Bladed Gauntlet and Mercurial Greatsword shafted by senseless errata!?

[XCorvis]

That is why the mercurial greatsword was deemed to be too powerful. Unlike every other exotic weapon, it has two improvements for the cost of the feat, instead of a single improvement.

That and it's downright idiotic in concept. A sword filled with mercury? What a joke.

The reason that those two weapons were downgraded in the errata is because they were better than any other melee weapons. Bladed gauntlets had the widest crit range (which combined especially horribly with vorpal) and the mercurial greatsword can inflict more damage than any other weapon, on average or with a single hit. In a word, both are unbalancing.

 

[Anubis]

Exotic weapons are exotic for one of three reasons: Either they have a one step improvement in some game mechanic, have an extra ability as compared to similar weapons, or they are just very unusual.

A kukri is a dagger with a one step improvement in the crit range. (19-20 -> 18-20)

A Bastard Sword is a longsword with a 1 step improvement in damage. (1d8 -> 1d10)

A mercurial greatsword was a greatsword with a 1 step improvement in damage and a one step improvement in the crit range. 19-20/x2 is equivalent to x3, and the Mercurial greatsword improved that to x4.

That is why the mercurial greatsword was deemed to be too powerful. Unlike every other exotic weapon, it has two improvements for the cost of the feat, instead of a single improvement.

Forget about "steps of improvement". What about the fact that the mercurial greatsword only does 34.41% more damage than the greatsword which is only slightly better than the bastard sword's 22.22% improvedment over the longsword? What about the fact that the greatsword is 55.55% better than the shortspear?

You must scale improvements by size and type more than by similarity.

 

[Anubis]

That and it's downright idiotic in concept. A sword filled with mercury? What a joke.

The reason that those two weapons were downgraded in the errata is because they were better than any other melee weapons. Bladed gauntlets had the widest crit range (which combined especially horribly with vorpal) and the mercurial greatsword can inflict more damage than any other weapon, on average or with a single hit. In a word, both are unbalancing.

Neither is unbalancing. Arguing that they are better than every other weapon does not mean that they are unbalanced. Take them out, and the rapier, scimitar, greataxe, and greatsword are now better than every other weapon. (The rapier and scimitar have the widest threat ranges, while the greataxe and greatsword do the most damage.)

That argument is illogical. Neither are unbalancing, even if they appear to be. In your example, the Vorpal ability is what is unbalancing, not the weapons. (The Vorpal ability is so unbalancing that most people ban it from play or change it completely.)

 

[Caliban]

Forget about "steps of improvement".

No. That is how the weapon creation system works. Each size category only gives you a certain range of damage dice and crit ranges. You get an increase when you go from simple to martial, and another increase when you go from martial to exotic. That's pretty much the way it works, if you examine the weapons in the PHB.

What about the fact that the mercurial greatsword only does 34.41% more damage than the greatsword which is only slightly better than the bastard sword's 22.22% improvedment over the longsword?

That only proves my point. It's more than 10% better, for the cost of a single feat. That means it has a better benefit for the same cost.

What about the fact that the greatsword is 55.55% better than the shortspear?

That's the difference between martial and simple weapons.

You must scale improvements by size and type more than by similarity.

You play it your way, but the fact is that the mercurial weapons offered a greater improvement for that feat than any of the other exotic weapons.

 

[Crothian]

Actually they are unbalanced because they alone are the best. You pointed out many weapons that share similiar stats. THere are no other weapons that share the crit range or damage of these weapons.

"What about the fact that the greatsword is 55.55% better than the shortspear? "

That is just funny. I really don't see why you are comparing a spear with a sword. And why are you comparing damage percentages. THe game isn't balanced by that. I still think your assumptions of how EWP is greatly flawed.

 

[Anubis]

There is one more limitation to the mercurial weapons. They are VERY RARE. At least that is how they should be played, if you run a logical campaign. IMC, the mercurial weapons were part of a huge side quest that involved the bad guys creating the mercurial weapons and teaching their soldiers how to use them.

To this day, however, there has only been ONE person proficient in the mercurial longsword and ONE person proficient in the mercurial greatsword. They can't even be bought in stores, and no one knows how to train people to use them.

Also, after an incident at a big tournament, the mercurial weapons were banned from tournament competition.

Sure, this may all be house ruling, but that works far better than the faulty errata.

 

[Anubis]

Actually they are unbalanced because they alone are the best. You pointed out many weapons that share similiar stats. THere are no other weapons that share the crit range or damage of these weapons.

"What about the fact that the greatsword is 55.55% better than the shortspear? "

That is just funny. I really don't see why you are comparing a spear with a sword. And why are you comparing damage percentages. THe game isn't balanced by that. I still think your assumptions of how EWP is greatly flawed.

You think?

I have playtested all of this IMC, and I have seen NOTHING that unbalances gameplay regarding these two weapons. I have heard nothing of others having problems either.

The fact is that Haste, Improved Invisibility, Teleport, Iajutsu Focus, and other such things have had MUCH more impact than the mercurial greatsword and the bladed gauntlet.

 

[Caliban]

There is one more limitation to the mercurial weapons. They are VERY RARE. At least that is how they should be played, if you run a logical campaign. IMC, the mercurial weapons were part of a huge side quest that involved the bad guys creating the mercurial weapons and teaching their soldiers how to use them.

Don't use roleplaying limitations to balance game mechanic benefits.

To this day, however, there has only been ONE person proficient in the mercurial longsword and ONE person proficient in the mercurial greatsword. They can't even be bought in stores, and no one knows how to train people to use them.

Also, after an incident at a big tournament, the mercurial weapons were banned from tournament competition.

Hmm... seems the tournament officials agree with most of the DM's out there.

Sure, this may all be house ruling, but that works far better than the faulty errata.

The errata was not faulty. It brought them in line with the range of improvements from other exotic weapons.

Even with the errata, the Mercurial Greatsword is an improvement over a regular greatsword. (Although I would have preferred 19-20/x3 instead of just x4.)

 

[Crothian]

You think?

I have playtested all of this IMC, and I have seen NOTHING that unbalances gameplay regarding these two weapons. I have heard nothing of others having problems either.

The fact is that Haste, Improved Invisibility, Teleport, Iajutsu Focus, and other such things have had MUCH more impact than the mercurial greatsword and the bladed gauntlet.

The spells are limited in their use. The weapons can always be used. Iajutsu was specifically made for a certain setting and outside that setting it will cause problems. Not everything should be considered universal.

You've heard nothing of other people's problems? Search the boards and you will find many complaints. I'm not one of them. Personally, I think nothin really unbalnces the game. As DM I can easily keep up with anything the PCs think of.

 

[Pielorinho]

There is one more limitation to the mercurial weapons. They are VERY RARE. At least that is how they should be played, if you run a logical campaign.

Well, if you play in one kind of logical campaign, they should be VERY RARE because they are VERY SILLY.

If you play in another kind of logical campaign, they should be VERY COMMON: they're more effective than any other weapon out there, so most fighters should get their grubby paws on a Mercurial Greatsword as soon as they can afford it. Even if it requries a feat to learn, feats are cheap for fighters. If the technology allows this weapon, then a fighter who trains in the mercurial greatsword will (all things being equal) be more effective than the fighter who trains in the regular greatsword. Natural selection will soon prevail.

Daniel