Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="mneme" data-source="post: 5695549" data-attributes="member: 59248">Frankly, I don't have that much problem with a vorpal axe (or even gouge) at level 6.  Call it a rare item -- but you can push the power curve a -lot- without breaking stuff.  Consider that in 3.5, we spent most of the campaign (1-17) with a box that would let you double-shrink things and people permanently (until dismissed or dispelled) (so all our casters were getting +4 to hit and AC) and a sword that could cut through solid stone and let us pull all sorts of crazy shenatigans.  A sword that gives you a mere +.5 or so per die (iirc this is always what it gives, -regardless- of die size, until you manage brutal, and even then it has to be brutal on a a small die to really matter) doesn't even rank.[ Ok, not quite.  I forgot about the +1 on the initial equasion, eg: let X = the die size let Y(X) = average damage for a vorpal weapon with a die size of X. The average damage for a vorpal weapon (no brutal) = (X+1/2) + 1/X (chance of rolling max) * (Y(X)). If you do a bit of algebra, you get the damage being the sum of two infinite series: [** is to the power of, for non programmers] (X+1)*sum(1/2X**Z as Z goes from 0 to infinity)This is about where I run out of math, though; I mean, we know that the convergence of powers of 2 is 1 -- so if we calculate this for flipping a coin(d2), we get: 3*sum(convergence of powers of 2), so an average of 3 (1.5 up from the normal average of a d2 of 1.5). It's easy to tell that the convergence will go down with die size, so the -maximum- you can get per die (without brutal) is that 1.5 on a d2.   With a quick perl program [sub conv { my ($root,$sum,$count,$max) = @_; $count++;$count > $max and return $sum; return conv($root, $sum + 1/($root ** ($count)),$count,$max) } for(1..12) { print "$_: ",conv($_,0,0,5000),"\n"}] I can hand you the converce of any die size, and they decend radically as die size decreases.   So:2: 14: 1/36: 1/58:.1410: 1/912: 1/11]Regarding charging:Roundabout Charge doesn't do anything any more.  It was written to change the rules that said you had to pick a square that was "closest" and charge to there -- but you don't have to do that any more.  It doesn't directly override the rule about each step taking you closer, so it doesn't.  (a fine house rule would be to say that you could pick a square closest to the target and ignore the "each step taking you closer" rule.  A much better house rule for Roundabout, IMO, would be "your charge may include any movement whatsover -- except that the last two squares moved must take you closer to the target".  This would mean that you could make "roundabout" charges with this feat, where you went in a little circle or whatnot -- but it would still feel like a charge, as the last two steps would be a functional charge.No, the charge through the creature is pure shenigans.  See above.I'll note, btw, that while the rationale has changed, it's still technically possible for a creature to be two squares away from an enemy and still be unable to legally charge it.  If you're at 0,0, and the critters at 3,3, with blocking terrain or enemies on 2,2 and 1,1 (or even better, a large block covering the four squares in the center), you cannot charge, as even though 0,0 to 0,1 takes you effectively closer(4 squares of movement away to 3 squares), you "count through blocking terrain" so it's not a legal charge movement.  Personally, I'd rule this the other way just out of fairness, but  @<a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/member.php?u=71571" target="_blank">DracoSuave</a>  (to pick someone who I know runs strictly by the book) would almost certainly disallow it.</blockquote>

Verification