Mercurial Greatsword

[BVB]

So where did the idea for a mercurial sword come from, anyway? Was it originally an element in a fantasy novel? I'd love to read more about it, if only I knew where to look ...

 

[A2Z]

So where did the idea for a mercurial sword come from, anyway? Was it originally an element in a fantasy novel? I'd love to read more about it, if only I knew where to look ...

Right, I'm going home. Why I even try...

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

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.

~NegZ

Sorry, I'm not good at deciphering jokes, sarcasm, etc.

Yes, DnD is a "munchkin's paradise" since the game designers can't possibly fix every abuse. I'm pretty sure they never dreamt of slaad farming.

I don't think there's a problem with players wanting to be powerful. However, I think players themselves know when something is balanced or not. They had to know the pre-errata'd mercurial greatsword and the 3.0 Archmage was broken.

Ken

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?
Ken

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.

 

[Chun-tzu]

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.

The Mercurial Greatsword has been discussed a few times before on these boards, and the general consensus has been that the errata'd version is very balanced. Somone even did the math to prove it. Most people who object to it object to the concept, not to the numbers.

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.

If you're running a 3.5 game, then it's even less of an issue, because of how they nerfed crit maxing (keen effects don't stack with improved critical).

 

[DiFier]

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.

 

[totoro]

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.

Perhaps you better fix the orcish double axe, dwarven urgrosh, battle axe, and flail while you are at it.

 

[JoeGKushner]

If a player came up to me and wanted to play a character like Guts from the Berserk anime, I'd let him take this type of sword as long as he paid the proficiency for it.

 

[Negative Zero]

... Yes, DnD is a "munchkin's paradise" since the game designers can't possibly fix every abuse. ...

now i disagree. DnD isn't a "munchkin's paradise" because of the ability of people to find loopholes, it's that way because that's what is fun. and as a game, it's supposed to be fun.

seriously, how many movies/stories do you see out there written about mundane things? not a whole lot. the really fun ones are about the excepeional characters and/or the exceptional circumstances/situations they find themselves in.

RPGs in general, i think, try mostly to recreate that sort of cinematic/dramatic atmosphere. and you really can't do that with Joe Average. at least, I don't think so.

now i'm not saying that this is the only way to play the game, not at all, there are a very many ways to play, and as long as everyone playing is having fun, then all is good.

the point of my aimless and possibly pointless rambling, is that DnD is at its heart a min-maxer's game, coz that's the way heroes are built. each hero in myth/literature has a niche and fills it well, howver, often they are inadequate in other areas. DnD tries to recreate that.

~NegZ

 

[DiFier]

Perhaps you better fix the orcish double axe, dwarven urgrosh, battle axe, and flail while you are at it.

Why do their center of balances shift too?

 

[ColonelHardisson]

I feel the mercurial greatsword is the most broken weapon I've ever seen.

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:

"p. 70, Weapons Table: Mercurial longsword-Change damage from 1d10 to 1d8. Change crit from x3 to x4."

"p. 70, Weapons Table: Mercurial greatsword-Change damage from 2d8 to 2d6."

Get the full Sword and Fist errata document here:

http://www.wizards.com/dnd/article.asp?x=dnd/er/er20011228a