Mercurial Weapons -- good idea or bad idea?

[hammymchamham]

I happen to like the swords. Granted, if a player of mine wanted one, he'd have problems finding them.

I also have a charecter that uses a Gnomish Battle Pick (S&F). I guess I happen to like (post Errata) S&F. It was the first 3rd edition book I bought

 

[Ashrem Bayle]

Hey, you guys do realize that you are saying that the fighter's hollow sword is "unrealistic" while the wizard's bag of holding or wand of fireballs is ok right?

My point is not to offend, but to point out that I believe mercurial weapons to be ok in a fantasy setting. Realisticly it is very silly, but then again, so is silver or gold bladed weapons. However, the rules say that silver or gold weapons have been magicly treated and so they function like steel. Same here.

I can live with that.

I think it depends on what level of fantasy you like in your games.

The only mercurial weapon I ever had in my game was a flaming burst mercurial greatsword. The "mercury" in the center was really the blood of a red dragon. The blade had a crystal section running down the center so that you could see the blood inside of it. It was intelligent and VERY evil.

Just depends on how you want to use it.

 

[Painfully]

I'm really surprised by the number of quick responses, but I guess that's what happens after the boards have been down for a while.

Mercurial weapons feel too much like a "power up," item with no other purpose than to be bigger and badder than the others.

I'm very aware of the pre- and post-errata versions of the mercurial weapons, but the idea of being able to craft it seems like it should require a special talent above and beyond ordinary weaponcrafting. It seems too much of a technological step forward for even a fantasy game IMO. If something in the game is going to be special or enhanced, I want it to be using older technology or magic, not modern-day scientific know-how. Dragon's blood is a good idea, but I already use it as a magical catalyst IMC. Precious stuff, that dragon's blood is.

Thanks to everyone for their input and especially buzzard, whose more technical answers might convince my players that I'm not just being crazy.

 

[Henry]

First of all, if you don't mind, I'm going to move this over to the rules forum - you are likely to get a whole new crop of responses over there.

Second, from my standpoint, if you use the Sword & Fist Errata figures, I do not honestly believe they would cause you any balance problems. the only difference between regular and mercurial weapons is the deeper crit - and that trade-off for an exotic weapon feat just to use them is not unbalancing.

I will leave the factor of personal DM taste for this weapon concept totally in your hands. I don't consider it "cheesy", but it may not fit all campaigns on the matter of taste and plausibility.

 

[ColonelHardisson]

why should we read a book which a weapon may be base on Col?

Uh, because they are among the most acclaimed books of science fantasy written in the last 20 years, praised by fan and critic alike?

 

[NPC]

I like 'em and will allow them in campaigns that I DM. They are rare, but not extremely rare.

<Casts Resist Elements(Fire) on himself>

Besides, I find the spiked chain way more cheesy and unbalancing than the merc. greatsword.

 

[ColonelHardisson]

I use them as artifacts of a long-forgotten age. They are very rare, having once been the badges of office of dignitaries of an empire that faded millennia ago. They make good nonesuch treasures for the PCs to find.

 

[Xeriar]

I don't think these things can be forged without magic or some serious technology behind them. We'll probably make a sword-useable titanium alloy first (at a reasonable cost, even).

Even then, fighting with maces is already a little hard on the wrists, something that actively changes balance during the swing ought to require its own set of proficiencies (ie, one feat for 'mercurial-style' weapons like these and the Gith blades in general, and another for the exotic proficiency for the specific weapon itself).

 

[Acmite]

Given that the balance point for mercurial weapons would be similar to those of axes, clubs, flails, glaives, guisarmes, halberds, hammers, maces, morningstars, picks, and scythes, why is it a problem for mercurial weapons and not for similarly-balanced mundane weapons, especially considering that the mercurial weapon requires a feat to wield competently?

All the weapons you listed above usually have a wooden shaft. This allows the wielder to slide his/her hand up along the shaft in oder to compensate for the balance point when bringing the weapon back to a guard position. While the balance point is stationary, the wielder's hands are not required to stay near the pommel, or below a crossguard.

You generally don't slide your hand up along a sword blade.

I've played in many campaigns since SaF was released and I've yet to see anyone express even the most remote interest in using a mercurial weapon. Since it's never been a topic of discussion, I'm not sure why.

Personally, they just don't interest me. I'd rather focus on a "mundane" weapon nobody seems to use in order to make my fighter-type more unique. No one in any of my groups had used a Warhammer yet in 3E, so my Paladin in my weekly game now uses that as his signature weapon (Paladin of Tyr in pseudo-Realms/Homebrew).

OT: Does anyone know why Tyr's favoured weapon is a longsword and not a Warhammer?

 

[kreynolds]

So have other DMs/players out there discussed this already?

My group allows the errata'd versions. Seems that most people freak out and ban them before they see the real stats, but it's understandable, since the originals were a bit over the top. The real ones aren't that bad.