|
I think I'll call it 'adjustable'. What it does is this.
Normal weapon enhancements gives the weapon a plus to attack and a plus to damage, so say we use a +2 weapon, what adjustable does is allow the weilder of the weapon to move the attack and damage bonuses around. meaning that as a move action you can have a +3/+1 weapon or a +4/+0 or +1/+3 etc. even if you make it +0/+4 it is still considered a magic bonus to attack so you can bypass DR/Magic.
So what do you think? Overpowered, underpowered, useless and not worth the time, useful if the cost is right, etc...
Weak, but useful in the right situations, like a limited version of 3e power attack in both directions. Obviously its value increases with the bonus, so you can't cost it as a flat +1000gp or whatever. It's not as good as another +1, so you might cost it as +30% or something.
So a +1 adjustable sword is 2600, +3 is 23400.
You might simplify it to a choice of +0/+4, +2/+2 or +4/+0 or you'll get the fiddly numbercrunching we saw with 3e power attack.
I'm assuming that the normal bonus determines other DR effects too (alignment, material, epic, etc).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This is avoided in PF because of the inherent imbalance in bonuses.
A bonus to hit is intrinsically worth more then a bonus to damage. Just look at power attack. If I take my +2 weapon to +3/+1, 1 point of Power Attack now gets me to +2/+4. The trade off is not even, and its worse with a 2h weapon.
Defender and Guardian both sacrifice full bonuses for +1 to AC or to saves.
Statistically speaking, any smart player will take the opportunity to double their bonus to hit and assure damage of getting through. THis only becomes more important with higher damage numbers and multiple attacks.
The only time you would NOT do this is if it gets your hit % over 95%, which would be a waste.
If you could dump TH for damage, that would probably be okay...a small damage bonus isn't going to overdo anything.
But potentially doubling a bonus to hit is EXTREMELY powerful.
==Aelryinth
|
I'll say this much: I like how it harkens back to REALLY old gaming where a magical weapon's values were expressed as "+X/+X weapon" rather than just "+X weapon," and I don't see why it shouldn't remain possible for a weapon's enhancement bonus to be capable of unequal distribution toward attack and damage rolls in some form or another.
Well, yeah, POSSIBLE is certainly there.
But a +3/+1 weapon is worth more then a +2/+2 weapon. Pricing is going to be an issue.
==Aelryinth
I wouldn't mind if it were a +1 Bonus that didn't work unless you had 2 instances of it on a Double Weapon.
Could take the Enhancement Bonus (but not the abilities) from one end and add it to the other. So a +5 Adjustable/+5 Adjustable Quarterstaff could be +10 on one side and not on the other.
Would probably be need to be useful for like 1 minute per day or something like that, however, otherwise it'd just be totally broken.
Mathmematically, it's kind of overpowered because the value of bonuses scale quadratically. If you have a +2 longsword, you can sacrifice the damage of a 8000gp sword to gain the attack bonus of a 32,000gp weapon.
I think I'll call it 'adjustable'. What it does is this.
Normal weapon enhancements gives the weapon a plus to attack and a plus to damage, so say we use a +2 weapon, what adjustable does is allow the weilder of the weapon to move the attack and damage bonuses around. meaning that as a move action you can have a +3/+1 weapon or a +4/+0 or +1/+3 etc. even if you make it +0/+4 it is still considered a magic bonus to attack so you can bypass DR/Magic.
So what do you think? Overpowered, underpowered, useless and not worth the time, useful if the cost is right, etc...
Too good. Way too good, and is very prone to min-maxing issues in every game.
Honestly, Weapon Special Abilities should be something more along the lines of utility or some benefit outside of the weapon's base ability to kill. This falls under just that: The weapon's base ability to kill just got exponentially higher compared to a basic + Enhancement, instead of a lesser boost to a secondary statistic or a separate utility.
Something like this I think would be much better suited to allowing the weapon to change between Cold Iron, Silver, Steel, Wood or Adamantine for the purposes of overcoming damage reduction, and I would reduce it to a +1 bonus.
This is avoided in PF because of the inherent imbalance in bonuses.
A bonus to hit is intrinsically worth more then a bonus to damage. Just look at power attack. If I take my +2 weapon to +3/+1, 1 point of Power Attack now gets me to +2/+4. The trade off is not even, and its worse with a 2h weapon.
But you'll probably use PA anyway, so this is moot.
Statistically speaking, any smart player will take the opportunity to double their bonus to hit and assure damage of getting through.
If that were true, people would never use PA, which does exactly the opposite. Make your mind up.
The only time you would NOT do this is if it gets your hit % over 95%, which would be a waste.
What you should do is calculate the point where (average damage) x (chance to hit) is a maximum, which is simple differential calculus like we used to do with 3e PA. Unless you needed to be sure of a hit or needed some chance to do loadsadamage.
But potentially doubling a bonus to hit is EXTREMELY powerful.
Oh noes, +1 to hit. As good as Bless! Except -1 damage and only for 1 person. So not as good as a second-rate 1st level spell.
Sure, it's better than nothing, but it's not going to break anything. The only people who will really benefit are those who do loads of damage with poor accuracy, like GTWF sneak-attacking rogues. Who need some help.
This is avoided in PF because of the inherent imbalance in bonuses.
A bonus to hit is intrinsically worth more then a bonus to damage. Just look at power attack. If I take my +2 weapon to +3/+1, 1 point of Power Attack now gets me to +2/+4. The trade off is not even, and its worse with a 2h weapon.
But you'll probably use PA anyway, so this is moot.
Statistically speaking, any smart player will take the opportunity to double their bonus to hit and assure damage of getting through.If that were true, people would never use PA, which does exactly the opposite. Make your mind up.
The only time you would NOT do this is if it gets your hit % over 95%, which would be a waste.What you should do is calculate the point where (average damage) x (chance to hit) is a maximum, which is simple differential calculus like we used to do with 3e PA. Unless you needed to be sure of a hit or needed some chance to do loadsadamage.
But potentially doubling a bonus to hit is EXTREMELY powerful.Oh noes, +1 to hit. As good as Bless! Except -1 damage and only for 1 person. So not as good as a second-rate 1st level spell.
Sure, it's better than nothing, but it's not going to break anything. The only people who will really benefit are those who do loads of damage with poor accuracy, like GTWF sneak-attacking rogues. Who need some help.
Ah, a minmaxer who wants more free bonuses. I knew one would stick their head up.
I AM assuming you'll use Power Attack. Now you can use it 'for free', and STILL gain the damage bonus, which will override and surpass that which you lose from gaining this ability.
As damage goes UP, th % becomes more and more important, not less, because each +1 becomes 5% of a greater and greater damage total. Now, I can do 5-25% swings in my TH? Sign me up!! I shall POwer Attack until the cows come home, because it's literally NOTHING BUT A BONUS to me! Only when tyou hit overkill status of 100%+ is this a bad thing...at which point you can dial it back.
This also gets more and more valuable if you have more attacks, since the cumulative +% damage numbers start adding up.
The TH ability of monks, rogues and whatnot is not the issue here. It's the power of this in the hands that are NOT monks and rogues. And in that situation, it really is too strong.
==Aelryinth
Dotted for interest.
I'll say this much: I like how it harkens back to REALLY old gaming where a magical weapon's values were expressed as "+X/+X weapon" rather than just "+X weapon," and I don't see why it shouldn't remain possible for a weapon's enhancement bonus to be capable of unequal distribution toward attack and damage rolls in some form or another.
Hear, hear!
I still toss in the occasional +1 sword, +3 vs undead (or similar).
Just last session my players defeated
From my description, the players assumed it was a +1 flaming sword (with +1d6 damage) which would have been a little OTT for 2nd level characters, not to mention the fact that it did no extra damage dice when used against them.
So when the party alchemist first started swinging it, I informed him there was no extra damage die, but that the sword glowed a fiery red hue like a torch and did half slashing, half fire damage when it hit.
Total homebuilt job, eh?
But in last night's adventure, they were lured into an old Thassilonian ruin and cornered by trolls. The fire aspect of the sword was essential to their very, very narrow success, not to mention when searching for their final lair, under a pitch-black pool leading to an inaccessible cave. Without that sword they had no light source capable of going underwater.
So hey, I'm all for ideosyncratic magic items that don't follow the normal rules of item creation. No need for special item creation "rules", it's just because Thasilonian.
And BTW I was impressed by this group of 4 2nd-level characters (fighter, paladin, barbarian and alchemist) just barely overcoming 2 trolls and 3 giant spiders in the same encounter (even if they all didn't join the fight at exactly the same moment). 3 of them went into negative hit points during the fight, but they all survived.
All because I liked the art on that sword.
Mudfoot is in here throwing insults because he does not like the math.
The math has been done many times over. Instead of being a jerk prove the forum wrong. Otherwise you really have nothing to add to the argument.
I agree this is a bit on the good side. But i like the idea so i Will Throw it on a unique magic short sword in my next game.
So it's got power attack built in?
And Power Attack is the baseline to compare it to.
IN effect, you're giving up +1 damage on the sword to gain +2 on Power Attack, +3 with a 2h weapon.
It's basically additional damage with no penalty on every swing.
If you want a cheap th/damage bonus for rogues, make Subtlety a scaling effect instead of 20k to get it.
==Aelryinth
Hear, hear!
I still toss in the occasional +1 sword, +3 vs undead (or similar).
Just last session my players defeated ...
I once accidentally created Bone-Nunchucks of Zombie-Explode because a player kept scoring critical hits against those poor, low health zombies. They only had like 8 health, and this guy was doing about 3x that much with these nunchucks he made out of some dead guy's leg bones. I had to describe the extra damage in some dramatic way. Anyway, it is similar to a +1/+3 thing, except it just caused zombies to explode on contact. Idiosyncratic magic items rule.
Not aware that I insulted anyone. The math is trivial. A +2 variable sword is clearly not as good as a +4 sword (I don't think anyone literate can argue with that; numeracy is not required).
Compared to a +3 sword, you have the option of +1/+3, +2/+2, +3/+1 (all clearly worse) or +4/+0 or +0/+4 (situationally slightly better, otherwise worse, not least because of DR). And a +3 sword is not ZOMG B0rK3N. Therefore a +2 variable sword is not broken either.
And a +2 variable sword is not worse than a standard +2 sword unless misused, so it is better. Therefore the price is somewhere between +2 and +3.
Now there might be an issue when the numbers get very big; with a +5 variable sword which is potentially +10/+0, you are probably auto-hitting with your main attack and possibly with your first iterative too. But given that it means that
a) you're full-attacking
b) you're high enough level to afford this thing
c) you paid (on my +30%) 72000gp for it (and that assumes no Holy, Bane or other good stuff)
you're a high level martial who invests heavily in melee. And that means you're already overshadowed by the casters.
In any case, it's just the usual issue of setting a price and a limit. The trivial limit is to set the maximum bonus at +5, as Jacob S suggested. Sorted.
And before anyone else points out that I can't multiply by 1.3, the cost above should have been 65k (that's what comes of posting at 1 am after getting up early). That's slightly above 1/4 WBL for a 15th level character, by which point the casters auto-win anyway.