PDA

View Full Version : Strudels Homebrew Weaponry 3.5 [PEACH]



Strudel110
2010-01-23, 05:58 PM
http://i871.photobucket.com/albums/ab277/Strudel110/RazorwindAtlatl.jpg
Razorwind Atlatl: A weapon of elven design, created when elves were little more than tribal hunters. The atlatl used to be a wooden device use to thow polished stone discs (this type is still used by clerics), now the most common design is a mix of a khopesh and a falchion, with two blades adjacent to each other, ammunition is placed between these blades on the back edge. The weapon is fired by simply swinging it forward in a vertical position, though seemingly simple it takes a lot of training to fire this weapon accurately. Once mastered this weapon is a terror on the battlefield, with the user slinging heavy discs at a steady rate, dismemberment is inevitable.
The design is popular with fighters because although it is slightly harder to use than a normal melee weapon, the atlatl opperates much the same as a falchion in close quarters. If gold is abundant atlatls can be upgraded much like composite bows, allowing the users strength to increase damage, although the elves are loathe to reveal how this works. One of the weapons drawbacks is weight, of both the atlatl and the ammunition, weighing ten and two pounds respectively. There are several kinds of ammunition including bludgeoning stone discs, alchemic explosives, and jagged blades that leave gaping wounds.

{table=head]Name | Cost | Damage | Critical | Range |type
Atlatl (ranged)|100gp|1d10|18-20/x2|80ft|Slashing (depends on ammo)
Atlatl (melee)|-|2d4|18-20/x2|-|Slashing
[/table]
Requires Exotic Weopon Proficiency (Atlatl)
When used as a melee weapon user recieves -1 on attack rolls and may gain the benifits of Weapon Focus (Falchion), Weapon Specialization (Falchion), and other feats associated with falchions. Regular ammo costs 1gp per 5 discs weighing 2lb each.

Mikka
2010-01-23, 07:19 PM
I really like it. However as a throwing weapon, it ALREADY adds strength to damage. Small disks however shouldn't deal more than 1d4 damage, but when strength bonus it easily makes up for it, not to mention it has a great critical threat range. The range should also be lowered, i really can't see a guy chucking these farther than a guy with a sling. . so a range of 40 ft. would be more accurate.

Two-handed Melee: 2d4 , 18-20/x2

Two-handed Ranged: 1d4 , 18-20/x2 , 40ft range.

Wielded two handed in melee, requires both hands to use ranged but doesn't count as a two-handed weapon (no adding 1.5 strength modifer)

lesser_minion
2010-01-23, 07:25 PM
It's an exotic weapon, so it should be good. I think those stats are about right.

As Mikka pointed out, there's no real point allowing the item to be 'enhanced' like a bow, when you're basically chucking things at people.

Milskidasith
2010-01-23, 07:37 PM
I really like it. However as a throwing weapon, it ALREADY adds strength to damage. Small disks however shouldn't deal more than 1d4 damage, but when strength bonus it easily makes up for it, not to mention it has a great critical threat range. The range should also be lowered, i really can't see a guy chucking these farther than a guy with a sling. . so a range of 40 ft. would be more accurate.

Two-handed Melee: 2d4 , 18-20/x2

Two-handed Ranged: 1d4 , 18-20/x2 , 40ft range.

Wielded two handed in melee, requires both hands to use ranged but doesn't count as a two-handed weapon (no adding 1.5 strength modifer)

Why do you want an exotic weapon to suck? It's hardly worth the feat as is.

Mikka
2010-01-23, 08:01 PM
I think its awesome like this, a medium ranged versatile weapon with a high threat range, perfect for a focused fighter. Also, it has a SUPER benefit of being a two-use item. . thats to say that +2 Frost Razorwind Atlatl. . well its still a +2 Frost Razorwind Atlatl when you start throwing steel disks at people! The disks are the equilavent of daggers, yet they have more force behind them so they add strength damage. But its still not a weapon designed purely for range so it doesn't shoot at far as other actual range weapon. 1d10 over 1d4 damage might matter early on, but i get the feeling that this is an experts weapon, a weapon of elite elven commando types and such types don't care that much over such a little damage difference.
Ohh, and i would remove the -1 attack penalty when used as a melee weapon
: )

lesser_minion
2010-01-23, 08:32 PM
It's not really much. High threat range wasn't competitive when Improved Critical, Keen Edge, and Keen all stacked, allowing you to run around everyone with 12-20 weapons.

Damage dice aren't that important, and while weapons that have to be enchanted twice aren't worth the money, that doesn't make the other weapons overpowered.

And it's still an exotic weapon. That is a pretty major blow.

Temotei
2010-01-23, 08:33 PM
I do like how taking feats for the falchion affects this. Does it go the other way as well?


1d10 over 1d4 damage might matter early on

Yes.


but i get the feeling that this is an experts weapon, a weapon of elite elven commando types and such types don't care that much over such a little damage difference.

Doesn't matter what you feel in this case.

The weapon should be effective for all users, not just those of high levels.


Damage dice aren't that important, and while weapons that have to be enchanted twice aren't worth the money, that doesn't make the other weapons overpowered.

It only has to be enchanted once, I believe.

Mikka
2010-01-23, 08:56 PM
Exactly only has to be enchanted once.

d10 damage for a little metal disk doesn't make sense. . hes not throwing bastard swords goddamnit ! xD

For one feat you get incredible versatility along with the ability to focus on one weapon that improves in two ways.

Ohh **** the necromancer is beginning to chant but is blocked off by a horde of undead.. woo! Schiiing schiing schiiing a few blades cut through the air and decapitate the poor bastard who had been expecting another melee fool. . or something like that.

lesser_minion
2010-01-23, 08:57 PM
But it's basically a very fancy sling, and slings were absolutely lethal (contrary to their portrayal in D&D).

d10 damage sounds about right for a 2lb object slamming into you at a ridiculous speed with sharp things attached to it.

The Evil Necromancer has protection from arrows, which functions equally well against weird bladed elvish shot-put things.

arguskos
2010-01-23, 09:07 PM
I like it! However, what's the reload time on it? As a sling? Crossbow? Bow? My thought would be that it reloads as a sling, but it's something you might want to note.

Temotei
2010-01-23, 09:11 PM
Exactly only has to be enchanted once.

d10 damage for a little metal disk doesn't make sense. . hes not throwing bastard swords goddamnit ! xD

For one feat you get incredible versatility along with the ability to focus on one weapon that improves in two ways.

Ohh **** the necromancer is beginning to chant but is blocked off by a horde of undead.. woo! Schiiing schiing schiiing a few blades cut through the air and decapitate the poor bastard who had been expecting another melee fool. . or something like that.

Then you lose the weapon because the necromancer disintegrates it.

Dang. Feat's useless until you get another very heavy item.

You have to be careful with this thing due to the huge weight.

That brings up a question: Do discs break when shot (like arrows)?

Mikka
2010-01-23, 09:17 PM
But it's basically a very fancy sling, and slings were absolutely lethal (contrary to their portrayal in D&D).

d10 damage sounds about right for a 2lb object slamming into you at a ridiculous speed with sharp things attached to it.

The Evil Necromancer has protection from arrows, which functions equally well against weird bladed elvish shot-put things.


Sorry but really, you can't compare it to the damage of hand and a half sword cutting through you.

Like you said, slings were lethal, how much damage do slings do. . thats riiight 1d4. . . or a sharp dagger. . 1d4. . a piercing thrown : 1d4. . a blunt thrown. . 1d4. . . a slashing disk. . 1d10!!!. . no, no : p 1d4.

If this was a ranged ONLY thing, giving it a d10 damage would be fair, but it isn't.

I like the advantage of it, you can stand and fire off throwing disks with the blade until the enemy closes in melee, a single attack, after which you can retaliate with a full-round attack.

Making it competitive with bows and crossbows just doesn't make sense, if you want ranged power get a greatbow or something like that. .

but if you want a super hybrid this is it.

A strong level one character would deal 1d4+3-4 already better than any regular crossbow or bow.

And it only gets better the higher level you get.

Edit: Ohh and the disks should weigh 1-2 lb. per stack of 5 and not 2 apiece.


Then you lose the weapon because the necromancer disintegrates it.

NICE ARGUMENT! I BET IF IT DID 1d10 DAMAGE IT WOULDN'T BE POSSIBLE RIGHT!?!?! AND NO OTHER WEAPONS CAN BE DISINTEGRATED!!! YOU SO COOL!

. . .

Temotei
2010-01-23, 09:24 PM
Sorry but really, you can't compare it to the damage of hand and a half sword cutting through you.

Like you said, slings were lethal, how much damage do slings do. . thats riiight 1d4. . . or a sharp dagger. . 1d4. . a piercing thrown : 1d4. . a blunt thrown. . 1d4. . . a slashing disk. . 1d10!!!. . no, no : p 1d4.

If this was a ranged ONLY thing, giving it a d10 damage would be fair, but it isn't.

I like the advantage of it, you can stand and fire off throwing disks with the blade until the enemy closes in melee, a single attack, after which you can retaliate with a full-round attack.

Making it competitive with bows and crossbows just doesn't make sense, if you want ranged power get a greatbow or something like that. .

but if you want a super hybrid this is it.

A strong level one character would deal 1d4+3-4 already better than any regular crossbow or bow.

And it only gets better the higher level you get.

Edit: Ohh and the disks should weigh 1-2 lb. per stack of 5 and not 2 apiece.



NICE ARGUMENT! I BET IF IT DID 1d10 DAMAGE IT WOULDN'T BE POSSIBLE RIGHT!?!?! AND NO OTHER WEAPONS CAN BE DISINTEGRATED!!! YOU SO COOL!

. . .

:smallsmile:


Ohh **** the necromancer is beginning to chant but is blocked off by a horde of undead.. woo! Schiiing schiing schiiing a few blades cut through the air and decapitate the poor bastard who had been expecting another melee fool. . or something like that.

You're the one who said this. Necromancers beat fighters with spells. Fell drain magic missile? Enervation? Win.

Just saying. Not really an argument against the weapon so much as against...your argument for the weapon. :smallamused:

I do agree on the damage though. 1d10 is pretty high for a "thrown" weapon.

Mikka
2010-01-23, 09:40 PM
All im saying is the boon of the weapon is its versatility and when compared to other thrown weapons its damage should be 1d4 and its range should at MOST be the range of a sling 50 ft, and that is really stretching it.

Terazul
2010-01-23, 09:51 PM
A strong level one character would deal 1d4+3-4 already better than any regular crossbow or bow.

And it only gets better the higher level you get.


I believe that's the point of spending a feat to access it in the first place, instead of just using said crossbow or bow. Versatility and all. The damage dice and having a range higher than a "simple weapon" sling really aren't that much of an issue.

Temotei
2010-01-23, 09:56 PM
All im saying is the boon of the weapon is its versatility and when compared to other thrown weapons its damage should be 1d4 and its range should at MOST be the range of a sling 50 ft, and that is really stretching it.

1d4 + 3 = 4-7. Average? 5.5 damage.

1d10 + 3 = 4 - 13. Average? 8.5. That's +3 damage on average over the sling. Not that much. It's Weapon Specialization (awful feat) + 1 over the sling.

And you have to spend a feat on it.

From a realism view, yeah, it doesn't make too much sense. From a balancing view, it does.

Mikka
2010-01-23, 10:00 PM
I believe that's the point of spending a feat to access it in the first place, instead of just using said crossbow or bow. Versatility and all. The damage dice and having a range higher than a "simple weapon" sling really aren't that much of an issue.

Taking the feat saves you quickdraw, you can change immediately from ranged attacks to melee (and do full attack action straight away). You threaten your melee range even when you're ranged. By improving your melee weapon you also improve your ranged weapon, its two for one, and weapons are expensive.
If you have a decent strength your average damage will also be greater than a regular crossbow/longbow : )

All this for one feat! Awesome, even if its 1d4 damage and 40 range, its more than enough for most situations, but you won't be firing off into the distance like with a 'REAL' ranged weapon, as it should be.


1d4 + 3 = 4-7. Average? 5.5 damage.

1d10 + 3 = 4 - 13. Average? 8.5. That's +3 damage on average over the sling. Not that much. It's Weapon Specialization (awful feat) + 1 over the sling.

And you have to spend a feat on it.

From a realism view, yeah, it doesn't make too much sense. From a balancing view, it does.

Adding another +3 average damage on said capabilities is NOT balanced : )

My way is both more realistic and more balanced.

Terazul
2010-01-23, 10:06 PM
Taking the feat saves you quickdraw, you can change immediately from ranged attacks to melee (and do full attack action straight away). You threaten your melee range even when you're ranged. By improving your melee weapon you also improve your ranged weapon, its two for one, and weapons are expensive.
If you have a decent strength your average damage will also be greater than a regular crossbow/longbow

Congratulations. Your feat was actually worth spending, because you got an Exotic Weapon that doesn't suck. That's kinda the point. It's not nearly as gamebreaking as you think it is. +3 average damage isn't much in the grand scheme of things.

Well, At level 1, maybe, but psh. Everyone dies to a stiff wind at that level anyway.

Temotei
2010-01-23, 10:07 PM
Taking the feat saves you quickdraw, you can change immediately from ranged attacks to melee (and do full attack action straight away). You threaten your melee range even when you're ranged. By improving your melee weapon you also improve your ranged weapon, its two for one, and weapons are expensive.
If you have a decent strength your average damage will also be greater than a regular crossbow/longbow : )

All this for one feat! Awesome, even if its 1d4 damage and 40 range, its more than enough for most situations, but you won't be firing off into the distance like with a 'REAL' ranged weapon, as it should be.



Adding another +3 average damage on said capabilities is NOT balanced : )

My way is both more realistic and more balanced.

+3 damage is balanced for a feat.

Versatility is to be had, and the main benefit is threatening melee squares when using your ranged weapon, but that's not worth a feat by itself.

Your argument for having high Strength is invalid. Just get a composite bow.

The other main benefit is having a weapon that gets enchanted as a ranged and a melee weapon. This doesn't really unbalance things too much though, since you're still paying the same as another fighter's magic weapon would cost (+400+100 per Str mod added).

One pain is paying for increasing the Str mod in ranged fighting. You don't have to do that for other thrown weapons.

As is, the weapon is hardly worth taking a feat for. I'd rather have a greatsword and not spend a feat on it. :smallsmile: It has its uses though.

DracoDei
2010-01-23, 10:29 PM
I approve of this weapon, and could see bumping both it and slings to 1d6 damage...

Rithaniel
2010-01-23, 10:35 PM
Read this before you decide if this is worth a feat or not.

"How about instead of being able to travel anywhere in the multiverse, transform yourself into anything you can think of, stop time, and slay everyone you can see, we just give a nice +1 to hit with your secondary weapon? Deal?"

Feats were an interesting idea when they were ported to 3rd edition D&D. But let's face it; they don't go nearly far enough. Feats were made extremely conservative in their effects on the game because the authors didn't want to offend people with too radical a change. Well, now we've had third edition for 6 years, and we're offended. Feats are an interesting and tangible way to get unique abilities onto a character, but they have fallen prey to two key fallacies that has ended up turning the entire concept to ashes in our mouths. The first is the idea that if you think of something kind of cool for a character to do, you should make it a feat. That sounds compelling, but you only get 7 feats in your whole life. If you have to spend a feat for every cool thing you ever do, you're not going to do very many cool things in the approximately 260 encounters you'll have on your way from 1st to 20th level. The second is the idea that a feat should be equivalent to a cantrip or two. This one is even less excusable, and just makes us cry. A +1 bonus is something that you seriously might forget that you even have. Having one more +1 bonus doesn't make your character unique, it makes you a sucker for spending one of the half dozen feats you'll ever see on a bonus the other players won't even mention when discussing your character.

We all understand this problem, what do we do about it? Well, for starters, Feats have to do more things. Many characters are 5th level or so and they only have 2 feats. Those feats should describe their character in a much more salient way than "I'm no worse shooting into melee than I am shooting at people with cover that isn't my friends." This was begun with the tactical feats, but it didn't go far enough. It's not enough to add additional feats that do something halfway interesting for high level characters to have we actually have to replace the stupid one dimensional feats in the PHB with feats that rational people would care about in any way. Spending a single feat should be enough to make you a "sniper character" because for a substantial portion of your life you only get one feat. Secondly, we have to clear away feats that don't provide numeric bonuses large enough to care about. The minimum bonus you'll ever notice is +3, because that's actually larger than the difference between having rolled well and having rolled poorly on your starting stats. Numeric bonuses smaller than that are actually insulting and need to be removed from the feats altogether. 3.5 Skill Focus was a nice start, but that's all it was a start.

Furthermore, the fundamental structure of feats has been a disaster. The system of prerequisites often ensures that characters won't get an ability before it would be level appropriate for them to do so, but actually does nothing to ensure that such characters are in fact getting level appropriate abilities. Indeed, if a 12th level character decides that they want to pursue a career in shooting people in the face, they have to start all over gaining an ability that is supposed to be level appropriate for a 1st level character. Meanwhile, when a wizard of 12th level decides to pursue some new direction in spellcasting he learns a new 6th level spell right off and gets an ability that's level appropriate for a 12th level character.

DracoDei
2010-01-23, 10:39 PM
Eh I say, fix the feats with a feat fix... don't try to fix the feats by fixing the weapons.

Temotei
2010-01-23, 10:42 PM
Eh I say, fix the feats with a feat fix... don't try to fix the feats by fixing the weapons.

That's what he quoted it from--a broken feat fix (I assume that's why the link isn't quoted).

Rithaniel
2010-01-23, 11:02 PM
Exotic Weapons are always given for a feat, so, if you make an exotic weapon... you're making a feat.

It's not how SRD does it, but, the difference here is the difference between 'traditional', and 'usable'.

Admittedly, Spiked Chain is, in some remote cases, actually worth the loss of a feat, but, that's that.

As for the quoting, I didn't know I had to quote it, do I?

Temotei
2010-01-23, 11:04 PM
Exotic Weapons are always given for a feat, so, if you make an exotic weapon... you're making a feat.

It's not how SRD does it, but, the difference here is the difference between 'traditional', and 'usable'.

Admittedly, Spiked Chain is, in some remote cases, actually worth the loss of a feat, but, that's that.

As for the quoting, I didn't know I had to quote it, do I?

Of course you don't. You copy-pasted the most important and relevant information from what you read. The link itself is unneeded because you provided everything we needed to see from what you had to say on the topic.

The spiked chain is only useful because it has the ability to help with tripping and disarming, and it has reach.

Of course, if you want those bonuses, just get an item (or spellcaster) for enlarge person.

Strudel110
2010-01-24, 11:16 AM
All right first off it's not a thrown weapon guys in the same way you don't throw sling bullets at people you fire them...with a sling. Second I think 1d10 is reasonable, there is a sport using a form of atlatl wre they throw object at a speed of 145-160 miles per hour, if you get hit by 140mph object weighing 2lbs it's pretty much over, so yeah no 1d4 for you. Third it's supposed to be better than a bow I kept hearing my friend complaigning that D&D haets ranged weapons so I made one that's pretty good. Also Weapon Focus (atlatl) and other feats associated only improve the ranged part of the weapon, in melee it's a Falchion with -1 on attack rolls. I'll be doing some more weapons and maybe some special ammo for atlatls.

Strudel110
2010-01-24, 03:35 PM
Falx and Greater Falx Fixed*
http://i871.photobucket.com/albums/ab277/Strudel110/Untitled.jpg
{table=head]Name | Cost | Damage | Critical | Range |type
Falx|25gp|1d8|19-20/x2|-|Slashing
Greater Falx|65gp|2d6|19-20/x2|-|Slashing
[/table]
Falx are martial weapons.
A falx is a roughly sickle-shaped sword with a steep curve used for supprise attacks and attacking around shields, the only difference between a falx and a greater falx is size. While using a falx of either size enemies in close combat with you do not gain an AC bonus from physical shields. A falx is a type of longsword, whereas a greater falx is a type of greatsword, they benifit from feats associated with longswords and greatswords respectively.

Eku Fixed*
http://i871.photobucket.com/albums/ab277/Strudel110/Eku.jpg
{table=head]Name | Cost | Damage | Critical | Range |type
Eku|10gp|1d10|x3|-|Bludgeoning [/table]
Eku are martial weapons
The eku is a weapon developed by fishermen for self defense and adopted by monks and strengthened for battle. Eku are monk weapons that are a cross between a greatclub and a quarterstaff, They were originally boat oars used by fishermen to deter monsters from stealing their catch. This weapon is essentially a greatclub and benifits from feats associated with greatclubs.

Swordbreaker Fixed*
http://i871.photobucket.com/albums/ab277/Strudel110/Swordbreaker.jpg
{table=head]Name | Cost | Damage | Critical | Range |Type
Swordbreaker|40gp|1d4|19-20/x2|-|Piercing [/table]
Swordbreakers are martial weapons
Swordbreakers are defensive weapons that...break swords, this is achieved by catching an enemy's weapon in the space between the blades and snapping the blade at the hilt where the metal is weakest. Anyone using a swordbreaker counts as having improved sunder and gains a +1 on disarm checks. This weapon is a dagger.

Temotei
2010-01-24, 03:38 PM
The greater falx is better than the greatsword. Consider raising the price, since it's only 10 gp more for bypassing shield bonuses (meh) and getting one higher threat range (nice).

Consider the falchion: 2d4; 18-20/x2; 75 gp
This weapon is better because of the increased damage, and not only that...it's cheaper.

The atlatl isn't a thrown weapon, but it should be treated as one like the sling is.

Mikka
2010-01-24, 03:59 PM
Swordbreaker weapons were not actually made to break swords as much as catch them and potentially twist them out of the opponents grip, and then use your primary weapon to do the lethal blow.

So if anything, it should improve disarm attempts by +2 or something along those lines.

The falx is much better than a regular martial weapon and should be exotic.

The main weapon you posted IS a throwING weapon, you throw stuff with it, just like a sling and thats what you call a "thrown" weapon. Read up on your rules : )

And yes you throw things at very high speeds. . but what the HELL do you think that bows and crossbows do? they do it better than any human could ever possibly do. . thats why the real life equivalent of this weapon was abandoned in favor of superior weapons

arguskos
2010-01-24, 05:07 PM
The Falx needs clarification, as do all of these. Are they light, one-handed or two-handed?

The Falx/Greater Falx seem strictly better than the greatsword. Perhaps they should be exotic, since they deny AC bonuses.

The Eku is fine. Abnormally high damage, but meh, who really cares.

The Swordbreaker needs some mechanical clarification. Does the return sunder attempt take an AoO to perform? Is it a free action? What's it actually DO? Depending on the answers, it may need to be changed to an exotic weapon.

Strudel110
2010-01-24, 09:18 PM
Swordbreaker weapons were not actually made to break swords as much as catch them and potentially twist them out of the opponents grip, and then use your primary weapon to do the lethal blow.

So if anything, it should improve disarm attempts by +2 or something along those lines.

The falx is much better than a regular martial weapon and should be exotic.

The main weapon you posted IS a throwING weapon, you throw stuff with it, just like a sling and thats what you call a "thrown" weapon. Read up on your rules : )

And yes you throw things at very high speeds. . but what the HELL do you think that bows and crossbows do? they do it better than any human could ever possibly do. . thats why the real life equivalent of this weapon was abandoned in favor of superior weapons

That may be true but this is fantasy so it breaks swords. I fixed the falx. I made the atlatl like a composite bow for balance rather than realisticness I want it to be good but not "1d10 + strength bonus at 1st level" good. I may not be perfect but I do know basic rules and if I don't remember a rule I look it up, so less blatent hostility please.

Also arguskos It has the same stats as a greatclub so it's not that strong

I fixed some stuff but I need to clarify the rules for the swordbreaker, so I'll do that right now.

arguskos
2010-01-24, 09:21 PM
That may be true but this is fantasy so it breaks swords. I fixed the falx. I made the atlatl like a composite bow for balance rather than realisticness I want it to be good but not "1d10 + strength bonus at 1st level" good. I may not be perfect but I do know basic rules and if I don't remember a rule I look it up, so less blatent hostility please.

Also arguskos It has the same stats as a greatclub so it's not that strong

I fixed some stuff but I need to clarify the rules for the swordbreaker, so I'll do that right now.
Thought it was better for some reason. Meh, it's a simple weapon, who really cares. :smallbiggrin:

Temotei
2010-01-24, 09:22 PM
That may be true but this is fantasy so it breaks swords. I fixed the falx. I made the atlatl like a composite bow for balance rather than realisticness I want it to be good but not "1d10 + strength bonus at 1st level" good. I may not be perfect but I do know basic rules and if I don't remember a rule I look it up, so less blatent hostility please.

Also arguskos It has the same stats as a greatclub so it's not that strong

I fixed some stuff but I need to clarify the rules for the swordbreaker, so I'll do that right now.

It's also a simple weapon. The greatclub is a martial weapon. This weapon does more than any other simple weapon. And it's based on an oar. :smallannoyed:

I don't believe there was hostility, and you did ask for PEACH. Capital letters could be shot down, but other than that, I didn't see anything offensive.

The point about the atlatl is it costs a feat, and you have to pay a lot for it to do decent damage. I say just add Strength automatically, like a thrown weapon (which is what it is).

Lapak
2010-01-24, 09:25 PM
The greater falx is better than the greatsword. Consider raising the price, since it's only 10 gp more for bypassing shield bonuses (meh) and getting one higher threat range (nice).I would have rated that the other way around:
- a lot of humanoid enemies may derive a respectable chunk of their AC from shield bonuses
- the falx as presented bypasses the Shield spell as well
- there are class features or feats out there that allow users to use their shield bonus vs. touch attacks, and this would eliminate that defense too.

For a martial weapon, that's a non-negligible bonus you're getting there. There's no convincing reason to take a longsword or a greatsword instead of their falx equivalent, and that's a good sign that it's too good. It should certainly be exotic.

Temotei
2010-01-24, 09:29 PM
I would have rated that the other way around:
- a lot of humanoid enemies may derive a respectable chunk of their AC from shield bonuses
- the falx as presented bypasses the Shield spell as well
- there are class features or feats out there that allow users to use their shield bonus vs. touch attacks, and this would eliminate that defense too.

For a martial weapon, that's a non-negligible bonus you're getting there. There's no convincing reason to take a longsword or a greatsword instead of their falx equivalent, and that's a good sign that it's too good. It should certainly be exotic.

It's been changed since I said that, but I get your point. Be careful with changing it to an exotic weapon though. Make sure it's worth a feat.

arguskos
2010-01-24, 09:34 PM
It's been changed since I said that, but I get your point. Be careful with changing it to an exotic weapon though. Make sure it's worth a feat.
...it eats most humanoid enemies alive. That's a pretty damn nice buff. It's probably well worth the feat.

Strudel110
2010-01-24, 09:38 PM
I fixed some stuff. I didn't get defensive but he/she(?) has been saying that it's overpowered over and over, but I think that the loss of a feat, the cost, and the wieght make it more than reasonable, also I'll make the eku martial don't kow why I put simple.

Strudel110
2010-01-24, 09:44 PM
...it eats most humanoid enemies alive. That's a pretty damn nice buff. It's probably well worth the feat.

Yeah but the catch is that you have to be fighting humanoids, if your playing an ooze campain or all your enemies are abberations it doesn't help, it just costs more.

Temotei
2010-01-24, 09:49 PM
Yeah but the catch is that you have to be fighting humanoids, if your playing an ooze campain or all your enemies are abberations it doesn't help, it just costs more.

Even against humanoids, it only gets rid of shield bonuses to AC. Armor bonuses and enhancement bonuses are usually much larger, unless you're up against a huge fighter with a tower shield heavily enchanted. In which case, his armor is probably heavily enchanted as well.

The weapon probably shouldn't bypass magical shields though.

Knaight
2010-01-24, 10:10 PM
I really like it. However as a throwing weapon, it ALREADY adds strength to damage. Small disks however shouldn't deal more than 1d4 damage, but when strength bonus it easily makes up for it, not to mention it has a great critical threat range. The range should also be lowered, i really can't see a guy chucking these farther than a guy with a sling. . so a range of 40 ft. would be more accurate.

Two-handed Melee: 2d4 , 18-20/x2

Two-handed Ranged: 1d4 , 18-20/x2 , 40ft range.

Wielded two handed in melee, requires both hands to use ranged but doesn't count as a two-handed weapon (no adding 1.5 strength modifer)
Realistically an atlatl is a dart thrower, and gets decent distance. Not further than a sling, but a 40 foot range increment with a sling isn't exactly realistic, given that a sling gets better range than a longbow, and is comparable to 160 to 180 pound drawn bows. Given the composite longbow stats (1d10, 110 foot range increment) a sling should probably be 1d8 90 foot minimum. Of course, it also shouldn't be a simple weapon, but that is besides the point. The original set up is fine, although 1.5 strength at ranged is a bad idea.

Strudel110
2010-01-24, 10:11 PM
Even against humanoids, it only gets rid of shield bonuses to AC. Armor bonuses and enhancement bonuses are usually much larger, unless you're up against a huge fighter with a tower shield heavily enchanted. In which case, his armor is probably heavily enchanted as well.

The weapon probably shouldn't bypass magical shields though.

Probably wouldn't the reason it bypasses shields is because its curved shape lets you hit around shields.

Temotei
2010-01-24, 10:13 PM
Probably wouldn't the reason it bypasses shields is because its curved shape lets you hit around shields.

As written, it does. You should probably edit that.

Strudel110
2010-01-24, 10:22 PM
As written, it does. You should probably edit that.

Thanks! Fixed again.

Strudel110
2010-01-25, 08:23 PM
The Kegsplitter
http://i871.photobucket.com/albums/ab277/Strudel110/Kegsplitter.jpg
{table=head]Name | Cost | Damage | Critical | Range |type
Kegsplitter|2510gp|1d8|x3|-|Slashing [/table]

The Kegsplitter is a +1 Battleaxe with an additional +2 against wooden items (such as barrels) and plant creatures. Kegsplitters are enchanted ceremonial dwarf weapons used to open kegs of dwarven mead during certain religious ceremonies, they also prove effective against plant-like enemies.

Temotei
2010-01-26, 01:36 AM
The Kegsplitter
http://i871.photobucket.com/albums/ab277/Strudel110/Kegsplitter.jpg
{table=head]Name | Cost | Damage | Critical | Range |type
Kegsplitter|2510gp|1d8|x3|-|Slashing [/table]

The Kegsplitter is a +1 Battleaxe with an additional +2 against wooden items (such as barrels) and plant creatures. Kegsplitters are enchanted ceremonial dwarf weapons used to open kegs of dwarven mead during certain religious ceremonies, they also prove effective against plant-like enemies.

Fixed the table for you. Anyways, interesting. I think I saw this idea first implemented in Icewind Dale II, and I liked it then, too. :smallbiggrin:

Strudel110
2010-01-26, 08:27 AM
Fixed the table for you. Anyways, interesting. I think I saw this idea first implemented in Icewind Dale II, and I liked it then, too. :smallbiggrin:

Lol table fail. Thanks, Icewind Dale, huh? I got the idea from my friend but he has Icewind Dale so I guess thats where he found it. Heard it was a good game.