Flaming/Icy/Shocking Burst weapons

[Ridley's Cohort]

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...

From a minmax POV it is not even close.

You need to compare Flaming Burst (+2 equivalent) to Flaming (+1) PLUS Shocking (+1).

It is completely obvious that any x2 weapon would be more effective with +2d6 damage all the time than +1d6/+1d10.

That is still true with the higher multipliers except in the most extreme examples.

If you think Flaming Shocking is a bad example, substitute Flaming Keen and it is the same story. It is completely obvious that Flaming Keen is better for high multiplier weapons than Flaming Burst, at least with the Sage's ruling.

The bonus d10s for criticals were clearly intended to be in addition to the normal d6. While it is not obvious from the working which way is correct, it is obvious from the perspective of play balance which to use.

 

[kreynolds]

From a minmax POV it is not even close.

Damn right!

Hey everybody. This is being covered in this thread as well. Check it out for more info.

I've been having this discussion with another DM for quite some time. Luckily for us, we managed to fix the problem in our games. Hell, we even managed to fix Vorpal weapons! Woohoo!

 

[coyote6]

Hijack!

Hell, we even managed to fix Vorpal weapons! Woohoo!

Curious: what did you do with/to vorpal weapons?

 

[Ferret]

Isn't a flame tongue the thing that does that? Or ar you talkin about geting both enchantments?

 

[Darkness8Me]

Isn't a flame tongue the thing that does that? Or ar you talkin about geting both enchantments?

A flame tongue is just a magical longsword with the flaming burst enhancement.

 

[kreynolds]

Re: Hijack!

Curious: what did you do with/to vorpal weapons?

There are so many situations that a vorpal critical seems rediculous, that we just tried to find a good solution. For instance, is it possible to severe the head of a colossal dragon with a dagger? Shortsword? Hell, even a longsword? Absolutely not. Unless, of course, you're gonna sit there for a while and saw his head off with your vorpal pocket knife.

Basically, we decided that vorpal weapons inflict X4 critical damage of your weapon, in addition to your normal critical weapon damage, but the vorpal damage is force damage.

Look at it like this. A vorpal longsword on a critical hit will deal 2d8 (longsword crit) + 4d8 force (vorpal longsword crit). Trying to keep with the spirit of vorpal, meaning it's really really deadly, this much damage is pretty freakin' nasty, and there's a good chance it will kill you, if not just hurt really bad. Furthermore, I'm not aware of anything that is immune to force damage.

But the best part? Even for creatures that are immune to critical hits, you are still gonna dish out a healthy portion of vorpal damage. Why? You must critical for the vorpal to work. Enhancements that function only on a critical function whether or not the creature is immune to crits. For example, if you crit a skeleton with an icy burst weapon, you don't deal critical damage, but the icy burst is activated. So, with our vorpal fix, you won't deal critical hit damage, but you will deal vorpal damage.

Also, consider vampires and the normal vorpal. You can't crit a vampire, but you can cut off his head. This single situation completely broke the vorpal enhancement. It was yet another situation in which the DM would have to make a judgement call. And in my opinion, the vorpal enhancement was more work for me, the DM, than it was worth.

Also, it made sense to base the vorpal damage off of the weapon, as a vorpal greatsword is going to hurt much much more than a vorpal dagger.

 

[twjensen]

I like it

The vorpal fix sounds similar to what I'm doing with harm. I'm letting harm do loads of damage, but its limited to 1d8 / cleric level. No save, lotsa damage, still a very cool spell, but no longer the dragon bane it once was.

Back on topic:
Even if the burst is +1d6 + 1d10, it still seems less effective than +166 keen or +1d6 flame + 1d6 shock.

Of course, some characters will still want the burst if it's +1d6 +1d10, but only if they crit about 60% of the time that they hit.

 

[kreynolds]

Re: I like it

Even if the burst is +1d6 + 1d10, it still seems less effective than +166 keen or +1d6 flame + 1d6 shock.

Exactly. That's why my DM group ruled that the 1d6 energy enhancements do not stack, as it keeps the burst enhancements valuable. Otherwise, you might as well get rid of burst. Even for someone with a keen flaming burst great axe and improved critical, a longsword with flame and shock will have a much higher average damage.

 

[Kae'Yoss]

Is it possible to give your sword both flaming and flaming burst?

 

[Noldor Elf]

In SRD Flame Tongue is +1 longsword with both flaming and flaming burst, and for it's wording I would say it only deals 1d6 fire on normal and 1d6+1d10 (because of both enchantments) on crit. The price for Flame tongue is also for a +4 weapon.