D&D 3E/3.5 [3.5 Quick Question] Brilliant energy?
- Thread starter Ashrem Bayle
- Start date
Brilliant Energy is an AntPC weapon.
Think about it. Who has massive AC's from armor?
PC's.
Unless your entire campaign is built around fighting NPC's who also wear armor, this is stupid.
Check out the New Balor's Default equipment.....Vorpal Sword or Brilliant Energy Weapon.
Fighter with +5 full Plate and +5 lg shield.....That's +19 AC getting ignored (old system) or 'only' +12 in the new one.
And how much of an armor bonus does it have? Nat AC, deflection, dex....hrm.
Anti-PC enchantment all the way. And yet, making a Nat AC ignoring enchantment would be 'unbalanced' in return.
Feh.
==Aelryinth
Think about it. Who has massive AC's from armor?
PC's.
Unless your entire campaign is built around fighting NPC's who also wear armor, this is stupid.
Check out the New Balor's Default equipment.....Vorpal Sword or Brilliant Energy Weapon.
Fighter with +5 full Plate and +5 lg shield.....That's +19 AC getting ignored (old system) or 'only' +12 in the new one.
And how much of an armor bonus does it have? Nat AC, deflection, dex....hrm.
Anti-PC enchantment all the way. And yet, making a Nat AC ignoring enchantment would be 'unbalanced' in return.
Feh.
==Aelryinth
In responce to nameless and others, BE only cuts through physical armor. For a high level ability it gets less useful as you are more and more likely to be fighting either monsters or NPC who have am armor bonus but are wisely wearing Bracers of AC, which BE is useless against.
love
burne
love
burne
ThirdWizard
First Post
Just because something is situational based, IMO, does not make it less powerful. If an enhancement nullifies armor bonuses, it nullifies armor bonuses, and it will be extremely beneficial when facing against opponents in those nice armors. A +4 bonus is balanced for these encounters, and the weapon enhancement must be balanced with that in mind, lest it be abused in NPC heavy campaigns.
Plane Sailing
Astral Admin - Mwahahaha!
IMC Brilliant energy has (and will continue to) ignore armour, shields and natural armour except those which are force effects.
It is a *bit* like having a phasing sword, or an sword which is incorporeal in terms of my definition of what it can effect (and I'm seriously considering allowing it to affect constructs, undead etc too, but as a +5 enhancement effect)
Cheers
It is a *bit* like having a phasing sword, or an sword which is incorporeal in terms of my definition of what it can effect (and I'm seriously considering allowing it to affect constructs, undead etc too, but as a +5 enhancement effect)
Cheers
Skinwalker
First Post
Re: Re: Re: Re: [3.5 Quick Question] Brilliant energy?
Agreed, but I don't see that as an issue. Compare this: 1 action to power up your 1d6 variable element effect vs. 1 action to select which of your four 1d6 elemental effects to activate. Either way, you have 1d6 from your choice of elements at the cost of an action. Granted, the latter is *slightly* less flexible on the number of elements it provides, *but* if you have time to prepare or your opponent foolishly gives you time you can keep activating more elements.
RingXero said:
Agreed, but I don't see that as an issue. Compare this: 1 action to power up your 1d6 variable element effect vs. 1 action to select which of your four 1d6 elemental effects to activate. Either way, you have 1d6 from your choice of elements at the cost of an action. Granted, the latter is *slightly* less flexible on the number of elements it provides, *but* if you have time to prepare or your opponent foolishly gives you time you can keep activating more elements.
kreynolds
First Post
Archer said:
Because they require a standard action to activate.
Archer said:
Correct, but it will destroy your scabbard, then pants, then underwear, etc... Besides, a stickler could say that when the weapon is hanging off your hip, you're no longer a wielder, but simply a bearer, which is completely different.
Last edited:
kreynolds
First Post
ThirdWizard said:
Where are you getting that from? I'm looking at the writeup and it doesn't say anything about it not being able to bypass shield bonuses. What _does_ say, however, is that it bypasses inorganic material, such as armor, which is the same as a shield in 3.0. It lists what bonus types it _doesn't_ bypass, but shield isn't on this list either.
No doubt they simply forgot to update the text to include shields in armor. Basically, the new writeup doesn't change anything about the old, and neither does it add anything new. It simply clarifies, but it doesn't even touch on shields.
