Negative Zero said:y'know, the so called "game balance" argment is just the ultimate GMs tool for telling a player "nyah-nyah you ca-an't haaave it!"
seriously tho, DnD IS a min-maxer's game. always has been. (at least 3.0 which is the bulk of my DnD experience always has been.) the DnD system assumes that the characters will specialise. and that different specialties will come together to make a great fighting whole. heck there was even min-maxing advice in the back oh my PHB.
the idea that somehow you were a "munchkin" if you were specialised in combat simply came about when some of us got older and started getting tired/bored with simply killing things. there is nothing wrong with powerful weapons. unless of course you've "graduated" to more social games. in which case, just don't use 'em.
Correct. Personally I think the errata'd mercurial greatsword is kind of silly, but if a player wanted one I'd be happy to let them. (Indeed, I might say the same pre-errata, if I got to errata it myself. ) I think DMs should still be able to say "no" sometimes, however.If a player want an item then it is up to the player and the Gm to come to terms. Game balance it ultimately in the DM hand. if the party is tough then you just add a few more mobs . If the game master feels some how a weapon is unbalancing there are lots of ways to bring the game in balance, .The game is about both the players and the game master creating a good game right?
Carceri said:It isn't so much JUST the mercurial greatsword as it is the character wielding it. Ok, let me give you an example of what the character wielding one of these in the campaign I am running. He's a half-orc fighter/weapon master; with feats that are geared towards getting the most he possibly can out the particular weapon he uses (improved crit, power critical, specialization). I don't think some of you are taking into account such things when seriously weighing the differences between a standard greatsword wielder and a mercurial greatsword wielder.
DiFier said:My problem with the Mecurial great sword is definitally concept. The idea works great for chopping off heads that are on a chopping block. but I think that there would be a problem with overextention. you don't have to worry about overextention when you are chopping off a head as an executioner. but when you are using it in a fight it would be all wacky. most swords ballance very close to the hilt. I think that they should have left the Mecurial great sword as it was originally but added that when you use it against an apponint who treatens you, they get an attack of opertunity. if you attack someone, hit or miss, you open yourself up to an AoO. makes sence to me. I don't think too many people would take it with that stipulation.
(Psi)SeveredHead said:... Yes, DnD is a "munchkin's paradise" since the game designers can't possibly fix every abuse. ...
Carceri said:I feel the mercurial greatsword is the most broken weapon I've ever seen.
Why do their center of balances shift too?
Carceri said:Thank you all for your responses and your input, and thanks for welcoming me to the forum. So the mercurial greatsword is from a story that is basically more of a sci-fi/fantasy genre than a straight up fantasy genre? I always did get the impression of 'Final Fantasy' when I considered the merc greatsword.
Anyway, I suppose some of us can agree to disagree, but I feel the mercurial greatsword is the most broken weapon I've ever seen. Drawing comparisons to a scythe...hmmm... ok, I see your point somewhat, but I think I'd rather see someone trying to abuse a scythe (as silly as it may look) than a merc greatsword. It isn't so much JUST the mercurial greatsword as it is the character wielding it. Ok, let me give you an example of what the character wielding one of these in the campaign I am running. He's a half-orc fighter/weapon master; with feats that are geared towards getting the most he possibly can out the particular weapon he uses (improved crit, power critical, specialization). I don't think some of you are taking into account such things when seriously weighing the differences between a standard greatsword wielder and a mercurial greatsword wielder.
Yes, the threat range is lower on a merc greatsword, but a merc greatsword crit has more potential to kill a foe in one blow than a standard greatsword does. I don't even think a greataxe is as deadly.
I thank you for some of your suggestions, but I do not know as though I can bring myself to sunder a character's favorite weapon. That isn't normally what I like to do and I don't think I've ever used the Sunder ability on a player yet. Sundering is not as easy as it sounds to begin with anyway. As I stated previously, this particular merc greatsword is magical; a mercurial greatsword of the planes. It just so happens that the creatures that they are fighting most of the time are outsiders, and none of them wield +4 or better weapons.
And take one that's entirely full of water and hit something, and you'll do even more damage. The idea behind the mercurial sword is that when you hold it point-up, the mercury is in the handle, putting the center of gravity there. When you swing it, the mercury flows toward the point moving the CoG along with it, providing "free" momentum. The half-full bottle experiment shows that you do not gain this free momentum, because of pesky things like the first law of thermodynamics (aka "There is no such thing as a free lunch").SpikeyFreak said:Edit: Yes, do a little experiment. Take an empty 2-liter bottle and hit your computer with it as hard as you can. Now take one half-full and do it. See which one does more damage.
I don't think Carceri has been listening to the nuts-and-bolts of the errated Mercurial Greatsword as mentioned by Chun-tzu, ColonelHardisson, and the first guy (sorry). I don't think Carceri has been listening to the nuts-and-bolts of the errated Mercurial Greatsword as mentioned by Chun-tzu, ColonelHardisson, and the first guy (sorry).
It was statistically proven (as I remember) that the MG was not unbalanced in comparison to a boring old greatsword, especially when having to burn a feat to use it properly.
The maxed-out weapon master concept has been done, many times. It's not overpowered. Critical hits have their share of limitations, so a character based on maxing crits is going to be effective, but not super-effective.
Even with the errata? Many felt that the errata for the weapon made it balanced. This is the official errata for it from Wizards of the Coast: