Why did they change the Keen rule and not the property?

Camarath

Pale Master Tarrasque
Why not just change the Keen ability to allow the wielder to use the weapon as if he had the Improved Critical Feat?

That would seem to me to be the a simpler and more elegant solution than changing the critical threat range stacking rule. They would not stack if they were (basicly) the same thing. The result would be the same with out changing the rules.

It would be easier to customize your game. If you wanted stacking you could use the 3.0 Keen, if you didn't you could use the 3.5, and if you wanted some fun you could use both.

It seems very heavy handed to me to change the stated rules when you could just change the property that made the rules necessary. Now we have characters which can look exactly the same on paper but function vastly different depending on which 3rd edition rule set you use.

IMO if you changed the function of Keen the difference would be easier to remember and explain. So why didn't they do this when it would cause less discontinuity and greater transparency between the rule sets?
 

log in or register to remove this ad

I guess the rule forum is OK. I had thought this was maybe a little too much about general principles and philosophy for the rule forum. I would like to know anyone's thoughts on this issue. This option I did not occure to me untill recently. But, now that it has I wonder why they didn't go with it in 3.5.
 

Maybe they feared the splatbooks (weapon master will still get +2 on crit range with your rule) and third party products with feats or magic enhancements that will still add crit range beyond keen and improved crit.
I don't know if they gained anything ... now I guess there will be many weapons with 18-20/x3 or 16-20/x2 or something like that in the third party books.
In our first group it is unsure if we will use the new (non-)stacking rule. In our second group it is sure that we still use 3.0 keen and improved crit (and weapon master).
I have never seen anyone with a crit range of better than 12-20/x2 (Rapier). Most keep using bastard- or longsword with imroved crit. Since Bless Weapon only works on non-keen weapons no paladin (or PrC with bless weapon) will ever use a keen weapon. Pure fighters are very rare in our groups and to become a weapon master you have to give up a lot of feats. Real fighters don't use "knitting needles" (rapier) in our game. They use real swords or axes.
The falchion in D&D is all other but a real falchion (maybe a twohanded heavy scimitar) so noone used it till today.
And as long as our significant foes will often be immune to crit, hard to hit (15 or more on the d20) and feats are rare, keen and impr. crit are no problem in our groups.
And if ... since you must be at least level 8 to gain impr. crit. who cares ? At this level you ARE beyond masses in respect to fighting capabilities. The damage rises slowly (strength and weapon spec.) and an improved crit. range is the one thing that makes you better than the 4th level guard with high STR and a keen weapon.
You ARE better at inflicting serious wounds with your weapon of choice and the weapon is more capable of delivering serious wounds because of a very keen blade. Where is the problem ? Crits no longer special enough doesn't count in my book ...
BYE

[Edited for spelling]
 
Last edited:

You have to change the rules either way (either you change the stacking rule or the rule of keen - or the feat) and you can easily use the old version of the rules in both cases.

Plus, the ruling they chose adresses all issues, not just that in the core rules.

You can still do a feat like Greater Critical (prereq: Improved Critical) which triples your thread range, but you cannot take a keen weapon, improved crit, and the weapon master stuff (and whatever will come in d20 material) anymore, and only get it from one source (which is a good thing IMO, consider a wizard/red wizard/archmage and spellpower)
 

isoChron said:
Maybe they feared the splatbooks (weapon master will still get +2 on crit range with your rule)

I forget where, but even Andy ("he who wants criticals to be more special") said the Weapon Master does still get his +2 Crit Range ability.

I have never seen anyone with a crit range of better than 12-20/x2 (Rapier).

Without third-party materials, and with currently-errata'd versions of the various weapons in WOTC products, the best you can do is a 10-20 threat range under 3.0 rules (improved critical, keen (or impact) weapon, weapon master PrC, and a base threat range of 18-20).



Real fighters don't use "knitting needles" (rapier) in our game. They use real swords or axes.

"Real" fighters? So the high-Intelligence, high-Dexterity Finesse fighters aren't "real" enough?

Heh.

One word: DUELLIST. An AC so high, their motto becomes "If you have to ask, the answer is NO you don't hit!" :D
 

Pax said:


"Real" fighters? So the high-Intelligence, high-Dexterity Finesse fighters aren't "real" enough?

One word: DUELLIST. An AC so high, their motto becomes "If you have to ask, the answer is NO you don't hit!" :D

Ok, next question : How many damage does he against elementals ? or oozes ? or undead ? or golems ? or heavy fortificated fighters ?
It's ok if you know your enemies will all be "critable" but with a standard D&D dungeon mix there will be serious problems to dish out damage. You just don't have the STR to make your attack count. What about CON ? Enough to get the hitpoints to take some unholy blights or icestorms or horrid wilting ?

That news about the Weapon Master is good news (at least for me).

I know the maximum threat range is 10-20/x2 but who will go for such a high threat range ? What if you hit on a 14 on your d20 ? What good for is this high a threat range ? Increased threat range is great for the x3 weapons with high damage output (like greataxe or the heavy pick with x4.

And remember: to become a weapon master you have to spend a whole lot of feats. All these feats serve a twohanded weapon wielder more than a light weapon wielder. (look at spring attack, whirlwind attack, cleave ..........)

I know I stressed the "real fighter" a bit, but it's not that baseless.

BYE
 

I've been considering changing a few things about increasing crit ranges. All the extra crit range on something like an axe isn't too bad, but when you put it on something like a Rapier, the game just goes downhill. All you need is a Rapier-wielding Weapon Master with Improved Critical and a 'Keen(Piercing)' Something Burst(one or more) Rapier, and you've got yourself a pure killing machine. Said char would have a crit range of 9-20, which is WAAAAAY too much IMO. I think I'm going to HR that in terms of increasing crit ranges, the first increase doubles the crit range, the 2nd increase increases the crit range by the base-1, the third increases the range by the base-2, etc. with a minimum of one each time I.E. a duelist could take the Improved Critical: Rapier feat, increasing his range to 15-20, then pick up a 'Keen' Rapier, which would only increase his crit range by 2, effectively making it 13-20, and then any bonuses he would get from classes wold only increase the range by at max 1 each. So the maxed-out weapon master would only have a crit range of 12-20, which is STILL really high range.

Comments?
 

Angcuru said:
I've been considering changing a few things about increasing crit ranges. All the extra crit range on something like an axe isn't too bad, but when you put it on something like a Rapier, the game just goes downhill. All you need is a Rapier-wielding Weapon Master with Improved Critical and a 'Keen(Piercing)' Something Burst(one or more) Rapier, and you've got yourself a pure killing machine. Said char would have a crit range of 9-20, which is WAAAAAY too much IMO.
First, the character's threat range is 10-20, not 9-20 (18-20 base, 15-20 Improved Critical, 12-20 keen, 10-20 weapon master); also, burst weapons are actually very weak (do some math; you'll find it's always better to have an extra regular energy effect for +2d6 all the time than a burst effect for +1d6 and the occasional +1d6+1d10).

Consider the math before complaining about critical threat ranges. A pick with keen and Improved Critical effects deals just as much expected damage as a rapier with the same benefits; in practice, the pick is probably a bit better -- as isoChron pointed out, as a threat range becomes very large, it begins to show diminishing marginal returns, since it becomes increasingly likely that a d20 attack roll will be good enough to threaten a critical but not good enough to hit. (Note that this also means that, in a way, your desire for threat ranges to have diminishing marginal returns is already written implicitly into the rules.) Also note that a weapon master is much better off with a high multiplier weapon than a high threat range weapon, for reasons that should also be clear below (so it's hardly your rapier-wielding weapon master that's abusive -- it's more more likely to be your pick-wielder).

Why is this the case? Consider that, with an x2 multiplier, each point of threat range offers a 5% chance to do +100% damage, which means that each point of threat range with an x2 multiplier yields an additional 5% expected damage. But with an x4 multiplier, each point of threat range offers a 5% chance to do +300% damage, which means each point of threat range with an x4 multiplier yields an additional 15% expected damage. This is why 18-20/x2 rapiers are balanced against 20/x4 picks: each yields the same amount of additional expected damage (15%), and this is also why, with keen effects and Improved Critical, rapiers are balanced against picks, even though the rapier has a higher threat range -- the rapier has a 45% chance to cause +100% damage, and the pick has a 15% chance to cause +300% damage.

Finally, this is also why "flat" increases in threat range are inherently unbalanced in favor of high-multiplier weapons: the weapon master's +2 threat range with an x2 weapon yields a +10% chance to cause +100% damage, increasing expected damage by 10% (thus, a rapier master's 10-20/x2 threat range offers a total 55% additional expected damage), while the same bonus with an x4 weapon yields a +10% chance to cause +300% damage, increasing expected damage by 30% (thus, a pick master's 16-20/x4 threat range yields a massive 75% additional expected damage). This imbalance is true for all high-multiplier weapons (although it's less pronounced with axes or most swords, say) -- which means it's just irrational for you to be more concerned about the power of the rapier-wielding weapon master than the power of the high-multiplier one.
I think I'm going to HR that in terms of increasing crit ranges, the first increase doubles the crit range, the 2nd increase increases the crit range by the base-1, the third increases the range by the base-2, etc. with a minimum of one each time I.E. a duelist could take the Improved Critical: Rapier feat, increasing his range to 15-20, then pick up a 'Keen' Rapier, which would only increase his crit range by 2, effectively making it 13-20, and then any bonuses he would get from classes wold only increase the range by at max 1 each. So the maxed-out weapon master would only have a crit range of 12-20, which is STILL really high range.

Comments?
This rule is unfair; see the math above. The "with a minimum of one each time" clause means that while your house-rule weakens high-threat-range characters, it leaves high-multiplier characters quite powerful. A rapier master's crit of 12-20/x2 offers an additional 45% expected damage (down from +55% originally), while the pick master keeps his old 16-20/x4 crit and is just as powerful (with +75% expected damage). Even if you don't use weapon masters, your system still favors high-multiplier weapons (but to a slightly lesser degree): just given keen and Improved Critical, the rapier's 13-20/x2 crit offers +40% expected damage, while the picks 18-20/x4 crit offers the stronger +45% expected damage. So unless you wanted to make high-multiplier weapons objectively better than high-threat-range weapons, don't adopt this rule.
 

isoChron said:
Ok, next question : How many damage does he against elementals ? or oozes ? or undead ? or golems ? or heavy fortificated fighters ?

Depends on the elemental, and the weapon. Also note: I didn't neccessarily mean a Fighter/Duellist/Weapon Master. WRT the PrC's -- either or, IMO.

As for the weapon: +5, Force, Screaming, Dispelling, Keen; a +10 weapon, which does +2d6 damage (1d6 is [force], the other 1d6 is [sonic]), which might, with luck, be able to dispel that fortified armor, opening the door for Precise Strike. Forge it of Hizagkuur (from Magic of Faerun) for a couple points of bonus damage; the net price would come to 203,000gp, plus the rapier's base price.

With a halfway decent strength (say, 13 -- just enough for power attack), you would have 1d6+8+1d6[force]+1d6[sonic]+1[fire]+1[shock] -- totalling 3d6+10. Power attack, versus some targets, would bring that up higher. No crits involved.

It's ok if you know your enemies will all be "critable" but with a standard D&D dungeon mix there will be serious problems to dish out damage. You just don't have the STR to make your attack count. What about CON ? Enough to get the hitpoints to take some unholy blights or icestorms or horrid wilting ?

I think 3d6+10, without a crit and without Precise Strike or Sneak Attack, is reasonable damage. Not that that's also prior to any Power Attack, and it allows for weapon-and-shield.

Or even Two-Weapon, which can have it's own benefits (twin rapier could potentially be workable, even).


I know the maximum threat range is 10-20/x2 but who will go for such a high threat range ? What if you hit on a 14 on your d20 ? What good for is this high a threat range ? Increased threat range is great for the x3 weapons with high damage output (like greataxe or the heavy pick with x4.

At higher levels, BAB tends to outstrip AC. Eventually, a dedicated fighter with good to-hit bonusses aside from BAB will be hitting on rolls of 10+ for most encounters ... even more often for some.

And remember: to become a weapon master you have to spend a whole lot of feats. All these feats serve a twohanded weapon wielder more than a light weapon wielder. (look at spring attack, whirlwind attack, cleave ..........)

WW doesn't serve a 2H any better than a 1H. Neither does spring attack; Cleave, however, I'll grant you, is of less use to a 1H wielder.

Inasfar as the WM goes -- go 2H, with the Falchion (same threat range).

I know I stressed the "real fighter" a bit, but it's not that baseless.

Sure it is. 20th level, PHB races, splatbook PrCs only, by-the-book with a 32-point buy (or better, if you want). You bring yours, I'll bring mine; you won't be hitting except on a natural 20, regardless. The concept of a Duellist is "reasonable damage and stellar AC", whereas your concept of a "real fighter" seems to be "reasonable AC and stellar damage".
 

KaeYoss said:
You have to change the rules either way (either you change the stacking rule or the rule of keen - or the feat) and you can easily use the old version of the rules in both cases.

Plus, the ruling they chose adresses all issues, not just that in the core rules.

You can still do a feat like Greater Critical (prereq: Improved Critical) which triples your thread range, but you cannot take a keen weapon, improved crit, and the weapon master stuff (and whatever will come in d20 material) anymore, and only get it from one source (which is a good thing IMO, consider a wizard/red wizard/archmage and spellpower)

I think 3rd party could still produce Keen like enchantments that expressly stack with Improved Critical. I also do not think that the core rules need to try and balance out 3rd party materials. 3rd party stuff will always be able to break the core system if you let it and this won't change that.

If it is not broken why change it. If you do change it why not change it in the way that causes the least disruption to the existing rules. The effect in the core system and WotC supplements would be the same.
 

Remove ads

Top