trentonjoe
Explorer
Would a double weapon that does 2d6/2d6 but only criticals on a 20 and does times 2 damage be to good?
Exotic weapon
- Thread starter trentonjoe
- Start date
trentonjoe said:
Two rules would probably make this playable:
1. The character who wields this monstrosity has to have a strength score of 18, or he can hardly pick it up. Even with a strength of 18 a character will suffer a -5 to his attack rolls with this weapon. The only exception to this rule is if a Large (or bigger) creature handles it.
2. The weapon is so unwieldy that the character with this weapon always acts last in the initiative order. Every round. Even when handled by a Large (or bigger) creature the weapon remains too clumsy to avoid this second penalty.
With these changes I would give it a green flag. I would even allow the weapon to have a critical threat range of 19-20/x2. We are, after all, basically looking at a two-bladed sword that uses Great Sword damage instead of Longsword damage.
Last edited:
CCamfield
First Post
Even 1d10/1d10 sounds like too much damage to me. Bludgeoning weapons tend to have a lousier critical range (20/x2), but I guess the ability to smash skeletons and the like is supposed to compensate (I don't know). They don't tend to do more damage than the equivalent slashing weapon.
Since the two-bladed sword does 1d8/1d8 and the dire flail does 1d8/1d8, I don't think the damage should go above that for a medium-sized double weapon.
Since the two-bladed sword does 1d8/1d8 and the dire flail does 1d8/1d8, I don't think the damage should go above that for a medium-sized double weapon.
CCamfield said:
Um...well, it is clearly stated here that both of those weapons you used as examples are Two-Handed Melee Weapons, which is to say Large, by the 3.0 rules. Anyway, why should we restrict the damage if one is willing to take some penalties in return? I have seen much worse weapons; such as the War Cleaver in Relics and Rituals. Now that thing is scary!
Inconsequenti-AL
Breaks Games
trentonjoe said:
IMO, it's basically a huge double longsword. A double greatsword if you will. I'd change the crit range to 19-20/*2 and make it a requirement of size large to wield it.
I'd encourage someone to buy a doublesword and simply describe it as being really large. Or if they want this effect, get friendly with the enlarge spell.
Inconsequenti-AL
Breaks Games
I almost forgot. 
Proviso, I think people should include whatever works into their games - if swords that do 300D6 or magic missiles with death effects are the right thing then I think thats great.
However:
Pet Hate Rant
I heartily dislike a lot of the 3rd party weapons (and some of the stuff from Sword and Fist). The players guide weapons follow a simple system... don't understand why other stuff can't stick to it or at least reasonably close to it. Relics and Rituals cleaver is a prime example of a badly designed weapon, imo.
Basically as you go from simple>martial>exotic, you get an improvement for each level.
An improvement is an increase in damage, an increase in crit range OR multiplier or a special ability.
eg
medium weapons
heavy mace > Longsword > bastard sword
D8 20 *2 > D8 19-20*2 > D10 19-20 *2
OR
heavy mace > light flail
D8 20 *2 > D8 20 *2 + better trip
OR
heavy mace > warhammer
D8 20 *2 > D8 20 *3
OR
Longsword > Double sword
D8 19-20 *2 > D8 19-20 *2 + special (off hand is considered light).
Or you can muck about with these within a level
Longsword = Scimitar
D8 19-20 *2 = D6 18-20 *2
Increasing in size scales up the damage:
Shortsword > Longsword > Greatsword
D6 > D8 > 2D6
Hand Axe > Battle Axe > Greataxe
D6 > D8 > D12
Etc.
Nearly all the weapons there can be derived using this with a little bit of flexing to it: A couple of weapons do blur this a little, for example Mighty bows are pushing towards exotic weapons, imo. The finessable ability of rapiers is a borderline case...
In the case of the above big doublesword, if I had to allow it, I'd make it take 5 exotic feats to use as a normal double weapon.
1 = double sword
2 = main damage > D10
3 = main damage > 2D6
4 = off hand damage > D10
5 = off hand damage > 2D6
with a standard -4 nonproficiency penalty for each feat lacking.
/Pet Hate Rant
Edit: Formatting+sense
Proviso, I think people should include whatever works into their games - if swords that do 300D6 or magic missiles with death effects are the right thing then I think thats great.
However:
Pet Hate Rant
I heartily dislike a lot of the 3rd party weapons (and some of the stuff from Sword and Fist). The players guide weapons follow a simple system... don't understand why other stuff can't stick to it or at least reasonably close to it. Relics and Rituals cleaver is a prime example of a badly designed weapon, imo.
Basically as you go from simple>martial>exotic, you get an improvement for each level.
An improvement is an increase in damage, an increase in crit range OR multiplier or a special ability.
eg
medium weapons
heavy mace > Longsword > bastard sword
D8 20 *2 > D8 19-20*2 > D10 19-20 *2
OR
heavy mace > light flail
D8 20 *2 > D8 20 *2 + better trip
OR
heavy mace > warhammer
D8 20 *2 > D8 20 *3
OR
Longsword > Double sword
D8 19-20 *2 > D8 19-20 *2 + special (off hand is considered light).
Or you can muck about with these within a level
Longsword = Scimitar
D8 19-20 *2 = D6 18-20 *2
Increasing in size scales up the damage:
Shortsword > Longsword > Greatsword
D6 > D8 > 2D6
Hand Axe > Battle Axe > Greataxe
D6 > D8 > D12
Etc.
Nearly all the weapons there can be derived using this with a little bit of flexing to it: A couple of weapons do blur this a little, for example Mighty bows are pushing towards exotic weapons, imo. The finessable ability of rapiers is a borderline case...
In the case of the above big doublesword, if I had to allow it, I'd make it take 5 exotic feats to use as a normal double weapon.
1 = double sword
2 = main damage > D10
3 = main damage > 2D6
4 = off hand damage > D10
5 = off hand damage > 2D6
with a standard -4 nonproficiency penalty for each feat lacking.
/Pet Hate Rant
Edit: Formatting+sense
Last edited:
CCamfield
First Post
Ok, let me rein in my sarcasm and so forth...
Telperion, if you use the 3.5 conventions, two-bladed swords (etc) are referred to as Medium (two-handed) weapons, not "Large" any more.
As Inconsequent-Al said, this is basically a Large double weapon. For whatever reason (reduced enchantment costs?) it's not legal in 3.5 to monkey grip a larger-than-normal double weapon.
I suppose one could dual-wield monkey-gripped Large longswords, which would have a -6 penalty on attack rolls. Personally, I don't like the Monkey Grip feat; I think it's really goddamn cheesy.
Putting in requirements as opposed to penalties is clearly not the way WotC designed the system. Strength requirements are nowhere to be found, nor initiative penalties (which are not really a big deal after the first round anyhow, since there's no split between declaration and action.)
Telperion, if you use the 3.5 conventions, two-bladed swords (etc) are referred to as Medium (two-handed) weapons, not "Large" any more.
As Inconsequent-Al said, this is basically a Large double weapon. For whatever reason (reduced enchantment costs?) it's not legal in 3.5 to monkey grip a larger-than-normal double weapon.
I suppose one could dual-wield monkey-gripped Large longswords, which would have a -6 penalty on attack rolls. Personally, I don't like the Monkey Grip feat; I think it's really goddamn cheesy.
Putting in requirements as opposed to penalties is clearly not the way WotC designed the system. Strength requirements are nowhere to be found, nor initiative penalties (which are not really a big deal after the first round anyhow, since there's no split between declaration and action.)
AeroDm
First Post
I'd allow it as a huge weapon. This means that the player needs Monkey Grip as well as Two-weapon fighting as well as Exotic. Three feats to wield a very potent weapon. I'd also rule that the off-hand is NOT considered light in this case because, to be frank, it is really damn heavy.
Two-weapon fighting is optimal when using two of the same weapon when both are light, or one double weapon. This way you end with only -2/-2 and feats apply to both attacks. This will end at -4/-4 and an additional -2/-2 for monkey grip (not to mention they took monkey grip). A -6 penalty to all attacks is harsh.
The other element to consider is for the DM. No book at the moment, but I know that greatsword is reminiscient of the two-handed sword which was 6' tall. A double (this weapon in question) would then be like 10-15' in length depending on pommels, blade lengths, etc. This is a cool image, but it is more suited to a Warcraft type campaign than a Midnight type campaign. I'd only allow this in a campaign where I felt it wouldn't quickly devolve into a joke.
Two-weapon fighting is optimal when using two of the same weapon when both are light, or one double weapon. This way you end with only -2/-2 and feats apply to both attacks. This will end at -4/-4 and an additional -2/-2 for monkey grip (not to mention they took monkey grip). A -6 penalty to all attacks is harsh.
The other element to consider is for the DM. No book at the moment, but I know that greatsword is reminiscient of the two-handed sword which was 6' tall. A double (this weapon in question) would then be like 10-15' in length depending on pommels, blade lengths, etc. This is a cool image, but it is more suited to a Warcraft type campaign than a Midnight type campaign. I'd only allow this in a campaign where I felt it wouldn't quickly devolve into a joke.
