Vicious Effect and DR

[cdbd3rd]

The Vicious prefix exists to torment us by being added to Power 5 weapons in the loot tables.

..and in fact you would probably take a Vicious of Disruption, for example, if you didn't have a disruptor and no way to afford one.

Or dual-wield a pair if they matched.

[Angelus_dead]

You are right in one apsect - if item DR reduced this damage, everyone would be able to use them with very little consequence. But if class and/or racial DR would reduce the damage, there would be very few people completely reducing the effects since there aren't too many characters with DR 6/-.

Except for.... every single barbarian level 11 and higher.

[MysticTheurge]

But is it really necessary to start to turn vicious into greater bane everything weapons?

At the point where everyone, including the devs, recognize that Vicious is so bad that it actually makes all but the best weapons unusable, then it's probably time to re-examine the enchantment.

On a more fundamental level: Vicious is 2d6:1d6 in D&D, but in the transfer to DDO monster HPs increased more than Player HPs did. That means when you keep the same 2d6:1d6 ratio, you're actually throwing off the balance. If we assume that monster HPs increase by an average factor of 4 and that player HPs increased by an average factor of 2, then you ought to adjust the ratio on this weapon by a similar factor. Thus the damage to monsters should increase giving you 8d6:2d6, or to reduce things down a bit 4d6:1d6.

Obviously, I'm making those numbers up, but the devs probably have a more accurate understanding of the D&D to DDO changes to HP and can find the right ratio to change it to. But it's abundantly clear that monster HPs increased more than player HPs did, leaving Vicious less useful than it is in D&D.

[Uska]

Flaming and Bane existed in 1st edition.

have to dig out my books when I get home in the morning but I dont remember bane at all and just remember one flaming sword, I do remember arrows of slaying though

[Missing_Minds]

Obviously, I'm making those numbers up, but the devs probably have a more accurate understanding of the D&D to DDO changes to HP and can find the right ratio to change it to. But it's abundantly clear that monster HPs increased more than player HPs did, leaving Vicious less useful than it is in D&D.

While made up I do agree with the point. But then what of Rightious, bane, etc. All of these standard things that follow the book would have to be increased as well because they follow suit to the same argument. The only turn about is that they don't harm the user. Wait, I take that back, wrong alignment means double negative level to the PC with certain weapon types. (Yes, I said double. You take a negative level, the penalties are double here in DDO compared to what they are in PnP)

Also, I'm not against them changing vicious if they choose to, but it opens the door to a lot more complaints.

[MysticTheurge]

But then what of Rightious, bane, etc. All of these standard things that follow the book would have to be increased as well because they follow suit to the same argument.

No. Cause one of the main reasons that DDO monsters have so many HPs is because DDO players attack so fast.

Thus a weapon that deals 1d6 extra damage in DDO and D&D is pretty comparable because while the DDO monster has more HP it's being deal the 1d6 extra damage more often.

The problem with Vicious is the backlash damage, and in the inequities in HP conversions. The DDO player takes more damage from weapon than the D&D player (because the weapon is proc'ing more often) but doesn't have a comparably increased number of hit points. (I suppose this would be a good argument for actually reducing the backlash damage from Vicious, say to 1d3, rather than increasing the output damage.)

[Ustice]

1 HP per hit might be closer.

[Missing_Minds]

No. Cause one of the main reasons that DDO monsters have so many HPs is because DDO players attack so fast.

Thus a weapon that deals 1d6 extra damage in DDO and D&D is pretty comparable because while the DDO monster has more HP it's being deal the 1d6 extra damage more often.

The problem with Vicious is the backlash damage, and in the inequities in HP conversions. The DDO player takes more damage from weapon than the D&D player (because the weapon is proc'ing more often) but doesn't have a comparably increased number of hit points. (I suppose this would be a good argument for actually reducing the backlash damage from Vicious, say to 1d3, rather than increasing the output damage.)

Ah, that is what people in favor of this change have not been stating that was causing my hold up.

I'm still against making DR/resistance of any form stop vicious. Why? because then NPCs could stop vicious damage also. However, dropping the damage down to 1d3, etc. I'd be in favor of. Just as I'd also be in favor of 1d6 to us, more than 2d6 to them.

That 20 extra HP we start off with is no way near enough to offset the damage we take with viciuos compared to the NPC HP given the rate of attacks.

[DNDJESS]

In my opinion, it'd be better to adjust the damage output to damage taken ratio by increasing the damage output rather than giving ways to reduce the damage taken.

If Vicious did something more like 4d6 damage while dealing 1d6 damage to the wielder, the weapons would start to be more useful.

Whether you reduce damage taken or increase damage output, the end result is still the same. The difference is that if you make the damage resistable, it doesn't automatically make the effect the best available effect for every character. Making it 4d6 dmg would be nice, but then you'd have an effect outdamaging every other effect in the game, which would be a bit overpowering IMO.

Besides player greed, I'd like to see where it states in any rulebook that every item enchantment must be useful with 0% determent to the player.

It's not about having all positives and no negatives, it's about making an effect useful - hell, more like usable - as compared to other effects.

[DNDJESS]

Lets look at this from another angle for a second. What would be the chief benefit of making the effect resistable? The only gain I can see is that you'd save inventory slots. So what if, instead of making the effect resistable by class/racial DR, they added an effect to the loot list that would have the ability to resist this damage? This would have a self-balancing effect due to the fact that players would need to occupy two item slots to use this weapon to its fullest advantage.

[MysticTheurge]

Whether you reduce damage taken or increase damage output, the end result is still the same. The difference is that if you make the damage resistable, it doesn't automatically make the effect the best available effect for every character.

I don't mind reducing the damage taken, but I don't think it should be resistable. Do you see the difference?

In one scenario, you're getting better bang for your buck, but you're still going to take some damage.
In the other, you're potentially just getting free DPS if your character is built right (or has stoneskin or something else depending on what you decide should be resisting the damage).

[icculus]

You are wrong. A +2 Dagger of Greater Reptilian Bane DOES have a +6 enhancement bonus, whenever you're attacking a kobold or other reptile.



Yes, I recommend you read the SRD:
Bane
A bane weapon excels at attacking one type or subtype of creature. Against its designated foe, its effective enhancement bonus is +2 better than its normal enhancement bonus. It deals an extra 2d6 points of damage against the foe.

Would hate for this utterly incorrect post to be lost...

[Angelus_dead]

Would hate for this utterly incorrect post to be lost...

First off, you are attempting to harass me.

Second off, the post is correct.

I mean, seriously: it is a paste from the D&D rules. How can it not be correct?

[KatanAztar]

Would hate for this utterly incorrect post to be lost...

/fail

First off, you are attempting to harass me.

Second off, the post is correct.

I mean, seriously: it is a paste from the D&D rules. How can it not be correct?

/win

[LazarusPossum]

Totally not an expert in Monk, so I'm not trying to qft...but wouldn't a weapon like say, vicious handwraps sort of help out a monk when he's in Earth Stance? Or does he only gain Ki when damaged by a FOE, not a weapon?

[Lorien_the_First_One]

So...if we have a dev coming and telling us that vicious weapons are mostly useless, doesn't that pretty much beg the question, "Why are they in the game in the first place then?"

1) Because they are in D&D
2) They are cutting vicious self damage in half next mod

[Angelus_dead]

1) Because they are in D&D
2) They are cutting vicious self damage in half next mod

Which is almost identical to suggestions from this thread:

The problem with Vicious is the backlash damage, and in the inequities in HP conversions. The DDO player takes more damage from weapon than the D&D player (because the weapon is proc'ing more often) but doesn't have a comparably increased number of hit points. (I suppose this would be a good argument for actually reducing the backlash damage from Vicious, say to 1d3, rather than increasing the output damage.)