Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="evilishmael" data-source="post: 5004761" data-attributes="member: 86266">Ok, Let me get this straight... The major point of contention is that when a flaming burst weapon with a critical multiplier of greater than X2 comes into play... do we REPLACE the + 1d6 with +2d10? OR do we ADD +1d6 to +2d10?  From what I understand, the rules imply the FIRST scenario.(DMG 3.5 Page 224 "If the weapon's critical multiplier is x3, add an extra 2d10 points of fire damage INSTEAD, [...]) I also understand from reading these threads, that at somepoint, Monte Cooke expressed that is was the 2nd Scenario that should apply in this case. So let's look at an example... Let's take a Longsword VS Warhammer assuming +1 enhancement bonus on both weapons and no strength bonus. Longsword Crit threat on 19-20x2 Normal: 1d8+1 [Maximum DMG = 9 pts]Normal Critical: 2d8+2 [Maximum DMG = 18 pts]Flaming: (1d8+1) + 1d6 fire [Maximum DMG = 15 pts]Flaming Critical: (2d8+2) + 1d6 fire [Maximum DMG = 24 pts]Flaming Burst Normal: Same as Flaming.Flaming Burst Critical According to Monte Cooke: (1d8+1) + 1d6 + 1d10 [Maximum DMG = 25 pts] Flaming Burst Critical According to Rules as explained: (1d8+1) + 1d6 + 1d10 [Maximum DMG = 25 pts] Warhammer Crit threat on 20x3 only Normal: 1d8 +1 [Maximum DMG = 9 pts]Normal Critical: 3d8+3 [Maximum DMG = 27 pts]Flaming: (1d8+1) + 1d6 fire [Maximum DMG =  15 pts]Flaming Critical: (3d8+3) + 1d6 fire [Maximum DMG = 33 pts]Flaming Burst Normal: Same as Flaming.Flaming Burst Critical According to Monte Cooke: (1d8+1) + 1d6 + 2d10 [Maximum DMG =  35 pts]Flaming Burst Critical According to Rules as explained: (1d8+1) + 2d10 [Maximum DMG = 29 pts] First off, is this right? Is my understanding of how this is supposed to work correct? Second, Here is what I notice due to this rule set... A) For a longsword, why does the "flaming burst critical" only do 1 point more of potential damage than the "flaming longsword critical"?This seems a minor improvement for something that costs so much more in gold value. It doesn't matter whos method you use here, Cooke's or the normal rule's version. The problem lies in the fact that a "flaming burst critical" DOESN'T Multiply the weapon's normal damage. (DMG 3.5 Pg 222) B) Again, the Warhammer has only the same modest improvement from flaming critical to "flaming burst critical". Only a +2 damage improvement. This is kind of small when you consider the cost of a flaming burst weapon. This is again due to the fact that a flaming burst critical DOESN'T Multiply the weapon's normal damage.  C)  With regards to whether you should use Monte Cooke's version for critical multipliers greater than x2 in regards to burst weapon critical hits; the answer is Yes use Cooke's version.  Monte Cooke's version gives a Warhammer 2 more points of "umph" when striking a "flaming burst critical" compared to a "flaming critical". The normal rules give a Warhammer's "flaming burst critical" 4 LESS points than a "flaming critical". This makes no sense, a flaming burst damage should always do more damage than a flaming weapon in the event of a critical hit.  So that solves that issue. However, it doesn't solve the problem that paying the extra gold for a "flaming burst" weapon hardly seems worth the cost when compared to regulare "flaming weapon". So any thoughts on this?</blockquote>

Verification