A way to balance the greataxe with the greatsword


log in or register to remove this ad

charlesatan

Explorer
Plane Sailing said:
Which again begs the question - why have a difference at this point anyway, when there has been no attempt to distinguish axe and sword damage at any earlier point.

WotC needs uses for the d12 aside from rolling up Barbarian hp. And Warblade hp. =)
 



Feldspar

Explorer
Plane Sailing said:
The easiest way is to move them both to the same dice type - either 1d12 for both or 2d6 for both.
Yep, I agree with this. I'd let the players choose - which I'd imagine would most often result in one vote of 2d6 and all the rest for 1d12 ;)

I'd also say that if 2d6 was chosen as the standard, but a given player really wanted the d12 (more randomness!!!), then they could choose to roll that instead.
 

Michael Morris

First Post
Kaodi said:
The greataxe also has a much better chance of doing worse damage, and has a lower minimum. Assuming succesful critical confirmation rolls, the average critical damage of a greatsword is 7.7, and the greataxe 7.15.

Assuming confirmation, you have a 1 in 360 chance of doing 24 damage with a greatsword, but unfortunately I have forgotten how to (quickly) calculate the probability of doing 24 or greater damage with 3d12 and a 5% critical chance.
Your missing the fact of the bonuses being multiplied too on the crit. A Greataxe wielded by a 20 strength half-orc chucks a minimum of 18 points of damage. The greatsword's minimum with the same character is 14. Give the weapons a magical bonus and the difference gets even more extreme.

You also caculated average damage wrong. The average of 3d12 is 19.5 (6.5 x 3), the average of 4d6 is 14 (3.5 x 4). When damage is multiplied you multiply the number of dice rolled, you do NOT roll one die and multiply whatever face comes up.

So great axe wielded by a 20 str character is hitting for a spread of 18 - 51 with an average of 34.5. The greatsword hits for a spread of 14 - 34 with an average of 24.

Keep in mind though a greatsword has double the opportunity to threat in the first place. Because of this the weapons are balanced.

BTW, I have had a BBEG offed by a greataxe +3 wielded by a character with a 22 strength in 1 hit because he failed his fort save due to massive damage.
 
Last edited:

And to continue Michael's concept -

Make a size "large" warhammer a standard issue item - aka a maul.

2d6 dmg x3 crit - bludgeoning, weapon is 2x weight of warhammer. Zweihander of course for size medium. The balance is perfect when you take into account the potential of "weapon adaptation rules" in the DMG. Encourages PC's to scavenge Giants for gear.

Perfect for Dwarven Ranger/Cleric of St. Cuthbert w Strength and Destruction Domains (with favored enemy Giants of course :D
 


BenjErik

First Post
I don't see the need for any changes either. Its fine as written IMO. Sure the 2d6 is a tighter damage range, but the greataxe has brought alot of memorable moments to my table.

Recently we had a 3rd level barbarian charge a troll and one shot him due to a hefty crit; it amounted to something like 38 points of damage. Almost cut him clean in two, and ended that encounter in less than a single round!
 

Kaodi

Hero
I may have poorly stated what exactly my averages were. They were average damage including critical hits, not average critical hits.

So, the greatsword is average 7 + (7 x 10%), while the greataxe is 6.5 + (13 x 5%).

So, to take your 20 strength character does an average of 15.4 with a greatsword, and the greataxe 14.85.

Of course, a complete analysis would off the best picture, but I imagine the greatsword will edge out the greataxe in average damage at every hit probability, except for of course when a natural 20 is the only way to succesfully hit. Of course, if that happens, you probably in deep anyway.

Also, though it may not come up often, a greatsword is a vastly superior vorpal weapon to a greataxe.
 
Last edited:

Remove ads

Top