This is my boom stick(new weapons, D&D 3.5, WIP PEACH)

[bobthe6th]

Ok, so I have this problem with low level casters. They have so few spells, they use cross bows and such... Not cool. It feels like a break in charicter, and just a bit silly. So, my proposition.

two new weapons, the mage staff and wand.

{table=head]Simple Weapons | Cost | Damage (S) | Damage (M) | Critical | Range increment | weight | type
Ranged
Wand | 35gp | 1d6 | 1d8 | x3 | 80ft | 4lb | Piercing
Staff | 50 gp | 1d8 | 1d10 | x3 | 120ft | 8lb | Piercing
Martial Weapons | Cost | Damage (S) | Damage (M) | Critical
Ranged
Quick Wand | 30gp | 1d4 | 1d6 | x3 | 60ft | 2lb | Piercing
Quick Staff | 75 gp | 1d6 | 1d8 | x3 | 100ft | 3lb | Piercing
Taxing Wand | 75gp | 1d4 | 1d6 | x3 | 70ft | 2lb | Piercing
Taxing Staff | 100 gp | 1d6 | 1d8 | x3 | 110ft | 3lb | Piercing
[/table]



Staff:
A staff fires a bolt of focused energy. A staff uncharged, but can be charged by any person with at least one caster level at the cost of 1 sp in magical regents per charge. for every ten charges the staff has it's weight increases by 1 lb.
You prepare a staff for use by focusing it's energy. Preparing a staff is a full-round action that provokes attacks of opportunity.


the others are near identical, but the quick versions don't need to be prepared to use, and the taxing ones can be modified to add the casters charisma to the damage as a composite bow.


a staff is a two handed ranged simple weapon, with a

[Kyuu Himura]

these look good, I mean, low level characters are gonna love them if they run out of spells.

Yet again, if your character is running out of spells, you're probably doing something wrong.

[TuggyNE]

Um... is there a reason you decided on the names "staff" and "wand", when both are already in use with a quite different meaning?

Also, I'm not entirely sure why Reserve Feats aren't good enough to fill this void.

[Yitzi]

Yet again, if your character is running out of spells, you're probably doing something wrong.

Or at low levels, it might mean that your DM is doing something right (e.g. not letting you get away with the sort of adventuring day length that makes casters overpowered.)

[bobthe6th]

sorry this was half finished... it was late...

@Kyuu: a first level sorc has, at most 4 first level spells at level one... those never last the three encounters + random hazards. this is not the level were combat lasts 1 round, so most casters have 4-5 rounds of shooting their light crossbow... which I find a bit funky.

@tuggyne: I couldn't think of better names that weren't an existing magic item... so suggestions would be nice.

because they cost a feat? and also necessitate that you still have a high level slot left to be effective? Reserve feats can be fun... but still, a lot of casters are fairly feat starved especially at low levels.

@Yitzi: This, very much this. If the DM is playing a good game you should be out of spells one-two encounters in, leaving most with their crossbows.



and I should come clean that these are very much reskined cross bows and bows, if you hadn't already noticed...

[TheWombatOfDoom]

so suggestions would be nice.

Caster's Cloak and Gloves? These give you the power to shoot the energy. Perhaps have charges?

[bobthe6th]

but it loses the hand filling requirement... these are projectile weapons so you need two hands to use them...

[TheWombatOfDoom]

Hmmm...wands aren't two handed...nor are staffs.

[bobthe6th]

but they need to be held/carried, were cloaks and gloves can be worn... not a good trait for a weapon.

blasting rod and blasting staff then?

[Yitzi]

@Yitzi: This, very much this. If the DM is playing a good game you should be out of spells one-two encounters in, leaving most with their crossbows.

Not quite. If the DM is doing things right and you're doing things right, you shouldn't be out of spells until 5 typically encounters in (more precisely, a fifth encounter should be too dangerous to be gone into willingly due to you not having that many spells left), but you're only going to be able to use one or two spells of your highest two levels each battle, meaning that at low levels most of each battle will be based on non-spell weapons.

[ArkenBrony]

but they need to be held/carried, were cloaks and gloves can be worn... not a good trait for a weapon.

blasting rod and blasting staff then?

or maybe boom rod, and boom stick, for 1-hand and 2-hand respectively

[planswalker]

Not quite. If the DM is doing things right and you're doing things right, you shouldn't be out of spells until 5 typically encounters in (more precisely, a fifth encounter should be too dangerous to be gone into willingly due to you not having that many spells left), but you're only going to be able to use one or two spells of your highest two levels each battle, meaning that at low levels most of each battle will be based on non-spell weapons.

um... what games are you playing in? I've never seen a game where level 1-3 characters play like this.

also, this seems to be assuming that there is a "right" way to play...

[GunbladeKnight]

1) If these are based on magic, then I would expect a x2 multiplier.

2) If these are based on magic, why do they deal different damage when small?

3) Why piercing instead of bludgeoning? Or even make it elemental?

4) Is there a maximum number of charges?

5) These are way cheaper than 1st level wands, although they are heavier.

6) How does adding charges change the price?

[Yitzi]

um... what games are you playing in? I've never seen a game where level 1-3 characters play like this.

also, this seems to be assuming that there is a "right" way to play...

To answer both questions: I'm basing myself on what's indicated in the core books, IIRC particularly the DMG.

[planswalker]

I think practical experience trumps what's written in the DMG. That's the same book which thinks fighters are stronger than barbarians, that sorcerers need their gimps to keep them from outstripping wizards, and have all sorts of suggestions for how you're supposed to allow new players in and handle people making new characters.

all of which are things that get ignored, are just plain wrong, or people just ignore because that's now how they want to play.

[Techwarrior]

The rules that Yitzi is referencing assume something that almost never happens. It assumes that the encounters that you face are of the exact same CR as the party. I know that, in my experience, when that is the case for the average battle, combat gets to be underwhelming, and not at all the experience I'm gunning for.

For instance, when I DM, I tend to go at least one or two (or three) CR higher than the party for normal encounters.

However, under the circumstances established in the DMG, the guidelinedoes happen to be fairly accurate. Not perfect, but close enough for debate, but
as has been pointed out, that 'perfect set of circumstances' almost never actually happens.

[bobthe6th]

1) If these are based on magic, then I would expect a x2 multiplier.

2) If these are based on magic, why do they deal different damage when small?

3) Why piercing instead of bludgeoning? Or even make it elemental?

4) Is there a maximum number of charges?

5) These are way cheaper than 1st level wands, although they are heavier.

6) How does adding charges change the price?

1) because the magic focuses into a tight point of destruction.

2) because the bigger the container, the bigger individual charge you can build up.

3) because it is shaped sharpened magical destruction.

4) no, but at some point you will probably not be able to carry the weapon due to weight

5) The magic requires they be made out of depleted uranium, thus increasing the weight.

6) 1sp a charge as normal...

Alternative answer 1-6) because they are refluffed crossbows and bows... and I am lazy.

also, to the general subject of debate...
It is hard to take into account all play styles, as each group is often different. The general base assumption of the system is 3-4 encounters per day, but that could vary an infinite amount between groups and op levels. and endurance game could do 100 encounters in a day, and a low level low op game could have the DM let each day have one encounter. I can't disparage any of them, or call them wrong, but with this brew I assume the rules group, as that is one anyone can look up in the SRD. If your groups casters never have the problem of using a crossbow as much as a rouge, feel free to ignore this brew...

[GunbladeKnight]

Oops, I must have switched tracks in my train of thought on number 6. I meant, how does it change the weight.

[bobthe6th]

the added 1sp regent is more depleted uranium...

[TuggyNE]

the added 1sp regent is more depleted uranium...

What is this depleted uranium of which you speak, and how do you acquire some for the fantastically low price of 1sp per charge?

[ArkenBrony]

from akbars completely legitimate and definitely not fake depleted uranium store

[bobthe6th]

yep, from Akbar. the uranium is definitely non radioactive, totally clean...

[Yitzi]

The rules that Yitzi is referencing assume something that almost never happens. It assumes that the encounters that you face are of the exact same CR as the party. I know that, in my experience, when that is the case for the average battle, combat gets to be underwhelming, and not at all the experience I'm gunning for.

Even when the party can't safely use more than 1/5 of its resources each battle? And the DM keeps the power level down to what's possible using only the core rulebooks and no exploits?

There are two ways of playing (essentially high-powered and lower-powered, but high-powered also assumes fewer encounters per day); if there can be said to be a "right" way, it's the one described and assumed in the core books.

What is this depleted uranium of which you speak, and how do you acquire some for the fantastically low price of 1sp per charge?

What makes you think it's fantastically low? Personally, I think 1sp per millionth of an ounce is a very high price. Until we're told how much per charge, we can't really say if it's high or low.

[planswalker]

Even when the party can't safely use more than 1/5 of its resources each battle? And the DM keeps the power level down to what's possible using only the core rulebooks and no exploits?

There are two ways of playing (essentially high-powered and lower-powered, but high-powered also assumes fewer encounters per day); if there can be said to be a "right" way, it's the one described and assumed in the core books.

You are taking a system that's very complex and has a sliding scale across the board and trying to simplify it into a duality (aka, setting up a straw man), compare the "two" and then declaring that one is "right".

Where, exactly, do you draw the line between "high" and "low" powered?

although, I have to say that there is a point:

if there can be said to be a "right" way, it's the one described and assumed in the core books.

there can't. People who don't play the way that core assumes they will are not wrong. at all. in any sense of the word.

[toapat]

What is this depleted uranium of which you speak, and how do you acquire some for the fantastically low price of 1sp per charge?

Depending on how far you stretch the definitions, Adamantine fits the attributes of: Uranium, Tungsten, or Osmium

Mithral is definitively Titanium though.

asto names: Wand > Rent Mystic Sliver
Staff > Bound Arcane Essence

[TuggyNE]

What makes you think it's fantastically low? Personally, I think 1sp per millionth of an ounce is a very high price. Until we're told how much per charge, we can't really say if it's high or low.

1sp per charge, 10 charges increases weight by 1 pound. Yeah, I'm gonna say 1sp for 1.6 ounces of depleted uranium is a pretty ferociously low price.

Depending on how far you stretch the definitions, Adamantine fits the attributes of: Uranium, Tungsten, or Osmium

That may or may not be, but I'm pretty sure that 1gp/lb is far too low a price for it to be involved here. (Estimates I've seen range more around 1000gp/lb.)

[bobthe6th]

It's a by product of some transmutation rituals, which keeps the price artificially low.

[planswalker]

why not just say it's a product generated by alchemy to justify the pricing?

[Yitzi]

You are taking a system that's very complex and has a sliding scale across the board and trying to simplify it into a duality (aka, setting up a straw man)

Yes, there is a spectrum, but I think that things usually are going to tend more toward one approach or the other.

Where, exactly, do you draw the line between "high" and "low" powered?

If monsters with CR=party level are a viable challenge, it's the lower-powered approach, if they aren't it's the high-powered approach.

there can't. People who don't play the way that core assumes they will are not wrong. at all. in any sense of the word.

No they are not wrong (as long as everyone agrees to play a different way). But it isn't the default way to play, and so one should not assume that people will play that way.

1sp per charge, 10 charges increases weight by 1 pound.

And does that mean that the depleted uranium weighs 1 pound per 10 charges' worth, or does the charging process add weight? Seeing as the depleted uranium doesn't seem to actually enter the staff or wand, one is no more absurd than the other.

[planswalker]

Yes, there is a spectrum, but I think that things usually are going to tend more toward one approach or the other.

It has been my experience that this is very much not so. You remember more readily the examples where it's one extreme or the other, but that is just the human recollection bias. My experience has apparently been a lot more varied than yours.

If monsters with CR=party level are a viable challenge, it's the lower-powered approach, if they aren't it's the high-powered approach.

that depends as much on the power of the monster of equal CR as it does the players. Such a rubric will be... inconsistent at best. A 6th level ogre druid is cr6. So is a 6th level gnome druid. As are thrice-evolved allips, large storm elementals, and 6th level dwarf fighters.

for those playing at home: can you spot which of those are NOT going to be a challenge to the party, almost no matter the optimization in the party (this all assuming you're optimizing the enemies to be on par with the sorts of things the monster manual does and NOT to pc levels. PC level opt will break the CR system even farther)

No they are not wrong (as long as everyone agrees to play a different way). But it isn't the default way to play, and so one should not assume that people will play that way.

Why shouldn't I assume that? I've been playing since I was 12. I've never been in a game where we followed the majority of the DMG's assumptions.