PDA

View Full Version : [3.5]Weapons and Magic Weapons Redesign



Sinfire Titan
2010-02-12, 07:35 PM
ALPHA TESTING REQUESTED! (http://www.keepandshare.com/doc/1747301/weapons-pdf-february-12-2010-7-40-pm-538k)



As I've been working on this for a few months now, I feel this is ready to get off the ground. Yes, I am aware that not every magical enhancement is included in this document; I plan to expand upon this later on.

What I'm Looking For


Inter-weapon Balance. No singluar weapon should be an automatic choice for every character. However, the weapons have not been designed to be balanced between proficiencies (Exotic Weapons are designed to be inherently superior to Martial, Martial to simple, Simple to Natural, Natural to Improvised).
Pricing. Augments are intentionally designed to be cheaper than a +10 weapon. However, the prices I'm concerned about are the actual weapons themselves. I do not want the GP cost of the base weapon to be used as a balancing point.
Ease of use. Anyone familiar with Fable and 4E should be able to look at this and fill it out intuitively. The rules may need some editing, so please point out any and all glaring errors or counter-intuitive examples. Please, do not chew me out for the missing sample Fighter, that will be included in the finished product.

Baron Corm
2010-02-12, 09:26 PM
Can you make a table for each of the weapon types (Improvised, Natural, Simple, Martial, Exotic) similar to the ones in the SRD so it's easier to compare everything?

Sinfire Titan
2010-02-12, 09:28 PM
Can you make a table for each of the weapon types (Improvised, Natural, Simple, Martial, Exotic) similar to the ones in the SRD so it's easier to compare everything?

I will get on that soon.

The Dark Fiddler
2010-02-13, 10:01 AM
The Steadfast Augmentation seems way too powerful.

Aside from that, it looks good. I might use this variant with my group when I start DMing again (should be in a few weeks).

Sinfire Titan
2010-02-13, 10:31 AM
The Steadfast Augmentation seems way too powerful.

Aside from that, it looks good. I might use this variant with my group when I start DMing again (should be in a few weeks).

Noted. I knew it was going to be strong. I may remove it during the Beta and turn it into a Legacy Augmentation when I get around to stating those out (may be a while).

zagan
2010-02-13, 01:07 PM
Well I want to say exellent work, you must have spent lot of time.

A few thing I've seen as I was reading, mostly typo.

-Typo: In the Inappropriately Sized Weapons paragraphe you switch from greatsword to dagger to greatsword again.

-Typo: In the Double-axes description instead of martial or exotic, proficiency is written.

-Spinning Javelin is a simple weapon ? Is that normal ?

-No range for the Throwing hammer

-Typo: In the Double special ability description you use "the Power attack" instead of "the Power Attack feat"

- The Cleaving may need clarification, can you make the additional attack against the creature that receive the critical hit? I ask because I'm not sure if the creature could be considered adjacent to itself.

-Cold iron make the augment attach to the weapon harder to dispel ? I'm not sure I follow the reasoning. I tough that if anything it would be easier.

-For Deep crystal, does the number of power point is also limit by the manifester level of the user ?

- Did you invent Morghuth-iron or it is from an obscure sourcebook ?

- In the paragraphe about enchantment bonus their a phrase that begin with "Multiple augment with the same name" it look like we're missing a part of the phrase.

-The caster level line in the augment entry could get a little confusing I think.

- In the Frozen augment description you mentionned a Frostweawe augment, typo or another not yet add augment ?

-I agree Steadfast seem really powerfull.

And that's all, I hope that help.

Sinfire Titan
2010-02-13, 01:59 PM
Well I want to say exellent work, you must have spent lot of time.

A few thing I've seen as I was reading, mostly typo.

-Typo: In the Inappropriately Sized Weapons paragraphe you switch from greatsword to dagger to greatsword again.

-Typo: In the Double-axes description instead of martial or exotic, proficiency is written

Don't know how the first one got there, but the second one is Copy-Pasta error (I wrote a template for the weapon entries).


-Spinning Javelin is a simple weapon ? Is that normal ?

That's what the A&EG said.


-No range for the Throwing hammer

Ok, not that I changed the actual range.


-Typo: In the Double special ability description you use "the Power attack" instead of "the Power Attack feat"

Thanks.


- The Cleaving may need clarification, can you make the additional attack against the creature that receive the critical hit? I ask because I'm not sure if the creature could be considered adjacent to itself.

Unless he's feeling particularly bad, I don't think they can physically be beside themselves.


-Cold iron make the augment attach to the weapon harder to dispel ? I'm not sure I follow the reasoning. I tough that if anything it would be easier.

Cold Iron repels magic that targets it. The hardest part is getting the augments inside it, but once they're there the metal acts as a shield.


-For Deep crystal, does the number of power point is also limit by the manifester level of the user?

No, only BAB.


- Did you invent Morghuth-iron or it is from an obscure sourcebook ?

An Eberron splat.


- In the paragraphe about enchantment bonus their a phrase that begin with "Multiple augment with the same name" it look like we're missing a part of the phrase.

I tinkered with that the day before I posted it, so I got the feeling that I left something out.


-The caster level line in the augment entry could get a little confusing I think.

So the CL (Grade) style doesn't look that clean. Color coding?


- In the Frozen augment description you mentionned a Frostweawe augment, typo or another not yet add augment?

Forgot to change the name. It's a self-reference. While I was adding the final touches, I renamed that augment to Frozen to make it conform to the rest.


-I agree Steadfast seem really powerfull.

And that's all, I hope that help.

Noted. And thanks.

zagan
2010-02-13, 02:18 PM
- The Cleaving may need clarification, can you make the additional attack against the creature that receive the critical hit? I ask because I'm not sure if the creature could be considered adjacent to itself.

Unless he's feeling particularly bad, I don't think they can physically be beside themselves.

I was thinking about big creature that occupy more than one square.





- Did you invent Morghuth-iron or it is from an obscure sourcebook ?

An Eberron splat.

I need to look that up.





-The caster level line in the augment entry could get a little confusing I think.

So the CL (Grade) style doesn't look that clean. Color coding?

Perhaps, I was thinking two line could work as long as it's in the same order, like that:

Caster Level: 2nd, 4th, 6th, 8th, 10th
Grade: 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th

You could even remove the grade indication and just explain in the formating part that the CL need is written in order of grade.

Siosilvar
2010-02-13, 02:23 PM
Perhaps, I was thinking two line could work as long as it's in the same order, like that:

Caster Level: 2nd, 4th, 6th, 8th, 10th
Grade: 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th

You could even remove the grade indication and just explain in the formating part that the CL need is written in order of grade.

Aligned: CL: 3 + 4 per grade above 1st
Bane, Corrosive, Frozen, Searing, Shocking: CL: 2 + 2 per grade above 1st
Consumptive, Steadfast, Shining: CL: 11 + 2 per grade above 1st

Sinfire Titan
2010-02-15, 10:09 AM
Ok, here's the updated version (Alpha 1.1). (http://www.keepandshare.com/doc/1747301/weapons-pdf-february-12-2010-7-40-pm-538k)


Typos corrected, Steadfast deleted.

Drolyt
2010-02-15, 10:36 AM
Alright, I've looked it over and it looks pretty good. Now, since you are essentially completely redoing weapons why are you still going with the 3e naming system? For example why are you calling the arming sword a longsword (at least it sounds like an arming sword from your description)? A longsword is actually what D&D calls a Bastard Sword (I think, I'm not an expert on this). Also a longbow is already as tall as a full grown human, what the hell is a fiercebow? Not that big of a deal, up to you whether you want to change the names to reflect historical accuracy, but other than that you've done good. I'll get to looking at the balance later, I'm too busy right now.
Edit: On Ease of Use, it is very easy to use, or it would be with tables.

Sinfire Titan
2010-02-15, 12:13 PM
Alright, I've looked it over and it looks pretty good. Now, since you are essentially completely redoing weapons why are you still going with the 3e naming system? For example why are you calling the arming sword a longsword (at least it sounds like an arming sword from your description)? A longsword is actually what D&D calls a Bastard Sword (I think, I'm not an expert on this). Also a longbow is already as tall as a full grown human, what the hell is a fiercebow? Not that big of a deal, up to you whether you want to change the names to reflect historical accuracy, but other than that you've done good. I'll get to looking at the balance later, I'm too busy right now.
Edit: On Ease of Use, it is very easy to use, or it would be with tables.

Because I'm no weapons expert either. If I sat down and did my research, I'd have something a bit more life-like. But I limited my research to DnD products with the WotC logo.

The Fiercebow, or the Greatbow as WotC describes it, is taller than a person. I renamed it slightly. Odds are, the WotC version of the Longbow is the equivalent of a modern-day plastic bows (the ones with pulleys). Those are probably closer to an old-fashioned shortbow.


I'm working on the table.

Drolyt
2010-02-15, 12:30 PM
Because I'm no weapons expert either. If I sat down and did my research, I'd have something a bit more life-like. But I limited my research to DnD products with the WotC logo.

The Fiercebow, or the Greatbow as WotC describes it, is taller than a person. I renamed it slightly. Odds are, the WotC version of the Longbow is the equivalent of a modern-day plastic bows (the ones with pulleys). Those are probably closer to an old-fashioned shortbow.


I'm working on the table.

To elaborate on ease of use, the way you have everything organized is simply much clearer and better worded than the 3.5 Player's Handbook. It's very clear how everything works and it is very simple and straightforward. I like that you made special abilities standard instead of the PHB just putting it in the weapon description such that most people would never realize there were weapons with special abilities on their first read through.

Sinfire Titan
2010-02-15, 12:37 PM
To elaborate on ease of use, the way you have everything organized is simply much clearer and better worded than the 3.5 Player's Handbook. It's very clear how everything works and it is very simple and straightforward. I like that you made special abilities standard instead of the PHB just putting it in the weapon description such that most people would never realize there were weapons with special abilities on their first read through.

Thanks. I'll try and finish the chart soon.

Sinfire Titan
2010-03-07, 02:42 AM
Bumping to avoid Thread Necromancy on the next update.