How Would You Stat Out This Weapon?

AFGNCAAP · Dec 31, 2003

I'm trying to figure out the best way to stat out this weapon for D&D--I'm not sure if anyone has already provided stats for it for 3.X (I know I've seen stats for it for 2nd ed. in a Dragon article once).

Overall, the falcata's a slashing weapon just over 2 feet long (25 inches from point to pommel; the blade is 20 inches long). It has a forward curve just like a kukri.

First off, would this be an exotic weapon or a martial one? I think the kukri was an exotic weapon in 3.0, but is now a martial weapon in 3.5--what would you say?

Second, would you consider this a light weapon? It's just about short sword size (for a Medium creature).

Third, would you simply just treat it as a larger version of a kukri (maybe it deals damage as a Large kukri, but it sized for a Medium creature, etc.)?

I'd appreciate any info/advice/links that you could provide.

LGodamus · Dec 31, 2003

I would just use a khukri stats.....cause the falcata isnt really any larger than a khukri..... I have a Khukri under my bed and I use to have a falcata replica...they are pretty similar in balance and usage and I would guess damage.

jgsugden · Dec 31, 2003

Simple/martial/exotic is more a measure of power than a measure of ease of use. The more powerful the weapon is, the more exotic is should be. If the (medium size version of this) weapon does d6 damage, criticals on a 19-20, does slashing damage and acts as a light weapon, I'd call it a martial weapon.

Hypersmurf · Dec 31, 2003

Yeah - a kukri was Exotic in 3E and Martial in 3.5 because it was more powerful in 3E, due to the difference in the weapon sizing systems.

Mechanically, in 3E, a kukri was a Tiny scimitar with the damage of a Small scimitar, so it's Exotic.

In 3.5, it's a 'light' scimitar with the damage of a 'light' scimitar. It's balanced, so it's Martial.

If you make your falcata a Light 18-20x2 weapon that does 1d6 damage, it's Exotic. If it does 1d4 damage, it's Martial.

-Hyp.

Aaron2 · Jan 1, 2004

I treat similar weapons as a martial one-handed 1d8 20/*3 weapon. Light is more of a measure of weight than size and these weapon were heavy for their length to increase their chopping power.

Aaron

Tetsubo · Jan 1, 2004

From Stone To Steel (Monkeygod Enterprises) gives the following 3.0 stats:

Falcata (Small, Martial) 13 gp, 2d3, 18-2-/x2, 10.5 lbs, Type S, Medium, Hardness/HP 6/32.

This is a great weapons and armour book. They will be publishing a 3.5 version and providing a conversion document for those of us that bought the 3.0 printing.

James McMurray · Jan 1, 2004

2d3? Why on earthw ould anyone want to use a weapon that does 2d3 damage?

I'd say to just give it a kukri's stats, or up it to a d6 damage and make it exotic.

Intrope · Jan 1, 2004

I'd just call it a short sword, and give it Slash damage type. For that matter, Short Swords as Piercing is debatable anyway; as I understood it, the Roman Gladius that's the model for the D&D short sword was probably used as a slashing weapon anyway (based on wear patterns).

No need to complicate matters.

Camarath · Jan 1, 2004

James McMurray said:
2d3? Why on earth would anyone want to use a weapon that does 2d3 damage?

It is slightly better than 1d6 (2-6 average 4 vs 1-6 average 3.5) but is supposedly equivalent (2x3=6 and 1x6=6). Personally, I would rather go with 6d1 for my weapon if we are going to play the substute a few little dice for one big dice game.

James McMurray · Jan 1, 2004

Camarath said:
It is slightly better than 1d6 (2-6 average 4 vs 1-6 average 3.5) but is supposedly equivalent (2x3=6 and 1x6=6). Personally, I would rather go with 6d1 for my weapon if we are going to play the substute a few little dice for one big dice game.

LOL

I know its slightly better, but that .5 points of added damage doesn't (IMO) make up for the hassle of rolling two dice, dividing, and adding. Its just plain cumbersome.