Minotaur + Executioner's Axe = OMG!

[Runestar]

It is worth nothing that the majority of the MM races (barring the warforged) are currently the weakest races in the game, due to a dearth of support material (no racial feats, for example). I really see nothing wrong with allowing a minotaur PC, much less giving him a brutal weapon. Considering his crappy racial, it is really his only saving grace, IMO.

 

[devoblue]

Are we expecting Goliaths in PHB2? Do we expect them to be able to wield oversized?

It's a stuff up, but that's what errata is for.

 

[Ginnel]

WOTC didn't overlook it or did something wrong. No PC Class can use oversized weapons (yet) so there is no problem.

Minotaurs and all other Races from the MM are for NPC's! While it is possible (and fun) for a Player to use it, it should only be done with great care from the GM, if he allows it at all.

Exactly Minotaurs and Bugbears are not PC races.

so Zomg! look at the damage minotaurs is nice and all for an NPC but its not a player character.

 

[MrMyth]

Actually, the Bugbear and Minotaur ability to wield oversized weapons is probably the strongest racial ability in the game (in terms of direct numerical advantage)... but that said, while the Brutal ability is cool for avoiding crappy rolls, I was pleased to see it doesn't drive the average damage up to too absurd levels. (At least beyond what beyond Large does already)

Greataxe (Damage 1d12) - Min Damage 1, Average Damage 6.5, Max Damage 12
Large Greataxe (Damage 2d6) - Min Damage 2, Average Damage 7, Max Damage 12

Maul (Damage: 2d6) - Min Damage 2, Average Damage 7, Max Damage 12
Large Maul (Damage: 2d8) - Min damage 2, Average Damage 9, Max Damage 16

Executioner's Axe (Damage 1d12, Brutal 2) - Min Damage 3, Average Damage 7.5, Max Damage 12
Large Executioner's Axe (Damage 2d6, Brutal 2) - Min damage 6, Average Damage 9, Max Damage 12

Mordenkrad (Damage 2d6, Brutal 1) - Min Damage 4, Average Damage 8, Max Damage 12
Large Mordenkrad (Damage 2d8, Brutal 1) - Min Damage 4, Average Damage 10, Max Damage 16

Each point of Brutal adds an average 0.5 damage per die, which isn't too extreme. While upping the size of a weapon from 1d12 to 2d6 thus doubles the benefit from brutal, it is compensated by the fact that 1d12 to 2d6 is the lowest damage boost from a medium weapon to a large weapon.

Boosting the min damage is its real trick, and that is pretty nice - never being plagued by 1s again will be a boon for many people.

The other benefit comes into play late in the game, with vorpal weapons - that is where the Large Executioner's Axe really shines. Each time you roll a 6, you get to add another d6 to the pot. With Brutal 2, each die has a 1 in 4 chance of rolling a 6 - this not only provides a solid boost to average damage, but makes it awfully easy for a lucky streak to explode into a pile of dice.

Personally, one of my few complaints about 4E is that I really dislike how they handled weapons, and especially weapon sizes. Given the number of [W] powers out there, Small characters seem especially penalized, while Large characters (for the purposes of weapon-wielding) get a rather overpowered benefit. Personally, I'd rather have seen damage sizes go only from 1d4 to 1d12 - adding in 2d4, 2d6, 2d8, etc, just skews the math when you introduce elements like Brutal, Vorpal, Gauntlets of Destruction, etc.

Still, the differences are only a fewpoints in any direction in the end, so the game still works. I just feel they had an opportunity to really make the system work smoother, and failed to take advantage of it.

 

[eamon]

Brutal 2 on a 2d6 raises the average damage from 7 to 9. It's good, but it's not game-breakingly good - you do need a pretty limited racial ability and a specific type of weapon to use this.

 

[Traveon Wyvernspur]

Maybe I'm missing something here with these new brutal weapons, but isn't it if you roll a 1 or a 2 (on 2d6) you get to reroll the damage die for either, or both? So, if you roll two 2's, you would have to reroll both of them? Same thing if you rolled two 1's, or a 1 and a 2? So basically the minimum damage you could do is +6 (two 3's), add in your bonuses afterwards of course.

On a side note, if I was WotC, I'd have said that any 1 or 2 rolled is an automatic 3. Then you aren't getting a roll of a 1 or 2, then a roll of a 6 the next time. As a DM, I think this is the house rule I'll implement, if I'm understanding the rule correctly. Players would still be happy as they'll never get below the +6 damage threshold for the 2d6 or +3 on a 1d12.

 

[BASHMAN]

An idea how to interprete the weapon descritpion.
Large Executionier Axe damage die is 2d6. Both d6 are considered as 1 damage die. You may be throwing multiple dice, but those are considered as "one weapon die".

When you roll the damage, you score a number from 2 to 12. If the number happens to be 2, you reroll both dice. So, effectively, the damage become 3-12 (the same as previously).

Now I know this is really questionable, but it's a nice way to avoid unnecesery "superpower".

The chance of rolling two ones on 2d6 is 1/36. The chance of rolling a 1-2 on a d12 is 1/6. You just make it six times less likely for the dice to explode, or in otherwords, probably reduced the fun by 5/6ths for the player who thought of the idea. I think letting people get away with a cool combo is a far better altnerative than supernerfing to make sure nobody has "too much" fun.

Don't forget that there are some races, like dwarves that get to add +2 to the damage of a weapon at the cost of a feat-- This effectively adds 2 to the damage of a weapon,,, at the cost of a superior weapon feat.

 

[mach1.9pants]

Maybe I'm missing something here with these new brutal weapons, but isn't it if you roll a 1 or a 2 (on 2d6) you get to reroll the damage die for either, or both? So, if you roll two 2's, you would have to reroll both of them? Same thing if you rolled two 1's, or a 1 and a 2? So basically the minimum damage you could do is +6 (two 3's), add in your bonuses afterwards of course.

On a side note, if I was WotC, I'd have said that any 1 or 2 rolled is an automatic 3. Then you aren't getting a roll of a 1 or 2, then a roll of a 6 the next time. As a DM, I think this is the house rule I'll implement, if I'm understanding the rule correctly. Players would still be happy as they'll never get below the +6 damage threshold for the 2d6 or +3 on a 1d12.

***YOINK***
Brutal 1=2, 2=3 damage, I like it AND it saves another die roll

 

[Wonka]

Exactly Minotaurs and Bugbears are not PC races.

so Zomg! look at the damage minotaurs is nice and all for an NPC but its not a player character.

Purely a DM choice. My DM, and when I DM I allow, the races from the MM, if you can come up with suitable justification and background for wanting to play that race, not just "Dude, I want to be a goblin!" As has been stated before in this thread, aside from warforged (and possibly gnolls here once the article from this month's dragon is released), the MM races are for the most part inferior to the PHB races. As such, with proper justification, I see no problems letting them play the races, they just have to be ready for the prejudice they are likely to face being said race

 

[robotsinmyhead]

Purely a DM choice. My DM, and when I DM I allow, the races from the MM, if you can come up with suitable justification and background for wanting to play that race, not just "Dude, I want to be a goblin!" As has been stated before in this thread, aside from warforged (and possibly gnolls here once the article from this month's dragon is released), the MM races are for the most part inferior to the PHB races. As such, with proper justification, I see no problems letting them play the races, they just have to be ready for the prejudice they are likely to face being said race

But...but... DOPPLEGANGERS!