Flaming/Icy/Shocking Burst weapons

[Uriel - inactive]

I probably should have asked this question a year and a half ago, but does a flaming burst weapon (say, a long sword), on a succesful hit, deliver

a) 1d8 (normal) + 1d8 (crit) + 1d6 (flaming) + 1d10 (flaming burst)
OR
b) 1d8 (normal) + 1d8 (crit) + 1d10 (flaming burst)
?

Thanks in advance.

Uriel

 

[Crothian]

the d6 from the noraml attack stacks with e extra 1d10 fromm the burst ability. So, the answer is A.

 

[Darkness8Me]

the d6 from the noraml attack stacks with e extra 1d10 fromm the burst ability. So, the answer is A.

Didn't the sage rule the opposite? That the d10 replaced the d6 on a critical hit.

 

[Crothian]

Didn't the sage rule the opposite? That the d10 replaced the d6 on a critical hit.

Not that I'm familiar with, but he very well could have. I do know that Monte said it workes like I posted it. And since he wrote the magic items, I tend to side with his answers.

 

[Dr. Zoom]

I have not read Monte or the Sage on this one, but I think choice A is correct.

 

[EOL]

Ouch! Well I guess I've been playing it wrong all this time.

 

[Dr. Zoom]

The DMG describes flaming burst as a flaming weapon that also explodes in flame when you get a crit. I read the "also" as "in addtion to." I just cannot see a flaming longsword explode in flame for a whopping extra 1-4 points of damage.

 

[Archer]

The sage did rule the opposite, which essentially eliminates the burst power completely from the game. For those people who still have some interest in using burst, there is always Monte's ruling that you ADD the +1d10.

IMHO, with the sage's ruling a burst weapon is actually worth LESS than a regular weapon because it costs more to upgrade and has lower max power.

 

[DM_Matt]

The sage did rule the opposite, which essentially eliminates the burst power completely from the game. For those people who still have some interest in using burst, there is always Monte's ruling that you ADD the +1d10.

IMHO, with the sage's ruling a burst weapon is actually worth LESS than a regular weapon because it costs more to upgrade and has lower max power.

Agreed. This is yet another case of the Sage being so obviously wrong. Flaming does 1d6 on every hit and is +1. Flaming Burst costs +2, and doing +1d10 on a critical is not as good as 1d6 always unless you are dealing with very high level characters specially designed to have high crit ranges, esp with the Weapon Master, Deepwood Sniper, or Order of the Bow Initiate pres classes. By the core rules, though, Flaming would always be better.

Besides, the wording is obvious.

 

[Uriel - inactive]

Agreed. This is yet another case of the Sage being so obviously wrong. Flaming does 1d6 on every hit and is +1. Flaming Burst costs +2, and doing +1d10 on a critical is not as good as 1d6 always unless you are dealing with very high level characters specially designed to have high crit ranges, esp with the Weapon Master, Deepwood Sniper, or Order of the Bow Initiate pres classes. By the core rules, though, Flaming would always be better.

Besides, the wording is obvious.

If a flaming burst weapon would only do +1d10 on critical hits and no elemental damage otherwise, then, yes, it would suck. But The flaming burst description clearly states that you get the 1d6 when you're not hitting critical hits. Also, you get to multiply your critical hits (+2d10, +3d10) with a flaming burst weapon, so its still a pretty good choice even if you dont get the +1d6 AND the +1d10 on a critical hit...

Anyways, my OTHER 2¢

Uriel