Why ever make an elemental burst weapon?

[Goolpsy]

if you have a scyth, thats 4d10 on a crit, not to mention the normal damage.

In 3.0 their is a prc called deepwoodsniper. It adds crits to a bow. you can get a bow to do 5d10 and their are spells that can help you auto crit. Really the enhancement isent for everyone.

its not d10 per 'x' its 1d10 per 'x-1'
so a x2 weapon deals 1d10... x3 deals 2d10... x4 deals 3d10 (thats a scythe)
and a good deepwoodsniper deals +4d10 damage on a crit cause of the x5...

You're 1d10 off

the posible defening made by a thundering weapon isn't crucial to a monster.. i'dd much rather drop by wit my dwarven waraxe and deal +2d10...

 

[Plane Sailing]

I think the 10d6 here is artificially inflated, here. The 3.5 extra damage will not come in to play 100% of the time, but only when the attack succeeds. At best that's 95%, at worst its 5% (when you might also score a critical).

But on 100% of the hits that you achieve, you gain +3.5 bonus damage. Since the chance to hit and the chance to confirm the critical are the same, I wonder if they two terms would cancel out once the maths is done...

If you think about it some more though, I'm actually *deflating* it with 10d6. As you say, a critical hit normally occurs on less than 10% of your attacks with the sword. If you roll a threat and confirm on 50% of the confirm rolls, you have a 5% total chance of scoring a crit... thus you need 70(!) damage to match the +3.5 average!!!

In actual practice I think that a nice practical way of handling elemental burst weapons is to ignore the 'crit' issue entirely, and just state the following

"On a natural 20 an elemental burst weapon does an additional 5d6 energy damage to the target according to its energy type."

Thus you have a 5% chance per attack (whatever your weapon) of doing 17.5 extra damage; although it amounts to less than a measely +0.9 damage per attack it would have an excellent psychological effect. It feels like a power that really does something, and it is equally balanced for *all* weapon types, while on average still performing less well than the classic holy weapon (or double energy type weapon) in terms of total extra damage inflicted on foes during your lifetime.

Cheers

 

[Dingleberry]

The only reason for taking them is style - which can be a good enough reason.

Bingo.

 

[Dinkeldog]

Something else to consider is that burst on a longsword << burst on a scimitar. Both have a x2 modifier, but the scimitar will crit more often. Put the burst on a keen scimitar and you're potentially critting quite often.

<my house rule alert>Turning on a normal power like flaming, frost or shock requires a standard action. However, on the burst, the power turns on automatically and stays on until the weapon is sheathed/put down. That can be useful until you know exactly what the activation command is. (Actually, I'm not sure if that was exactly a "house rule" or just an interpretation of the rules in 3.0 which I've carried over into 3.5, but I don't want the RAW posse to have reason to criticize without my prior acknowledgement.)

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

(Actually, I'm not sure if that was exactly a "house rule" or just an interpretation of the rules in 3.0 which I've carried over into 3.5 ...)

It's a house rule.

The benefit with regards to activation for X-burst weapons is that the burst part of the property works even if the X part of the property hasn't been turned on yet.

EDIT:

As DD has edited, so shall I.

 

[Dinkeldog]

I'm sorry you feel that way, Patryn. In no way do I mean to suggest that you regularly overreact to something because it doesn't fit your PHB/DMG/MM only view of the world.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

Are you trying to provoke a fight? Because if you are, I'll just report you and let the other mods deal with it.

I suggest you read the following: http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?t=155143

 

[billd91]

I'm sorry you feel that way, Patryn. In no way do I mean to suggest that you regularly overreact to something because it doesn't fit your PHB/DMG/MM only view of the world.

It's not an unreasonable caveat to put in a post in the Rules forum. I regularly see posters chided for talking about how they house rule something, or (gasp!) even suggesting that someone house rule something rather than take the RAW on a particular point.
Some people really do seem to get their undies in a bunch about that sort of thing.

 

[Dinkeldog]

In fact, I read that a while ago and I've also reported myself--before your threat.

 

[Lonely Tylenol]

It's not an unreasonable caveat to put in a post in the Rules forum. I regularly see posters chided for talking about how they house rule something, or (gasp!) even suggesting that someone house rule something rather than take the RAW on a particular point.
Some people really do seem to get their undies in a bunch about that sort of thing.

Considering the sticky post in this forum and the mood around here lately, I think that the mods should be doing everything they can to avoid provoking even more venom and upset than we already have. That kind of post is inappropriate under the current circumstances, and especially coming from someone who's supposed to be setting an example.