Energy Enhancements are too good at +1 (math)

[Nail]

Lol

 

[Murazor]

Personally I think pros and cons of the energy enhancements even out in the end: A nice amount of extra damage, but only if your opponent doesn't have energy resistance to that type.

The problem as I see it, is that putting a plain +X on your weapon is nigh useless, because of the Greater Magic Weapon spell. Unless you are afraid of getting your weapon sundered or somesuch, it is usually a much better choice to just have one of the party spellcasters put a GMW on your weapon. For a mere 9k or 16k (dependant if the GMW is cast by a Sor/Wiz or Clr) invested in a Pearl of Power, you can have your weapon be equivalent to much more expensive weapon (as the cost of weapons is quadratic)

 

[The Souljourner]

People say that energy resistance is a big downside to the energy enchantments.. but what about damage reduction? It goes right through that, and "any kind of damage reduction" is a lot more common in my experience than one specific type of energy resistance. As for the standard action to activate... anyone who's walking through a dungeon without his flaming sword activated is an idiot (or a rogue sneaking, I guess).

Still... it's not a big deal most of the time.

I think the energy enchantments should be more like 1.5-ish or so. The 24 average damage per hit needed to equal out a +1 enhancement with it is pretty hard to attain before 14th or so level. Even a 12th level fighter with greater specialization, greatsword, and 24 strength only does 21 on average.

-The Souljourner

 

[Stalker0]

As people are talking about +1 being a little too low, how are the numbers if 1d4 was used....would that translate to a better +1 ability?

 

[Staffan]

As people are talking about +1 being a little too low, how are the numbers if 1d4 was used....would that translate to a better +1 ability?

The psionic version, psychokinetic, uses 1d4 instead. However, that's non-elemental damage, so it doesn't get hit by either DR or energy resistance.

 

[Nail]

The problem I see with +1d4? Having to roll that most hated of all die: the d4!

 

[maggot]

The real advantage of a +1 flaming longsword over a +2 longsword is that when they are buffed up with greater magical weapon (at say 12th level), the flaming longsword becomes a +3 flaming longsword while the +2 longsword just becomes a +3 longsword. Because of this one spell (greater magical weapon), I've never seen any character create a magical weapon with more than +1. But they create +1 flaming dragon-bane.

Keen has the same problem. The keen edge spell and the scabard or keen edges make it unnecessary to build keen into a weapon. (Not to mention in 3.5 keen doesn't stack with the feat improved critical.)

 

[FreeTheSlaves]

The problem I see with +1d4? Having to roll that most hated of all die: the d4!

In all seriousness I agree. My fingers are not dextrous, the thing doesn't roll in my hand, sometimes I flick it halfway across the room, it falls to the floor & instantly transforms into a vicious caltrop. I'd gladly suffer a d6 for that trouble, heck even a d8.

 

[The Souljourner]

Yes, d4s suck, however, I think that probably makes it a lot more balanced.

let's see

(DAMAGE + 2.5) * (TO-HIT%) = (DAMAGE + 1) * (TO-HIT% + .05)

With to-hit = 50%

.5d + 1.25 = .55d + .55
.7 = .05 d
14 = d

14 damage on average when you have 50% to hit is a much more reasonable number.

It means that you actually have a *chance* to do that much damage with a one handed weapon, as opposed to *requiring* a two handed weapon to make it happen.

-The Souljourner

 

[Nail]

An interesting comparison?

assume Ftr 8, full attack, Str 21, Focus & specialization

includes iterative attacks and criticals

                        25% hit    50% Hit    75% Hit
longsword +2:            5.2        12.6       20.0
longsword +1, +1d6 fire  5.1        12.9       21.6
longsword +1, +1d4 fire  4.8        12.2       20.3

I'm not sure a +1d4 energy weapon is worth a +1 enhancement......