Vorpal Uber Weapons?!?

[IanB]

True.

The problem isn't Vorpal, it's Gauntlets of Desctruction + Vorpal. The benefit of rerolling 1's on a D4 until no 1's appear with exploding Vorpal dice is what creates the radical value shift.

The solution is outlaw Gauntlets of Destruction (which BTW can be made at 18th level instead of 30th level).

What are we solving by doing that? Can you actually demonstrate that the game is harmed in balance terms by allowing them?

So far I still feel like we're in the realm of "this violates my sense of symmetry" rather than "there is a real mechanical imbalance".

 

[Hypersmurf]

Actually, 2d4 once vorpal'd is superior to d10, but not to d12 nor 2d6 It gets the largest % increase, but given that it started with less damage than other weapons in its class, that's a misleading figure.

This is what is important:

2d4 does less than a 1d12 weapon without vorpal. 2d4 does less than a 1d12 weapon with vorpal.

So "2d4 does less than a 1d12 weapon without vorpal. 2d4 does less than a 1d12 weapon with vorpal" is important, but "2d4 does less than a 1d10 weapon without vorpal. 2d4 does more than a 1d10 weapon with vorpal" can be glossed over?

Either the progression is meaningful and must be maintained, in which case the reversal of the 2d4 and d10 is a crime against the system that must be remedied, or else the progression is a point of trivia that has no relationship to the rules.

Since there's no interpretation which actually maintains the progression both with and without vorpal, it appears the second is true, and examination of the progression gives no insight as to how the rules apply.

-Hyp.

 

[PrecociousApprentice]

True enough Hyp, I just fall into the camp that says it is not a crime, and that it is OK for the vorpal falchion to be better than it "should" some times. Meaningful choices and all.

 

[tweinst]

Given that Vorpal is limited to level 30 weapons, I think it's important to look at how this would be used in play. Even basic attack at epic tier is 2[W], so you're always going to be rolling a handful of dice. Do you want to roll pairs of dice one at a time to see if vorpal triggers, or would you rather just roll a handful of dice and reroll the 4s?

Personally, I'd rather err on the side of simplicity.

 

[Hypersmurf]

True enough Hyp, I just fall into the camp that says it is not a crime, and that it is OK for the vorpal falchion to be better than it "should" some times. Meaningful choices and all.

I agree completely. It's not a crime, and it's fine for a weapon to fall outside the progression.

But I also think that p219 tells us that the damage die of a falchion is 2d4.

Do you want to roll pairs of dice one at a time to see if vorpal triggers, or would you rather just roll a handful of dice and reroll the 4s?

I don't think the answer to that has an effect on how the Vorpal rules actually play out.

If I have an attack that deals 4d6 damage, it might be simpler to just rule that I deal 14 damage every time. Certainly involves rolling fewer dice! But 'simpler' doesn't automatically mean 'correct'.

-Hyp.

 

[Edena_of_Neith]

(humor)

Improved Vorpal Sword: 2d4 (reroll 3s and 4s)
Greater Vorpal Sword: 2d4 (reroll 2s, 3s, and 4s)
True Vorpal Sword: 2d4 (keep rerolling unless both rolls are 1s)

And ...

Uber Vorpal Sword: 2d4 (keep rerolling until you get two consecutive rolls of double 1s)

 

[silentounce]

So "2d4 does less than a 1d12 weapon without vorpal. 2d4 does less than a 1d12 weapon with vorpal" is important, but "2d4 does less than a 1d10 weapon without vorpal. 2d4 does more than a 1d10 weapon with vorpal" can be glossed over?

Either the progression is meaningful and must be maintained, in which case the reversal of the 2d4 and d10 is a crime against the system that must be remedied, or else the progression is a point of trivia that has no relationship to the rules.

Since there's no interpretation which actually maintains the progression both with and without vorpal, it appears the second is true, and examination of the progression gives no insight as to how the rules apply.

-Hyp.

Dang it, I just wrote a long post that explained everything really well. And then it got messed up somehow. a;djfk;ladsjfj23rerwjfoiafj

Ok, let me try to recreate. I found an explanation that character maintains the relationship between all weapon die types as far as > and < at base, with GD, with Vorpal, and with both.

For weapon die entries like 2d4 or 2d6. You only explode on the highest possible result, max damage die, an 8 or a 12. With GD, you reroll each one rolled, but this only leads to explosion if the result is max. So for 2d4 with GD and Vorpal, you only explode if you roll (4,4), (1,4) and the 1 rerolls to a 4, or (1,1) and both reroll to 4s. If you take this interpretation, then all weapon die types are consistent as far as > or < except for two exceptions. When you use GD, the average result for 2d4 and d10 are identical, however d10 has a higher max damage.

But when you use GD and Vorpal, 2d4 and d10 are still identical, but there is no such thing as max damage. Although, it is less probable for 2d4 to result in a very high damage number than it is for a d10. With GD and vorpal, both types will explode 1/9 of the time if you only reroll on an 8 for the 2d4, but each time the d10 explodes it adds its new roll to 10 damage, while 2d4 adds to 8. Yeah, potential damage is infinite for both, but there is a greater probability for a high number of non-infinite damage for the d10. Take this for example. For 2d4, 72/81 of all rolls will result in 4-7 damage, 8/81 will result in 9-15 damage, and 1/81 will result in 16+ damage. For a d10, 72/81 of all rolls will result in 2-9 damage, 8/81 will result in 11-19 damage, and 1/81 will result in 21+. This can be extrapolated infinitely. So I don't really see a problem.

Damage probabilities for 2d4 and d10 with GD and Vorpal:
89%
2d4 4-7
d10 2-9

9.8%
2d4 9-15
d10 11-19

1.2%
2d4 16+
d10 21+

So, on average, these two types of weapon die will do the same damage, but it is more likely that the d10 will do a large amount.


FINAL TABLES:

Base average
d4 2.5
d6 3.5
d8 4.5
2d4 5
d10 5.5
d12 6.5
2d6 7

GD average
d4 3
d6 4
d8 5
2d4 6 rerolling all 1s
d10 6
d12 7
2d6 8 rerolling all 1s

Vorpal average
d4 3.33
d6 4.2
d8 5.14
2d4 5.33 rerolling only an 8
d10 6.11
d12 7.09
2d6 7.2 rerolling only a 12

Average with Vorpal and GD
d4 4.5
d6 5
d8 5.83
2d4 6.75 exploding only when a 8 is rolled on 2dice but rerolling all 1s
d10 6.75
d12 7.7
2d6 8.33 exploding only when 12 is rolled on 2dice but rerolling all 1s

So, there is an interpretation which actually maintains the progression both with and without vorpal. The progression is meaningful and can be maintained as I said above. Regardless of whether or not you like this interpretation or think it is correct, it is the only one that maintains the continuum of average damages for each case: d4<d6<d8<2d4<d10<d12<2d6. It is important to note that because 2d4 and 2d6 are considered a weapon die each set must be kept together when rolling multiple [W]s and they can only explode when an 8 or a 12 is rolled.

In summary, any and all 1s can be rerolled when using the GD, this does not break the weapon damage die progression. GD are not the problem. Rerolling every 4 or 6 when rolling 2d4 or 2d6 damage does break the progression both with Vorpal alone, and with Vorpal and GD. Rerolling 2d4 and 2d6 only when an 8 or a 12 results does not break the progression. Therefore, if you feel that this progression is an important system structure that needs to be maintained, the previous is the only rules interpretation that is valid.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Rerolling 2d4 and 2d6 only when an 8 or a 12 results does not break the progression.

Ha... you know, I never actually did the expected damage calculation for 2d4, reroll on 8? I accepted the argument that "It only explodes half as often as 1d8!" without realising that it still has a higher expected damage.

So I agree... as well as fitting the 219 text (the damage die of a falchion is 2d4, therefore the Vorpal reroll triggers when the damage die - 2d4 - rolls maximum), it also maintains the 'feels right' factor of the damage progression.

-Hyp.

 

[ShaggySpellsword]

I find it funny that, in all of these damage calculations, people are looking at the vorpalness of d4s and 2d6s when there are no weapons that can do Vorpal damage with those die sizes (dice sizes?).

Also, I can tell you definitively that Sneak Attack Dice are NOT rerolled with Vorpal...because Crossbows, Light Blades, and Shuriken can't have the Vorpal Property placed on them.

That said, reading this thread feels like banging my head between two walls.

I see lots of value in what both sides are saying.

Using plain English interpretations of words and common-sense die-rolling practices, the RAW appear to indicate that each individual piece of plastic is rerolled on a max number.

Using mathematical models of expected damage output and assumptions that 2-die weapons are exceptions to the single-die weapon rule (those exceptions being the game design theory behind 4ed) it seems that 2d4 counts as a single "die" of damage for a Falchion when it is part of the [W] damage the weapon is doing.

Strong arguments can and have been made either way.

Way 1 does give a decidedly bigger bonus to Falchions than Great-Axes, but not so big as to make the Falchion the best 2-hander ever and to obsolete the Great Axe.

Way 2 is hard to practically roll and enforce without lots of matched-set d4s.

I guess Way 1 is how most will run it, as it is table-top practical and I want strema-lined ease at my table (also a 4ed design goal); but I suspect Way 2 was the intent.

 

[Hypersmurf]

I find it funny that, in all of these damage calculations, people are looking at the vorpalness of d4s and 2d6s when there are no weapons that can do Vorpal damage with those die sizes (dice sizes?).

A greataxe sized for a Large creature is a 2d6 Axe.

-Hyp.