Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Grayhawk" data-source="post: 1426571" data-attributes="member: 11288">First, let me say that different weapon itterations only make any sense if they actually affect your number of attacks, and that to me this is the best way of mechanically addressing the idea that some weapons can be swung quicker than others. Still, I feel that the implementation we currently are discussing is flawed, as it lets smaller weapons out damage the bigger ones (IMO the biggets weapons should have the highest damage potential).Khaalis, your calculations are a bit off. The average on a d4 is 2.5, not 2, etc.Your example of comparing the 7 attacks from a dagger with the 4 attacks from a greatsword for someone with a Str of 18, is exactly the same I used in post #22 on the first page of this thread (except I used Greater Weapon Specialization):IMO, the benefit of dealing out 4.5 more points of damage on average per swing - the difference between a dagger's 2.5 and a greatsword's 7 - is outweighed by the greater flexibility of more attacks. Granted, higher damage per swing lets you bypass DR easier, but with higher damage comes the risk of greater 'damage overflow' (wasted damage). Why isn't Str damage multiplied on crits? Is that a special rule for this system?I agree. Currently I have a houserule in effect where a weapon can't get a higher Str bonus to damage than it's max base damage (and I'm not using the 'different BAB itteration' rule we're discussing). This way, a dagger has a max Str bonus of +4, a greatsword has a max of +12. I'm aware that this variant won't work for most games out there, but in my game a Str over 18 is very rare, and I like the idea of having to pick up a big weapon to properly benefit from exceptional strength.</blockquote>

Verification