd consider are these ones"
Furious, if I was a barbarian
Keen, if I wasn't going to take the feat
Spellstoring, maybe if I had a specific trick I had in mind
Bane, only if I knew I'd be facing a lot (50%+) of a certain type of creature, or if I was a ranger that was allowed to combo the ability with Instant Enemy.Really though, that's it. If I already had a +5 weapon I guess I'd consider holy/unholy, plus the basic elemental effects. But honestly it seems that most of the weapon special abilities aren't worth it at all.
What do you all think?
So I have a question, do the base pathfinder society rules allow for intelligent weapons? Havnt seen any rules against it but sounds sick.
Or will have the Improved Critical Feat. Especially if they can't get the Gold.I was getting at the fact that Archery benefits from getting the +5 as quickly as possible rather than a elemental bonus.Aren't we talking more of Archery?20 x3 on crits is the same as 19-20 x2 as far as extra damage goes.
Extra crits help fixed bonuses more. Enhancements bonuses give more crits, elemental bonuses do not.
==Aelryinth
This depends on how much damage the archer does (as well as the average AC of his foes, and their DR and elemental resistance), but for a dedicated archer, it's often true.
About crits, bows do 19+/x3 at around level 4-5, because every archer is going to buy Bracers of Falcon's Aim
4000 gold is damn cheap for a +1 to hit, improved critical and +3 to the best skill there is. The best magic item for an archer. And you can buy it before you can get the feat :)
Yeah, that has been posted as one of the most underpriced items in the EG, seeing as how it's actually worth more then the Bracers of Archery.
==Aelryinth
I have played in a Campaign where at level 10 we had less than 30,000 Gold.
With less than 30.000 gold you can buy 7 bracers and a half ;)
Yeah... But that would require us Selling all the gear we found leading to us only having 15,000GP.
NOTE: Only 500GP between us was available for crafting early on. It mostly went for Ammunition and things like Rations, Sunrods, Ioun Torches, etc.
Yeah, that has been posted as one of the most underpriced items in the EG, seeing as how it's actually worth more then the Bracers of Archery.
==Aelryinth
Well Bracers of Archery are overpriced, but that item is still under-priced... Just the bonus to hit and perception would be priced around there, and the critical improvement should be the most costly ability of the three.
-James
Bracers of Archery aren't overpriced, 4000g for +1 competence to hit is fair price (the ioun stone cost double that, because it's slotless), and 1000g for a feat (bow proficiency) is neat too. The problem with the bracer of archery is it's bad designed. You pay for something (bow proficiency) that you *don't* want, for 99.9% of characters who purchase a bracer. I think you can drop the price of the bracer to 3000 or 3.500 and remove the proficiency and it'll be ok.
It's like paying extra money for air conditioning in Alaska. It's not that it is overpriced, it's just that you are paying something that you don't want.
|
Courageous is amazingly good. You get half of the weapons enh. Bonus as a bonus to ALL morale bonuses. So for barbarians, that's their rage bonuses for str, con, and will. As well as for inquisitors, and anyone else with morale bonuses.
Dueling- fg. It's not found in the ultimate equipment, like many other abilities, or items but it one of my favorites and one of the best abilities in the game.
I don't think courageous is that good. It increases the morale bonus to strength and constitution by half its enhancement bonus. Most PCs, by economy of build points, tend to have even numbered attributes. To get an additional +1 STR/CON bonus this item would need to have a +4 (+5 FOR +4 Courageous) effective bonus to have a net +2 STR/CON and a +1 on the STR and CON bonus.
its only half the weapons enhancement bonus, so it maxes out at +2. It does however, work for all bonuses that are morale based. That can really add up.Couragous seems like it would be a great option if you have a bard in the party. Double inspire courage!
If you think there might be a fear effect coming, stand by the paladin for a +8 save bonus!
Doh! I read that wrong. Also, morale bonuses from different sources . . .
Bonus (Morale)
A morale bonus represents the effects of greater hope, courage, and determination (or hopelessness, cowardice, and despair in the case of a morale penalty). Multiple morale bonuses on the same character do not stack.
|
|
Rycaut, adding a d6 of "shocking" damage on every rapid shot, manyshot, BAB iterative arrow in a full attack for my archer is pretty nice...Sure it is. Problem is +1 to attack and damage is nicer. Specially with all those negatives from rapid shot and deadly aim, there are almost no sweet spots of attack vs AC where +1d6 outweights +1 to hit and damage. And if we factor in DR, I know for sure that I preffer to have a +4 weapon vs a /adamantine monster, that a +3 shocking weapon. Or a +1 shocking acid flaming cold for that matter.
Not really. In my experience, party buffs are often plenty enough to give you bonuses to hit and/or damage - Haste, Inspired Courage, Greater Magic Weapon, Good Hope, Hero's Feast, whatever suits your fancy. The best enhancement I know is Holy, since it aligns your weapon and does 2d6 against evil (the majority of your enemies), and pathfinder doesn't have the Sacred ability.
Acid is the best energy type to add to your weapon, fewer monsters have acid resistance than any other type. Sonic and Force aren't types you can add to my knowledge.
In general, I try to avoid adding enhancements to weapons that are duplicated by party buffs. Something like "Speed" I would never add.