Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Cap'n Kobold" data-source="post: 7349035" data-attributes="member: 6802951">The &quot;+0 weapons&quot; were as mentioned, a theoretical construct used to judge when it was appropriate for a party to have magical attacks with no bonus or equivalent enchantment. As you have said, simply penetrating magic resistance/immunity is a significant benefit, possibly on-par with the actual attack/damage bonus. When trying to judge utility/appropriate level for when to start introducing magic weapons to the PCs, it helps to at least think about when they should get one benefit rather than jumping straight in with two. Furthermore we have a baseline for no-bonus, but magical attacks from the Monk and Moon Druid to use as a guide for when they should get these theoretical +0 weapons, and so we can then start staging the +bonus (or equivalent weapons) over the later levels.Getting both magical attacks and a bonus to hit and damage on everything you fight is a significant power upgrade on just magical attacks, and thus it would be appropriate for characters to have to wait until several levels after level 6 (no-bonus magical attacks). If a +1 weapon is the lowest tier of magical weapon however, you may have to fudge this a bit and make them available earlier.&nbsp;I picked the longsword as an example of the middle ground between &quot;emergency backup only&quot; weapons and &quot;significantly more powerful when optimised&quot; weapons. If you're taking the more powerful weapons as the baseline, then just shuffle everything up a bit.&nbsp; <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />&nbsp; Fair enough. When it comes to the time for a more detailed breakdown however, I would suggest access to additional attacks would push glaives and handbows over greatswords.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Cap'n Kobold, post: 7349035, member: 6802951"] The "+0 weapons" were as mentioned, a theoretical construct used to judge when it was appropriate for a party to have magical attacks with no bonus or equivalent enchantment. As you have said, simply penetrating magic resistance/immunity is a significant benefit, possibly on-par with the actual attack/damage bonus. When trying to judge utility/appropriate level for when to start introducing magic weapons to the PCs, it helps to at least think about when they should get one benefit rather than jumping straight in with two. Furthermore we have a baseline for no-bonus, but magical attacks from the Monk and Moon Druid to use as a guide for when they should get these theoretical +0 weapons, and so we can then start staging the +bonus (or equivalent weapons) over the later levels. Getting both magical attacks [I]and [/I]a bonus to hit and damage on everything you fight is a significant power upgrade on just magical attacks, and thus it would be appropriate for characters to have to wait until several levels after level 6 (no-bonus magical attacks). If a +1 weapon is the lowest tier of magical weapon however, you may have to fudge this a bit and make them available earlier. I picked the longsword as an example of the middle ground between "emergency backup only" weapons and "significantly more powerful when optimised" weapons. If you're taking the more powerful weapons as the baseline, then just shuffle everything up a bit. :) Fair enough. When it comes to the time for a more detailed breakdown however, I would suggest access to additional attacks would push glaives and handbows over greatswords. [/QUOTE]

Verification