Scimitar

Sorry if this has already been asked, and answered, but someone on the WotC boards posted this, and I have the same question:

Does the scimitar need errata?

Why would it?

Boarstorm said:

Why would it?

Click to expand...

http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=1051988

Posting a link is of little help, since the website may be down or people here may not be able to see that site for various reasons.

Indeed, I think that was a downright rude response.

Since the page you linked to does not open, I'm going to have to assume that anyone who would ask such a question about the scimitar probably has some difficulty comprehending the rules and that there is no such problem.

Kwalish Kid said:

Indeed, I think that was a downright rude response.

Click to expand...

Whose response?

Kwalish Kid said:

I'm going to have to assume that anyone who would ask such a question about the scimitar probably has some difficulty comprehending the rules and that there is no such problem.

Click to expand...

Are you trying to be insulting?

Don't try it; I'm better at this than you.

After tracking down the thread over there, it appears the argument is that it should have a +3 instead of a +2, and if Versitile is better than High Crit. The thread is a bunch of relatively small posts arguing that back and forth.

Boarstorm said:

Why would it?

Click to expand...

"most definitely believe it is a misprint, as all blades are +3 to hit, except for the scimitar.

Let's look at the Longsword: +3, 1d8, Versatile.

Now the Scimitar: +2, 1d8, High Crit."



"I think that High crit is worth much more then vesatile. The -1 prof is further balance."




"I don't think so, as the theme as I see it so far, in other similar weapons, is same to hit and same damage, but either versatile or high crit."

I do know some weapons are both, but that's another matter.

Plus, versatile is a lot more reliable than waiting for that natural 20."



"Um... i don't think that's balanced."

I mean, not only do they benifit from high-crit, but they have an entire feat devoted to them, and not a bad one at that.

By making them +3 instead of +2 you are getting rid of any reason to use a longsword- how often would characters bother switching to two hands for an extra +1 non-scaling damage? Not to mention that at epic level, a scimitar wielded in one hand deals more damage (on average) than a longsword in two (assuming equal chance of hitting, which this change would result in)."


High Crit doesn't do a flat bonus of d6's, it does extra [W] damage, depending on your level tier, so so at epic a scimitar does an extra 3d8.

I'm fairly certain the +2 prof bonus is intentional.

Look at it this way. Edit High Crit gives you an extra [W] damage on a crit. A one in 20 occurrence. A longsword has a +1 more to hit than a scimitar, letting you do 1[w] more damage when the scimitar would miss.

High crit levels up to make up for the fact that class powers get higher x[w] damage. In paragon when you're throwing around tons of 2[w] or better powers, the high crit also does 2[w] extra damage to make up for that one time you would have missed due to the less prof. bonus.

The scimitar might end up with less damage in the end depending on your class and powers. But it might end up being better at epic when you take heavy blade mastery and can crit more often."



"Yeah, I see what you're getting at, but I still don't think it is balanced that two weapons that deal the same damage, but one can be wielded two-handed for extra damage, and always has a higher to hit while the other one's special property only kicks in on that natural 20."


"I think the weapons work fine as written."

"I think that based on that no weapon should be inherently better than any similar weapon that doesn't require a feat to gain training with.

A scimitar is very similar to a longsword, being that they are both one-handed heavy blades.

Then, you have different properties to make the weapon attractive for different reasons.

Longswords are more accurate and happen to be versatile.

Any one wanted to have the highest possible chance to hit would use one, even though it counts as a 2-handed weapon for halflings.

Scimitars have a special feat that only works with scimitars, and have a higher total damage potential.

Any one wanting the highest damage potential with a one-handed heavy blade will choose one, and halflings can use it as a one-handed weapon as well."



"Try looking at it this way. The same sword and board fighter does a basic attack 20 times against the same ac with both weapons.

Long Sword

Roll..........Weapon Damage
1-11..............Miss
11-20.............Hit (cumulative 10d8)

Scimitar

Roll..........Weapon Damage
1-11..............Miss
12-20.............Hit (cumulative 10d8)

Both examples he's doing the same amount of damage. With a basic attack or any attack that does 1[w] damage, the weapons are balanced at heroic levels. Versatile doesn't enter into it because you're sacrificing defense for damage which is something totally different. Now things change as you level up and get attacks that do more than 1[w] damage, but that's what High Crit's leveling up tries to balance against."



"Do you not find it odd that it is the one blade (light or heavy) that only has +2?"

High crit is better than versatile. Versatile almost doesn't count as a bonus, because you aren't going to be switching back and forth.

I don't think high crit is worth as much as +1 attack, though.

But I can't think of anything else to add. Making it High Crit and +3 to attack would make it superior to the longsword for anyone fighting with a one handed weapon. That probably isn't a good idea. Making it 1d10 and high crit makes it superior to the ax. It seems like it should just stay at +2, 1d8, high crit.

So... at least it comes with a snazzy feat that isn't available to the longsword. It seems close enough to balanced to accept.

Apparently the question is whether or not the scimitar should have a +3 proficiency bonus like all the other scimitars.

The scimitar currently has a +2 bonus.