Results 1 to 14 of 14
  1. - Top - End - #1
    Halfling in the Playground
    Join Date
    Jan 2016

    Default 3.5 Weapon Enhancement

    Here's an idea for you guys to critique

    Weapon Enhancement: Dominating
    Weapon: Any melee weapon

    A Dominating punishes your foes for their inferiority to you. When you strike a foe with a Dominating weapon, it deals an extra 1d6 damage (of the damage type of the base weapon) for each 5 points you beat the foe's Armor Class. This damage does not stack with precision-based damage such as Sneak Attack or Skirmish.

    Cost +1 or +2?

    The reason it doesn't stack with sneak attack is, thematically, you're supposed to be overwhelming the enemy with your dominance so a less-than-honorable attack shouldn't set it off; mechanically because using this against a flat-footed opponent might be overpowered. I could not think of a better way to rule that you have to be being a badass to use it.

  2. - Top - End - #2
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    khadgar567's Avatar

    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    turkey
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: 3.5 Weapon Enhancement

    Quote Originally Posted by Malapterus View Post
    Here's an idea for you guys to critique

    Weapon Enhancement: Dominating
    Weapon: Any melee weapon

    A Dominating punishes your foes for their inferiority to you. When you strike a foe with a Dominating weapon, it deals an extra 1d6 damage (of the damage type of the base weapon) for each 5 points you beat the foe's Armor Class. This damage does not stack with precision-based damage such as Sneak Attack or Skirmish.

    Cost +1 or +2?

    The reason it doesn't stack with sneak attack is, thematically, you're supposed to be overwhelming the enemy with your dominance so a less-than-honorable attack shouldn't set it off; mechanically because using this against a flat-footed opponent might be overpowered. I could not think of a better way to rule that you have to be being a badass to use it.
    cost -1 using your weapon in bdsm situations is nice but i stick rp ing my inner sadist thank you.
    Quote Originally Posted by Dark Shadow View Post
    Threads are like cats. They go where they want, and never listen to what you want them to do.


  3. - Top - End - #3
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    jqavins's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Helendale, CA
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: 3.5 Weapon Enhancement

    Compare it to a straight attack bonus. But first, is it an extra 1d6 per whole five pips by which you hit, or is it 1d6 per five pips or any part thereof? In other words, when you just hit do you get any bonus?

    When it's activated, it grants on average +3.5 points of damage minimum. Consider the following:
    Hit By Average Damage,
    First Type
    Average Damage,
    Second Type
    0-4 +0 +3.5
    5-9 +3.5 +7
    10-14 +7 +10.5

    Hitting by 5 to 9 isn't too common, but hardly rare. Hitting by 10 to 14 is rare, but by no means unheard of. Hitting by 15 or more is rare enough that I have not bothered to include it, but the point is clear. The extra damage when averaged over many attacks is substantial if you intend the first type, and big if you intend the second.

    It's harder to evaluate the average damage boost from a regular attack bonus, since the plus whatever on the damage roll is only half the story, with hits also being more common. If you'd suggest a particular case of BAB, Str mod, AC, and base weapon damage to use as a point of comparison then I could run the numbers for you.

    Without running the numbers, my gut feel is that the first type is a +2 and the second type is a +3.
    Last edited by jqavins; 2017-11-08 at 03:55 PM.
    -- Joe
    “Give a man a fire and he's warm for a day, but set fire to him and he's warm for the rest of his life.”
    -- Terry Pratchet

    Always remember that anything posted on the internet is, in a practical if not a legal sense, in the public domain.
    You are completely welcome to use anything I post here, or I wouldn't post it.

  4. - Top - End - #4
    Halfling in the Playground
    Join Date
    Jan 2016

    Default Re: 3.5 Weapon Enhancement

    Quote Originally Posted by jqavins View Post
    Compare it to a straight attack bonus. But first, is it an extra 1d6 per whole five pips by which you hit, or is it 1d6 per five pips or any part thereof? In other words, when you just hit do you get any bonus?
    It's the first type; you don't get any extra damage simply for hitting.

    As with any weapon it can technically be taken by anyone, though it would mostly likely only be selected by full BaB characters focusing on high Str or Dex (with weapon finesse). It probably would not do well for a two-weapon fighter due to the penalties involved.

    I suppose the perfect character for it would be a Barbarian who likes to rage and then charge but perhaps does not have Power Attack for some reason. A Spring Attack character could also perhaps benefit from this, as they generally make one good attack instead of a handful of shots in the dark.

    So, perhaps consider an unarmored level 10 human Barbarian with a Str of 20 and a Dex of 16 using a +1 greataxe and Spring Attack?

  5. - Top - End - #5
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    jqavins's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Helendale, CA
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: 3.5 Weapon Enhancement

    Quote Originally Posted by Malapterus View Post
    So, perhaps consider an unarmored level 10 human Barbarian with a Str of 20 and a Dex of 16 using a +1 greataxe and Spring Attack?
    I'll work on it at lunch time tomorrow. In asking for the AC, I meant the target's, not the wielder's.
    -- Joe
    “Give a man a fire and he's warm for a day, but set fire to him and he's warm for the rest of his life.”
    -- Terry Pratchet

    Always remember that anything posted on the internet is, in a practical if not a legal sense, in the public domain.
    You are completely welcome to use anything I post here, or I wouldn't post it.

  6. - Top - End - #6
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    jqavins's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Helendale, CA
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: 3.5 Weapon Enhancement

    OK, so now it's the next day, and I've got some results.

    AS it turns out, and I should have known this, the base weapon damage is irrelevant. What matters is the attack roll - BAB, Str mod, and weapon attack bonus vs. target AC - and any bonus to the damage roll - weapon attack mod and special feature. Since you didn't provide the target's AC, I've assumed 25.

    I computed the average damage considering hit chance (but I chose to neglect crits for simplicity) for weapon bonuses from 0 to +5, both with and without the Dominance enchantment, using the BAB of 10, the Str mod. of 5, and the greataxe as directed. And here are the results.

    Table 1: Damage With and Without Dominance
    Weapon Bonus
    W/o Dominance
    W/Dominance
    Delta
    0 6.325 7.55 1.225
    1 7.5 9.075 1.575
    2 8.775 10.7 1.925
    3 10.15 12.425 2.275
    4 11.625 14.25 2.625
    5 13.2 16.35 3.15
    (6) (14.875)
    (7) (16.65)
    Average 2.129167
    (I included +6 and +7 for a reason that will soon be clear.)

    The average increase given by the dominance feature is a bit over 2. That is similar to the improvement in average damage given by a +2 weapon, actually 2.45. So I would be inclined to call dominance a +2 enhancement. But wait; there's more.

    Another way to approach this is to consider how large a weapon attack bonus would be needed to achieve the same average damage as dominance. In other words, for a weapon with a +n attack bonus and dominance, what +m would I need without dominance to get near to the same damage.

    Table 2: +m for Nearest to Equivalent Damage
    Weapon Bonus (+n)
    Dam W/Dominance
    Nearest Bonus W/o (+m)
    0 7.55 1
    1 9.075 2
    2 10.7 3
    3 12.425 5
    4 14.25 6
    5 16.35 7

    So, for an underlying weapon bonus of 0, 1, or 2, dominance gives extra damage as an enchantment that's one better, i.e. a +1 enchantment. But for an underlying bonus of 3, 4, or 5, it's +2.

    Bottom line: all in all, I'd call it +2.
    Last edited by jqavins; 2017-11-10 at 03:11 PM. Reason: De-emphasized final conclusion
    -- Joe
    “Give a man a fire and he's warm for a day, but set fire to him and he's warm for the rest of his life.”
    -- Terry Pratchet

    Always remember that anything posted on the internet is, in a practical if not a legal sense, in the public domain.
    You are completely welcome to use anything I post here, or I wouldn't post it.

  7. - Top - End - #7
    Halfling in the Playground
    Join Date
    Jan 2016

    Default Re: 3.5 Weapon Enhancement

    Quote Originally Posted by jqavins View Post
    OK, so now it's the next day, and I've got some results.

    AS it turns out, and I should have known this, the base weapon damage is irrelevant. What matters is the attack roll - BAB, Str mod, and weapon attack bonus vs. target AC - and any bonus to the damage roll - weapon attack mod and special feature. Since you didn't provide the target's AC, I've assumed 25.

    I computed the average damage considering hit chance (but I chose to neglect crits for simplicity) for weapon bonuses from 0 to +5, both with and without the Dominance enchantment, using the BAB of 10, the Str mod. of 5, and the greataxe as directed. And here are the results.

    Table 1: Damage With and Without Dominance
    Weapon Bonus
    W/o Dominance
    W/Dominance
    Delta
    0 6.325 7.55 1.225
    1 7.5 9.075 1.575
    2 8.775 10.7 1.925
    3 10.15 12.425 2.275
    4 11.625 14.25 2.625
    5 13.2 16.35 3.15
    (6) (14.875)
    (7) (16.65)
    Average 2.129167
    (I included +6 and +7 for a reason that will soon be clear.)

    The average increase given by the dominance feature is a bit over 2. That is similar to the improvement in average damage given by a +2 weapon, actually 2.45. So I would be inclined to call dominance a +2 enhancement. But wait; there's more.

    Another way to approach this is to consider how large a weapon attack bonus would be needed to achieve the same average damage as dominance. In other words, for a weapon with a +n attack bonus and dominance, what +m would I need without dominance to get near to the same damage.

    Table 2: +m for Nearest to Equivalent Damage
    Weapon Bonus (+n)
    Dam W/Dominance
    Nearest Bonus W/o (+m)
    0 7.55 1
    1 9.075 2
    2 10.7 3
    3 12.425 5
    4 14.25 6
    5 16.35 7

    So, for an underlying weapon bonus of 0, 1, or 2, dominance gives extra damage as an enchantment that's one better, i.e. a +1 enchantment. But for an underlying bonus of 3, 4, or 5, it's +2.

    Bottom line: all in all, I'd call it +2.
    Wow, you put a lot of work into this. Thanks for the detailed review!

    So, do you think you'd eve play a character that'd buy it?

  8. - Top - End - #8
    Orc in the Playground
     
    RedKnightGirl

    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Gender
    Female

    Default Re: 3.5 Weapon Enhancement

    I'm confused. If the bonus it gives you is about +2, and +3.5 is the standard (flaming) for +1 enchantment weapons. How is this a +2 enhancement?
    Last edited by Knitifine; 2017-11-10 at 04:05 AM.
    Professional Sorcerer Advocate.

    Winner of the Base Class Contest XXXX 'Happy Little Accidents'
    Winning Entry: The Antiquarian (Artifacts, Options).
    Runner Up for Base Class Context XXXXI 'It's In Our Nature'
    Entry: The Egregore (Vermin Companion)

  9. - Top - End - #9
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    jqavins's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Helendale, CA
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: 3.5 Weapon Enhancement

    Quote Originally Posted by Knitifine View Post
    I'm confused. If the bonus it gives you is about +2, and +3.5 is the standard (flaming) for +1 enchantment weapons. How is this a +2 enhancement?
    Hmm, lemme think on that.

    Because flaming only adds is 1d6 on a hit and doesn't increase the hit chance, its additional damage averaged across many attacks is less than 3.5. Using the same BAB, AC, etc. as above, its long term average damage boost varies from 1.875 for a +0 weapon to 2.8 for a +5 weapon, with an average of 2.3625. Even so, that is comparable to what a +2 weapon adds, so by my logic, flaming should be a +2 enhancement, though indeed it is not. So, a net +2 weapon from +1 attack and flaming does about the same damage over the long haul as a net +3 weapon all in attack.

    And now we see that there are inherent inconsistencies in the RAW. What a shock (he said sarcastically).

    So, yeah, I guess you could make as good a case for dominance as a +1 bonus by comparison to flaming as for +2 by comparison to attack bonuses. What the heck, why not make it +1.5 (he asked with bitter sarcasm)?

    Come to think of it, if you wanted to, you really could declare it +1.5. This plus is only used for pricing and the total power limit. So for pricing, why not say that (for example) a +1 greataxe with dominance counts as a +2.5 total, giving a price of 2.52∙2000 g.p., which comes out to 12,500 g.p.? As for the total +10 limit, dominance by itself would be as good as a single +2, but two such (if any other +1.5s exist) would contribute +3. Since enchantments like this don't affect any die rolls, one could use fractions just fine.

    I'm not saying you should, but why not?
    -- Joe
    “Give a man a fire and he's warm for a day, but set fire to him and he's warm for the rest of his life.”
    -- Terry Pratchet

    Always remember that anything posted on the internet is, in a practical if not a legal sense, in the public domain.
    You are completely welcome to use anything I post here, or I wouldn't post it.

  10. - Top - End - #10
    Orc in the Playground
     
    RedKnightGirl

    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Gender
    Female

    Thumbs up Re: 3.5 Weapon Enhancement

    Quote Originally Posted by jqavins View Post
    So, yeah, I guess you could make as good a case for dominance as a +1 bonus by comparison to flaming.
    Got it, so it should be a +1.
    Professional Sorcerer Advocate.

    Winner of the Base Class Contest XXXX 'Happy Little Accidents'
    Winning Entry: The Antiquarian (Artifacts, Options).
    Runner Up for Base Class Context XXXXI 'It's In Our Nature'
    Entry: The Egregore (Vermin Companion)

  11. - Top - End - #11
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    jqavins's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Helendale, CA
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: 3.5 Weapon Enhancement

    Quote Originally Posted by Knitifine View Post
    Got it, so it should be a +1.
    Certainly not what I said. But, whatever.
    -- Joe
    “Give a man a fire and he's warm for a day, but set fire to him and he's warm for the rest of his life.”
    -- Terry Pratchet

    Always remember that anything posted on the internet is, in a practical if not a legal sense, in the public domain.
    You are completely welcome to use anything I post here, or I wouldn't post it.

  12. - Top - End - #12
    Halfling in the Playground
    Join Date
    Jan 2016

    Default Re: 3.5 Weapon Enhancement

    Quote Originally Posted by jqavins View Post
    So, a net +2 weapon from +1 attack and flaming does about the same damage over the long haul as a net +3 weapon all in attack.
    I guess something to consider is that this Dominate damage is the same damage as you are already doing; piercing, slashing, bludgeoning; whereas Flaming does fire damage. It's possible, and generally rather easy, to ignore 6 points of fire damage with a low-level armor enhancement or any kind of spellcaster on the team. That's why Impact is +2 for less damage than a Flaming + Shocking weapon.

    In this case, the damage is still typed, but of a type much harder to resist; and if the target already resists it than you're out of luck, enhancement or not.

    Based on this, I think your initial ruling of +2 would be appropriate.

  13. - Top - End - #13
    Colossus in the Playground
     
    Kish's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2004

    Default Re: 3.5 Weapon Enhancement

    I don't think fire should be assumed, or is assumed in the rules, to be worse than "more damage of the weapon's preexisting type" or that "does two types of damage" is a straight-up nerf.

    Comparing the described effect to existing weapon buffs, the case for +1 looks far stronger to me than the case for +2.
    Spoiler
    Show
    "The really unforgivable acts are committed by calm men in beautiful green silk rooms, who deal death wholesale, by the shipload, without lust, or anger, or desire, or any redeeming emotion to excuse them but cold fear of some pretended future. But the crimes they hope to prevent in the future are imaginary. The ones they commit in the present--they are real." --Aral Vorkosigan

    Quote Originally Posted by The Giant View Post
    This, in a nutshell.
    Yes, exactly.

  14. - Top - End - #14
    Halfling in the Playground
    Join Date
    Jan 2016

    Default Re: 3.5 Weapon Enhancement

    Quote Originally Posted by Kish View Post
    I don't think fire should be assumed, or is assumed in the rules, to be worse than "more damage of the weapon's preexisting type" or that "does two types of damage" is a straight-up nerf.

    Comparing the described effect to existing weapon buffs, the case for +1 looks far stronger to me than the case for +2.
    There is a 2nd level spell available to every casting class except for Bard that reduces energy damage of a choice by 10 for at least 30 minutes. This would more then negate a Flaming, Shocking, Corrosive, or Frost weapon but would have no effect on an Impact weapon. Stopping energy damage is extremely easy whereas stopping slashing/piercing/bludgeoning or untyped damage is much harder, and nearly impossible once the almighty +1 is added to the weapon.

    Even Sonic damage was so rare in the early editions that adding sonic damage to a weapon is nerfed, and this same spell can negate it as well.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •