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

[reapersaurus]

Where exactly is the Greater Wounding enchantment listed in the MM2 Web stuff?
I looked, but couldn't find it in the 2 MM2 articles I have.

I see a monster that has a Wounding weapon, but haven't found the Greater Wounding weapon statted out yet.

 

[wolfen]

Rust Dust. Man that's good stuff. Scrubs and cleans those munchkins every time. Really glorious stuff.

Do they make it anymore?


Anyway, I liked wounding under 3.0. No, it wasn't super powerful. But it made sense for certain characters and situations. Rangers could track the blood. Animals, Beasts, Aberrations, Giants, etc. didn't typically have healing powers so if you didn't wanna get too involved in a long battle -- you didn't have to. Just check back in an hour and retrieve the carcass.

Lastly, it's great for guerilla tactics against bigger enemies. Small parties of 4 without heavy firepower can make use of this a lot easier than they can sit toe-to-toe with a baddie. If you're in the wilderness, hit and run away. Let'em waste their healing resources on their little 1d8 sword wound. Come back and hit again. Guerilla attacks will eventually deplete their healing ability and you can bring down big fish if you (and the DM) are patient.

A monk with a wounding Kama could be a bad thing.

wolfen

 

[Jhyrryl]

Where exactly is the Greater Wounding enchantment listed in the MM2 Web stuff?

It's on page 4 for of the Monster Manual II conversion document for 3.5. The original stats were in the MMII book itself, under the kelvezu entry - it's a standard property of their weapons.

 

[James McMurray]

You'd still have to win the grapple checks to attack with that weapon. And even then you cannot use two weapons, as grapple forbids that AFAIK.

Actually, if you use the "Attack Your Opponent" option you just make your normal attacks at -4. You are right in that you can't use two weapons though.

Of course, grappling is a defense against wounding weapons in that it lets the <i>grappler</i> use their opponent's wounding weapons against them with an opposed grapple check and an attack roll.

 

[Technik4]

My .02

Seems like Wounding is a property that gets more powerful depending on how many party members exploit it. For instance, clerics and wizards prepare buffs for 1st-2nd round, rogues, fighters, and misc all have wounding weapons. Gang up on 1 guy for a round, inflicting some good wounding damage, then move on and let the spellcasters zap em.

While wounding does have its weaknesses, for a +2 it makes a good back-up weapon (since we all need back-up weapons thanks to material DR anyway). I still think a wounding bow is the sickest application, they tend to get the most full-round attacks and even at low levels rapid shot allows for more attacks than usual.

And I think that while it is powerful, it would not be worth a +3 enhancement, so I deem it on the high side of +2. Also, very nice for rogues with crippling strike and 2wf, reducing an enemy by 1 Str and 1 Con every hit is pretty nice...

Technik

 

[Beholder Bob]

"Wounding: A wounding weapon deals 1 point of Constitution damage from blood loss when it hits a creature. A critical hit does not multiply the Constitution damage. Creatures immune to critical hits (such as plants and constructs) are immune to the Constitution damage dealt by this weapon."

Well - I see only one change needed to make this weapon modifier balanced and reasonable.

"...deals 1 point of temporary Constitution damage from blood loss when it hits a creature AND DAMAGES IT..."

Now, damage reduction is a serious problem for it, a reasonable weakness without making it worthless. Otherwise, it beats any damage reduction even if the weapon itself can not scratch your foe. Bleeding to death without a cut, by the way, is a very embarrassing way to go.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Well - I see only one change needed to make this weapon modifier balanced and reasonable.

It's already covered by the "special effects accompanying an attack" clause of Damage Reduction.

-Hyp.

 

[Snipehunt]

AFAIK you lose your head whether you're crit'able or not. Those without a head and those who don't care whether they have a head or not won't mind the loss of the head, but any PC will die, Armor of Fort or not

(They have clarified that abilities that work only on crits fire even if the enemy is immune to crits. So A fiery burst weapon will still give the extra damage to undead and so on. This should apply to Vorpal as well)

Is that another FAQ/Errata? Sounds like the right rule, but I can't find anything in the books that actually spell out the right result.

 

[coyote6]

Is that another FAQ/Errata? Sounds like the right rule, but I can't find anything in the books that actually spell out the right result.

It's in the most recent (#311, IIRC) Dragon's Sage Advice, and it's also in the description of the weapon abilities in the DMG 3.5e (page 222). It's also in the 3.5e SRD:

Magic Weapons and Critical Hits: Some weapon qualities and some specific weapons have an extra effect on a critical hit. This special effect functions against creatures not subject to critical hits, such as undead, elementals, and constructs. When fighting against such creatures, roll for critical hits as you would against humanoids or any other creature subject to critical hits. On a successful critical roll, apply the special effect, but do not multiply the weapon’s regular damage.

The DMG passage specifically mentions flaming burst weapons.

 

[Celtavian]

re

Where exactly is the Greater Wounding enchantment listed in the MM2 Web stuff?
I looked, but couldn't find it in the 2 MM2 articles I have.

I see a monster that has a Wounding weapon, but haven't found the Greater Wounding weapon statted out yet.

It's in the accessory book that updates the MM 2 to 3.5. It is a weapon wielded by a Kelevzu (not sure I spelled it right). It is at the start of the text, just before it starts listing alternate Monster stats. Check it out.