Energy Enhancements are too good at +1 (math)

Nail said:
Er.....that's the point.

"Is Flaming a +1 or a +2 power?" .....so compare greatsword +3 to a Greatsword +1, flaming.
well then +2 is obviously better and so theoretically that would make energized 1.5?
but practically you have the same problem
 

log in or register to remove this ad

You're right, I forgot to take into account the fact that the energy damage is also affected by the to-hit rate when talking about damage per swing, and that +5% is a lot bigger difference in damage when you otherwise hit only 50% of the time.

Undo undo... not paying attention....

-The Souljourner
 
Last edited:





Stalker0 said:
He's saying that while flaming might be slightly better than a +1, its much worse than a +2...so you should keep it in the +1 category.
Bingo!

Thanks, Stalker0! Yer much clearer tha' I is. <yuck, yuck> :o
 

frankthedm said:
Of course you hear quite often about the creative [ab]uses players try with magical storage devices to try and avoid said activation in combat.
Um ... I'm pretty sure the energy enhancement descriptions themselves say that an activated energy weapon can be stored without harming the wielder or the scabbard (or whatever).
 

Jeff Wilder said:
Um ... I'm pretty sure the energy enhancement descriptions themselves say that an activated energy weapon can be stored without harming the wielder or the scabbard (or whatever).
Not so much.

It is implied, tho':

Flaming: Upon command, a flaming weapon is sheathed in fire. The fire does not harm the wielder. The effect remains until another command is given. A flaming weapon deals an extra 1d6 points of fire damage on a successful hit.
 


Remove ads

Top