D&D 3E/3.5 [3.5] Wounding blade broken?

[jgsugden]

It is a bit tto strong in my book. My response would be to either give the creature a saving throw to resist the con damage or limit the wounding effect to 1 / rd.

 

[niteshade6]

Both of which would probably ensure that wounding was considered weak. It already does less damage to all but the highest level opponents and doesn't work on alot of enemies. If your going to add another weakness it should be something pretty minor.

 

[MacMathan]

This probably requires a little too much math on the fly but what about wounding doing an additional amount of HP's damage equal to 1/2 the creatures hit die total? The extra damage is kept this way but is still subject to normal healing and DR.

 

[Darklone]

I don't think it's too weak. There are many opponents who are simply immune to Con damage... Undeads, and IIRC, regenerating dudes like trolls too?

 

[hong]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: re

Remind me. Last time we left off, was it WABBIT season, or DUCK season?

As you said, it does 'about the same' damage as unholy or two energy enhancements, which cost the same amount - and then you get the Con modifier for free.

Who cares?

The fact that there are better ways to get a con penalty is irrelevant.

The fact that there are better ways to get a Con penalty is perfectly relevant.

The point is that it's an effect that is over and above the damage (which by itself is roughly balanced, as you pointed out.)

The point is that this effect is trivial, because there are better ways to do it, and because (as pointed out above) the other enchantments also have their own specific advantages.

 

[Celtavian]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: re

The fact that there are better ways to get a Con penalty is perfectly relevant.

The point is that this effect is trivial, because there are better ways to do it, and because (as pointed out above) the other enchantments also have their own specific advantages.

What are the better ways for a high level melee character to do Con damage with all their melee attacks? Either a single weapon fighter with Haste or a dual-wielder with two wounding weapons and Haste? That is quite the Con drain. I would be interested in knowing what better way a melee has to do Con damage using the core rulebooks.

And given that energy enhancements are stackable, what is to prevent a person from stacking say Holy and Sonic damage on top of Wounding for an unbelievably potent weapon?

 

[hong]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: re

What are the better ways for a high level melee character to do Con damage with all their melee attacks?

Who cares about Con drain? There's enough undead crawling around most dungeons, as well as other creatures immune to crits, that you're better off getting holy. Leave the stat draining fancypants stuff to the spellcasters.

And given that energy enhancements are stackable, what is to prevent a person from stacking say Holy and Sonic damage on top of Wounding for an unbelievably potent weapon?

If you're willing to pay +4 worth of enchantment costs, I hope you'd bloody well expect it to be potent.

 

[Celtavian]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: re

Who cares about Con drain? There's enough undead crawling around most dungeons, as well as other creatures immune to crits, that you're better off getting holy. Leave the stat draining fancypants stuff to the spellcasters.

True. Many creatures are immune to Con loss, but many of the standard big bads, especially dragons and outsiders (not to mention the PC's), are not immune to Con damage. They are often the most dangerous adversaries you will face at high level barring certain powerful undead.

If you're willing to pay +4 worth of enchantment costs, I hope you'd bloody well expect it to be potent.

No disagreement here. I just feel the value of wounding is more than Holy or Sonic. Wounding takes roughly the same hit points (more the higher level the creaure you fight) and reduces Fort saves further setting you up for some of the deadliest spells in the game, on top of that you could just die from Con loss.

Another thing to note is that the hit point loss from Wounding cannot be healed until Con is restored. Holy and Energy damage can be healed.

Also, there are very few spells that can ward you against Con damage. A 2nd level Resist energy spell can ward you against energy damage, though not much can ward you against alignment damage except having a Neutral alignment (it pays to be a sideline person in D&D).

All in all that makes Wounding a very potent ability for only a +2 enhancement. I don't think it would be particularly difficult for a TWF to obtain two wounding weapons and go off like a mad dog leaving his enemies in pools of blood from Con loss as well as the regular damage from the blade.

It should probably be a +3 or +4 enhancement in IMO. I'm leaning towards +3, but +2 definitely seems a little low.

 

[hong]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: re

True. Many creatures are immune to Con loss, but many of the standard big bads, especially dragons and outsiders (not to mention the PC's), are not immune to Con damage. They are often the most dangerous adversaries you will face at high level barring certain powerful undead.

A fighter PC who doesn't have fortification armour is a fighter PC who deserves whatever he gets. Even leaving wounding aside, a x3 crit from a giant-sized greataxe is gonna hurt for most people.

No disagreement here. I just feel the value of wounding is more than Holy

Being able to negate DR X/good is invaluable at high levels.

or Sonic.

Huh?

Wounding takes roughly the same hit points (more the higher level the creaure you fight) and reduces Fort saves further setting you up for some of the deadliest spells in the game, on top of that you could just die from Con loss.

Eh. What's gonna kill you is not the ~20-40 points from losing Con, but the 120 points of damage you also took into the bargain.

Another thing to note is that the hit point loss from Wounding cannot be healed until Con is restored. Holy and Energy damage can be healed.

So cast restoration on them after the battle, which heals the hit point loss _as well as_ the Con loss. It's not like stat drain should be an unknown risk for high-level PCs.

Also, there are very few spells that can ward you against Con damage.

Who needs spells when you have fortification armour?

 

[Plane Sailing]

I remember hearing that the new version of wounding was to counter the administrative difficulties of handling the cumulative hit point drain from wounding which was what it did in 3e (and earlier editions).

I think it might have been cheaper back then, so our improved TWF fighter might land 4-6 blows on a target and it is then bleeding 4-6 pts extra every round until healed (not easy for many critters). This was cumulative with every additional rounds of combat.

I don't think it is worth bothering too much with the fine details of what is possible, but I can see that the new Wounding is (slightly) less of a headache to keep track of during a fight. The old version was much better for hit and run tactics (leaving them bleeding hp), and in a long combat against a big foe it might have ended up doing even more damage than the current version as all the different bleeding wounds added up.

In comparison with other +2 enhancements I guess it could be summarised as "a bit nastier, but against a more limited range of foes", and it probably balances out in that respect.

IMO of course!