Scimitar

[Steely Dan]

Making it High Crit and +3 to attack would make it superior to the longsword for anyone fighting with a one handed weapon.

Okay, first response that has satisfied me, thanks – have a good one people.

 

[Boarstorm]

I repeat:

So, the vibe I'm getting, is that the scimitar is only good for en epic level halfling with a certain feat…?

No, it's good at epic level, OR if you're a halfling OR a ranger OR have that certain feat.

That's quite a bit of utility for a single weapon.

If you make it +3 proficiency, it's clearly better than its alternatives and thus broken.

Fine as written.

 

[Crothian]

Why do all weapons need to be equal? It's okay if the scimitar is not as good as a long sword.

 

[racoffin]

Seems fine as written.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

High crit is better than versatile. Versatile almost doesn't count as a bonus, because you aren't going to be switching back and forth.

I don't think high crit is worth as much as +1 attack, though.

But I can't think of anything else to add. Making it High Crit and +3 to attack would make it superior to the longsword for anyone fighting with a one handed weapon. That probably isn't a good idea. Making it 1d10 and high crit makes it superior to the ax. It seems like it should just stay at +2, 1d8, high crit.

So... at least it comes with a snazzy feat that isn't available to the longsword. It seems close enough to balanced to accept.

I think reducing the damage to 1d6 should do the trick. (Like in 3E). Getting to hit with a power that offers secondary effects (control/debuff effects) is more important then dealing 1-3 more points of damage on average. At least that's my opinion.

I consider creating a Dragonborn Warlord for a converted campaign, and I wanted to pick the Scimitar, but the lower profiency penalty makes me reconsider that. But I still prefer it due to flavour reasons, so I might do it anyway...

 

[Cadfan]

I think reducing the damage to 1d6 should do the trick. (Like in 3E).

A +3, 1d6, high crit weapon would be balanced. That's basically the Katar.

But a +2, 1d8, high crit weapon seems within the realm of reason.

Personally, I permit weapon reskinning. If you really want the stats of a longsword and the vision of a scimitar, just ask. I might not permit you access to scimitar specific feats though.

 

[Umbran]

Are you trying to be insulting?

Don't try it; I'm better at this than you.

How about this - don't you try it either. Nobody try it.

If you have a problem with another poster, opening up on them with a big fat ego is not an acceptable answer. We have a "report a post" function to deal with problems.

So, I don't want to see any more of this schoolyard posturing stuff from anyone in the thread. If you want to get rude, do it elsewhere.

 

[Nightchilde-2]

I consider creating a Dragonborn Warlord for a converted campaign, and I wanted to pick the Scimitar, but the lower profiency penalty makes me reconsider that. But I still prefer it due to flavour reasons, so I might do it anyway...

Mustrum,

Didn't you get the memo? It's impossible in 4e to build a sub-optimal character that makes any decisions for flavor reasons!

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Mustrum,

Didn't you get the memo? It's impossible in 4e to build a sub-optimal character that makes any decisions for flavor reasons!

Ah, so then, Scimitar it is then! Since I can't make sub-optimal character due to flavor reasons, he obviously isn't sub-optimal.

 

[Obryn]

If Scimitar were versatile, my player's Gnome Ranger wouldn't have any 1d8 weapons to twin-strike with.

I know he, for one, is happy with the scimitar the way it is. I'm happy with it too, because now I can mock him for Drizzt-ing out his gnome. No need for an extra +1 to hit, it's fine as-is.

-O