Community

Aluman wrote:

Your math is right.

Actually bastard sword isn't for the expending of a feat, the only weapons it outpaces dramatically is the Longsword and Greatsword. And once again, if someone was to make a 'dwarven warax' at +2 1d12 verstaile it would outpace the battleax and greatax (though that one is lesser of a deal due to high crit).

I think really the great axe was given the +2 1d12 high crit to make it diffrent from just another +2 2d6 weapon. The sad part is, it made the Deadly Ax a useless feat for 2H fighter with axes.

I really think it would be nice if there was more 'extras' for weapons then just high crit, heavy thrown, off hand, reach.

Like maybe 'resounding' which would allow you to add an extra square of forced movement or 'tenacious' which deals 1 damage when used in the off hand and you get attacked.

That way the Katar can be made into a worthwhile blade, and the Maul can be backed down some in actual damage while remaining on par with others.

I know it costs a feat but despite that I don't think the bastard sword should be 100% better in every way over the longsword and greatsword. I was thinking of lowering the prof bonus to +2, so the expenditure of a feat gives you something like the battleaxe but in the heavy blade group. Although I think the DPR of a bastard sword held with both hands would still outpace the greatsword-- I'd have to check the math.

Anyhow a +2 1d10 bastard sword would still be the weapon of choice for sword and board fighters who want to utilize OAs. I think at +2 it's worth paying a feat for, for fighters-- just not for anyone else (except perhaps paladins).

Heck it's still a viable option for wizards and the like who don't get martial proficiencies anyway-- even the longsword would cost them a feat. That's if they want a better weapon, of course.

My opinion on weapon damage has always been that 1d8 -> 2d4 and 1d12 -> 2d6 is a lateral instead of direct promotion. Sure, it's better (.5 extra average damage) but nothing near as good as 1d8 -> 1d10 (1 more average, 2 more crit). I think whether it's one or the other should be flavor based, and if you're pumping 1d10 to the next level, 2d6 or 1d12 would both be viable and if 1d12 is going up, 2d8 is the next step.

From just glancing at the 2H Martial weapons, if we took away "superiority" of Heavy Blades (which i don't really understand) they'd be fairly balanced if you took High Crit from Greataxes and gave it to Glaives. [Glaives would do less damage on average, but more on crits, and Greataxes would be in the same ball-park as Mauls and Flails; all of which would be harder-hitting but less accurate than Greatswords].

What i am using for Superior Weapons are as follows:
Zweihander: +3 2d6 Heavy Blade
Dwarven War-Axe: +2 2d8 Axe (High Crit?)
Grand Maul: +2 2d8 Hammer
Dire Flail: +2 2d8 Flail
Guisarme: +2 1d12 Axe, Polearm Reach
Naginata: +3 1d10 Heavy Blade, Polearm Reach (High Crit?)

And so-on and so-forth.

I don't necessarily like how much damage a 2d8 weapon does, (+4 on a crit compared to a 2d6) but without making 1d6+1d8 weapons, i don't see a way around it. Taking High Crit away from Battleaxes (and Dwarven War Axes) would make the Paragon Feat still useful, and i don't see how being able to use an At-Will power instead of a basic attack on OAs is that much better than getting High Crit. How i play the bad-guys, OAs are about as rare as rolling criticals, if not less so.

lurker88 wrote:

Absolutely not.

Currently, the bastard sword beats out both the longsword and greatsword by an average of 1 damage per hit. That makes it just about strictly worse than Weapon Focus or Lethal Hunter, since it doesn't scale (the exception to this is dual-wielding rangers, where its more complicated). In other words, if bastard sword proffeciency is overpowered, then so is pretty much any feat that increases dpr by more than one, which is...quite a few.

You realize you can take the Weapon Focus feat for the bastard sword, right?

Except for Weapon Focus (and the bastard sword proficiency), all of the feats are situational in their extra damage. That's why I think the bastard sword is OP. Unless you want to let players take weapon focus multiple times and let it stack on the same weapon?

Taking 2 feats to increase your DPR by 2 FLAT, to me, is overpowered.

lurker88 wrote:

The problem is you're only looking at heroic tier. By Epic, it's +4 damage for two feats vs. +3 for one; that's perfectly fine.

If you're comparing it to Longswords (which it is closer to) then you get +1 damage per [W] which will be +2 for At-Wills to as high as +7 for certain Daily powers.

Really, if you're getting the Bastard Sword to use exclusively as a 2-handed weapon, i think you're wasting a Feat as is.

Hey all,

Thanks go to squarecircle for posting this thread!

Sorry it took me so long to join in, but here is something I posted in another thread here.
BTW, that thread was where a lot of this discussion started. If you are more interested in the discussion or want to look at the supporting math, please head on over there.

Anyway, without further ado....


2D4 Begone: The Changes


Theory Summary

The Scythe, Falchion, Glaive, and Greatsword melee weapons are mechanically inferior to the other 2-handed weapons in their respective categories. This disparity only applies to the basic weapon designs as shown on Page 218. The issue also only involves 2-handed weapons, not 1-handed weapons. All 1-handed weapons are assumed to be balanced as written.

On page 220 of the PHB we have the 'Weapons and Size' charts. There currently exists two versions. The first is for 1-handed weapons and goes as follows....
1d4 -> 1d6 -> 1d8 ->1d10 ->1d12 -> 2d6 ->2d8 -> 2d10

The second chart is for 2-handed weapons, and proceeds as follows...
1d8 -> 2d4 -> 1d10 -> 1d12 -> 2d6 -> 2d8 -> 2d10

Notice that the 1handed weapons start at 1d4 in order to simulate the smaller damage weapons, and the 2-handed table starts at 1d8. Also notice that the 2d4 damage die size only exists on the 2-handed chart.

Through the comparison of the current 2-handed weapons to their 1-handed counterparts, we can generally determine the method that they are converted. If they have a Martial 1-handed counterpart, their weapon damage die is converted to the 2-handed damage die size chart, then upgraded two 'steps'.

For example:
+2 1d10 Battlaxe
-Add a damage die size; increasing from 1d10 to 1d12 following the 2-handed chart on Page 220
-Add the High Crit property and you have 2 'steps'.
-Thus the +2 1d12 High Crit Greataxe is born.

For the purposes of our Theory, we are going to assume that a 'step' is more or less equal to:

-A +1 increase to weapon proficiency bonus
-One increase in damage die size following the charts on page 220 of the PHB
-The High Crit property

The Math done previously in this thread seems to indicate that these values are roughly balanced with each other. None are exactly equal, which would be impossible. Thankfully they are very close, and the 'leader' of the bunch tends to change based on many different variables. These include but are not limited to class features, paragon paths, epic destinies, feats, powers, items and creature defence values.
Also notice that each of these values directly affect your average Damage Per Round (henceforth referred to as DPR), and are quantifiable. Other weapon properties such as Versatile and Off-hand do not directly affect your DPR and are either arbitrarily assigned or have certain disadvantages. Therefore they are not considered a 'step' in this theory.

The Reach property, on the other hand, is generally considered to be worth 2 'steps' if we use the current Reach weapons as examples.


Therefore the Scythe, Falchion, Glaive, and Greatsword fall a 'step' behind other 2-handed weapons because they have to consider the 2d4 weapon size that is unique to 2-handed weapons.
Meanwhile, the other two-handed weapons get to 'skip' this added die size because their 1-handed versions typically began at 1D10.

So the proposed fix is very simple. Remove the 2d4 damage die size from the 2-handed chart, then redesign the inferior 2-handed weapons accordingly.


Theory in Practice

When we remove the 2d4 damage die size from the 2-handed chart on Page 220, what happens?

Only 2-handed weapons are affected, which should be obvious, as the 2d4 die size only exists for 2-handed weapons.

Therefore certain Weapons will then change as follows:

(Weapons are listed as they appear on the Melee Weapons chart on Page 218 of the 4th Edition Player's Handbook)

The Greatclub now becomes +2 1d8

The Scythe now becomes +2 1D10

The Falchion now becomes +3 1D10 (High Crit)

The Glaive now becomes +2 1D10

The Greatsword now becomes +3 1D12

The Spiked Chain now becomes +3 1D10


Everything else remains the same as written.