Results 1 to 14 of 14
Thread: 3.5 Weapon Enhancement
-
2017-11-08, 02:09 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jan 2016
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.
-
2017-11-08, 12:41 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2013
- Location
- turkey
- Gender
-
2017-11-08, 03:54 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jun 2013
- Location
- Howard, NY
- Gender
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 TypeAverage Damage,
Second Type0-4 +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“Shared pain is diminished. Shared joy is increased.”-- Spider RoninsonAnd shared laughter is magical
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.
-
2017-11-08, 06:11 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jan 2016
Re: 3.5 Weapon Enhancement
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?
-
2017-11-08, 06:57 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jun 2013
- Location
- Howard, NY
- Gender
Re: 3.5 Weapon Enhancement
-- Joe“Shared pain is diminished. Shared joy is increased.”-- Spider RoninsonAnd shared laughter is magical
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.
-
2017-11-09, 03:09 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jun 2013
- Location
- Howard, NY
- Gender
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
(I included +6 and +7 for a reason that will soon be clear.)Weapon BonusW/o DominanceW/DominanceDelta0 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
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/DominanceNearest 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“Shared pain is diminished. Shared joy is increased.”-- Spider RoninsonAnd shared laughter is magical
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.
-
2017-11-10, 03:03 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jan 2016
-
2017-11-10, 03:56 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2016
- Gender
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)
-
2017-11-10, 03:10 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jun 2013
- Location
- Howard, NY
- Gender
Re: 3.5 Weapon 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“Shared pain is diminished. Shared joy is increased.”-- Spider RoninsonAnd shared laughter is magical
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.
-
2017-11-10, 03:24 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2016
- Gender
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)
-
2017-11-10, 06:26 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jun 2013
- Location
- Howard, NY
- Gender
-- Joe“Shared pain is diminished. Shared joy is increased.”-- Spider RoninsonAnd shared laughter is magical
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.
-
2017-11-11, 01:55 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jan 2016
Re: 3.5 Weapon Enhancement
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.
-
2017-11-11, 02:28 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Nov 2004
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.Orth Plays: Currently Baldur's Gate II
-
2017-11-12, 12:17 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jan 2016
Re: 3.5 Weapon Enhancement
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.