The carnivorous crystal actually has 7d8 slam, which sits right between the 6d8 and 8d8 on one of the progressions from the first post.
Wow... I'm confused, this thread was so free and clear of drama too. Been at work all day and come back to find nearly a whole page deleted. :(
Woohoo! Road to 400!
I wish I could mark this for FAQ twice.
|
The carnivorous crystal actually has 7d8 slam, which sits right between the 6d8 and 8d8 on one of the progressions from the first post.
I think the carnivorous crystal can help immensely with determining a "general rule" for increasing damage dice. We don't need every possible dice combination included on a chart. If another critter comes along whose base damage is 3d4, or 5d6, we should quickly and easily be able to figure out what dice a larger version's attacks should be.
My vote for the crystal would be this:
7d8 for a "normal" crystal
7d6 for a "young" crystal
14d6 for a "giant" crystal
14d8 for a normal crystal w/ Strong Jaw
28d6 for a giant crystal w/ Strong Jaw
Although this seems like it could get out of hand quickly, consider this: when we look at progressing 6d6 two steps to 12d6, and 8d6 two steps to 16d6, doesn't progressing 7d6 two steps to 14d6 fit perfectly in between the other two?
The carnivorous crystal actually has 7d8 slam, which sits right between the 6d8 and 8d8 on one of the progressions from the first post.I think the carnivorous crystal can help immensely with determining a "general rule" for increasing damage dice. We don't need every possible dice combination included on a chart. If another critter comes along whose base damage is 3d4, or 5d6, we should quickly and easily be able to figure out what dice a larger version's attacks should be.
My vote for the crystal would be this:
7d8 for a "normal" crystal
7d6 for a "young" crystal
14d6 for a "giant" crystal
14d8 for a normal crystal w/ Strong Jaw
28d6 for a giant crystal w/ Strong JawAlthough this seems like it could get out of hand quickly, consider this: when we look at progressing 6d6 two steps to 12d6, and 8d6 two steps to 16d6, doesn't progressing 7d6 two steps to 14d6 fit perfectly in between the other two?
That's about how I houserule it as well. Though I still want the faq.
Wow... I'm confused, this thread was so free and clear of drama too. Been at work all day and come back to find nearly a whole page deleted. :(
Someone suggested that contentious animosity gets FAQ's answered more quickly, so we tried that. It didn't work this time. :(
Wow... I'm confused, this thread was so free and clear of drama too. Been at work all day and come back to find nearly a whole page deleted. :(Someone suggested that contentious animosity gets FAQ's answered more quickly, so we tried that. It didn't work this time. :(
Oh, I understand, we started intentionally bringing up 'sensitive' topics as jokes, but nothing took off. I guess one topic touched a real nerve, then it escalated really quickly.
| 11 people marked this as a favorite. |
Just posting here to tell you that I've been watching this thread and its actually one that has been mentioned among the design team at least once. We have members coming in and out for a while at cons and the like plus some amazingly cool (but hard) stuff on our plate, so don't expect any more FAQs (let alone any one particular FAQ) for a few weeks. However, there's good money on this one being answered relatively soon (the key being relatively) compared to other FAQs. This post is mostly just for reassurance, and I hope it helps.
Just posting here to tell you that I've been watching this thread and its actually one that has been mentioned among the design team at least once. We have members coming in and out for a while at cons and the like plus some amazingly cool (but hard) stuff on our plate, so don't expect any more FAQs (let alone any one particular FAQ) for a few weeks. However, there's good money on this one being answered relatively soon (the key being relatively) compared to other FAQs. This post is mostly just for reassurance, and I hope it helps.
It does. Thank you very much!
Just posting here to tell you that I've been watching this thread and its actually one that has been mentioned among the design team at least once. We have members coming in and out for a while at cons and the like plus some amazingly cool (but hard) stuff on our plate, so don't expect any more FAQs (let alone any one particular FAQ) for a few weeks. However, there's good money on this one being answered relatively soon (the key being relatively) compared to other FAQs. This post is mostly just for reassurance, and I hope it helps.
That's great news! Thank you for letting us know.
|
Just posting here to tell you that I've been watching this thread and its actually one that has been mentioned among the design team at least once. We have members coming in and out for a while at cons and the like plus some amazingly cool (but hard) stuff on our plate, so don't expect any more FAQs (let alone any one particular FAQ) for a few weeks. However, there's good money on this one being answered relatively soon (the key being relatively) compared to other FAQs. This post is mostly just for reassurance, and I hope it helps.
Mark, you're a good guy, I don't care what Cheapy says about you....
Just posting here to tell you that I've been watching this thread and its actually one that has been mentioned among the design team at least once. We have members coming in and out for a while at cons and the like plus some amazingly cool (but hard) stuff on our plate, so don't expect any more FAQs (let alone any one particular FAQ) for a few weeks. However, there's good money on this one being answered relatively soon (the key being relatively) compared to other FAQs. This post is mostly just for reassurance, and I hope it helps.Mark, you're a good guy, I don't care what Cheapy says about you....
Cheapy is a poopyface meany head anyway! [/kidding]
|
|
Out of curiosity, Mark, will THIS FAQ request also be answered around the same time?
The two issues are related, but subtly different.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Out of curiosity, Mark, will THIS FAQ request also be answered around the same time?
The two issues are related, but subtly different.
I would not count on them being answered at the same time. That way if they are, it will be a pleasant surprise!
Honestly in some cases, what might happen is that we have a pow-wow based on one topic, and we wind up discussing enough more things that someone says "Wait, we just answered more than one question there" and then more questions get answered as sort of "FAQs of opportunity" if you will.
I kinda still want the FAQ requests to reach 400... 8 more to go. ;)
I kinda still want the FAQ requests to reach 400... 8 more to go. ;)
Significant numbers are a meaningless mental construct!
...oh all right, then, just for you.
my two cents on the topic:
1. Make a new weapons by size chart, make it thorough, from Fine to Colossal. Do not allow dice sizes to exceed the chart. Have it cap off. Size increases, shapeshifting, it can get pretty absurd, pretty quickly.
2. Change Improved Natural Attack to be identical to the new size chart. Don't have INA and the size chart in contradiction like they are in 3.5
So what would large/huge/gargantuan/colossal monks (whose "weapon damage" i.e. their unarmed strikes) do when they reach lvl 16 (lvl 11 with a Monk's Robe) and their base weapon damage exceeds that of every other weapon published?
prototype00
And in just under three months, too. That's a community coming together =).
Too bad it wasn't something that is more useful. I have never seen this to be a issue, once you get that many dice, (a rare occurrence) the Dm just wings it.
I agree it should be answered, but this hardly seems a FREQUENTLY asked question, as I think it's the first time it's come up in what - a decade?
|
|
I agree it should be answered, but this hardly seems a FREQUENTLY asked question, as I think it's the first time it's come up in what - a decade?
6 times in 8 days, plus myriad others.
A lot of things come out of no-where and suddenly ping, such as the idea wizards could cast cleric spells, but sure, I get your point.
A lot of things come out of no-where and suddenly ping, such as the idea wizards could cast cleric spells, but sure, I get your point.
I've seen the question pop up periodically in Monk/Druid threads all the time. With the oncoming Warpriest, it popped up even more. I saw several threads along the line of. "Playing a Warpriest, what damage is my large sized weapon when I Enlarge myself" Or something along those lines.
It's actually pretty subtle in how often discussions of weapon damage dice come up, but I think a lot of people just never bothered to FAQ it.
That question, IMO, was easier to answer. Most people understood the intent.
This question likely involves more research.
Yeah, changing/codifying how weapon damage scales is the kind of thing that could have a lot of implications for the rules.
|
Ok i guess this will be the thread to watch, seeing as I am building a catfolk FCT INA monk that if it stacks the way I have been thinking it does then at level 9 they will doing 3d6.
Or better yet with ACG coming out in the next couple of weeks maybe better off going brawler to get cat pounce quicker.
bump?
Couldn't they just errata it to say Small races have their damage dice 1 category lower than Medium races?
apparently it's not as easy as that. Maybe because they don't want the standard small races to have that big of a damage difference?
apparently it's not as easy as that. Maybe because they don't want the standard small races to have that big of a damage difference?
Well, the difference between 1d6 and 1d4 is just a +1 on average, so it's not a big deal.
The exception, of course is the difference between 1d12 and 3d6, but few weapons use those dice.
|
|
I'm wondering if it has something to do with the dilemma of a small-sized humanoid benefiting from Enlarge Person.
Take the Glaive, for example. Normally a medium-sized Glaive does 1d10, and a small-sized Glaive does 1d8.
But, normally when 1d8 goes up a size category, it deals 2d6.
So, would a Halfling wielding a Glaive, who is subject to Enlarge Person, now deal 1d10 (per the weapon chart) or 2d6 (per the size increase chart)?
So, would a Halfling wielding a Glaive, who is subject to Enlarge Person, now deal 1d10 (per the weapon chart) or 2d6 (per the size increase chart)?
And that's why it's a problem!
If anyone has their own elegant (elegant meaning no byzantine exceptions) solution that fits the following two criteria, I'm open to listen and think about how it relates to everything I have so far.
#1) Does not decrease the damage of size small weapons based off medium weapons that deal d10 or d12/2d6 damage.
#2) Does not decrease the damage of size large weapons based off medium weapons that deal d8 or d10 damage.
What I have so far are numerous formulas and explanations of dice increases, which have allowed me to create a fairly elegant solution that fully explains all damage dice increases and decreases in the game, so long as we violate #1. I do not particular want to violate #1, however.