Epic weapons die changes?

[HalfORCastrator]

I saw a dev comment(and heard online) about there being a die structure change to epic weapons. I can't remember from where. What's the general change, and how will that affect eAntique Greataxe and eChimera's Fang? (I was told by someone online that he saw a dev post saying eAGA would be an exception, so confirmation for/against that would be nice too.)

[Eladrin]

Not yet. The feedback on tooltips and the like wasn't satisfactory, so we're waiting on this change.

[Vesuvium]

Back in November Eladrin outlined some of our plans on this subject in this thread. You can find his specific post here, but please note that this is still subject to change.

[Shade]

Not yet. The feedback on tooltips and the like wasn't satisfactory, so we're waiting on this change.

Smart. Exact thing you should be doing on Deadlies.

No one enjoys temporarily messed up content.

So do nothing and wait until you have a satisfactory version complete, then change it.

[Yan_PL]

Smart. Exact thing you should be doing on Deadlies.

No one enjoys temporarily messed up content.

So do nothing and wait until you have a satisfactory version complete, then change it.

this nerfs it for you, but boosts it for artificers and archers using Point Blank Shoot.

[Aesop]

Smart. Exact thing you should be doing on Deadlies.

No one enjoys temporarily messed up content.

So do nothing and wait until you have a satisfactory version complete, then change it.

They are only having problems with the tooltip wording not the overall plan.


Personally I like the plan overall. It adds a nice formula to follow.

Aesop

[djl]

this nerfs it for you, but boosts it for artificers and archers using Point Blank Shoot.

No it nerfs it for EVERYBODY. Most of the reason people take artificers is for deadly weapons, and by nerfing that spell they are directly nerfing the viability of that class in epics.

[Vordax]

No it nerfs it for EVERYBODY. Most of the reason people take artificers is for deadly weapons, and by nerfing that spell they are directly nerfing the viability of that class in epics.

Do you see a problem when a class is "useless" unless they have 1 particular spell? If this broken version of a spell is the only reason the class is taken on epics, the class must be underpowered and should be improved in other areas instead, right?

Vordax

[WolfSpirit]

Most of the reason people take artificers is for deadly weapons, and by nerfing that spell they are directly nerfing the viability of that class in epics.

~
This is a false statement.
Well built Artificers bring dps and MANY other very useful buffs.
Is it Epic SoS dps? Nope but it FAR outshines the dex monk.
Is it buffage like that of Bardic Songs?
No, but its Different and largely stackable.
A well build mulit Artificer ismuch more useful than the ONE spell they get that melees enjoy most.
Deadly Weapons.
NEVER assume an entire class encompasses the ability of every player and all the gear that player has access to.
Artificers do traps, weaken mobs from distance, have amazingly cool buffs, Can be incredibily hearty, completly self sufficent. many have ZERO requirement for a personal Healer.
(Everyone assumes Barbarians are so powerful because of their sole ability of dps, but really its the barb AND the healer behind him being useful)
Combination of TWO.
You shortchange an entire class. Havent heard this type argument since Arcane Archers started appearing. And that was/is a more useful argument!

[DogMania]

No it nerfs it for EVERYBODY. Most of the reason people take artificers is for deadly weapons, and by nerfing that spell they are directly nerfing the viability of that class in epics.

WRONG I tr'd and capped my Arti before Deadly Weapons was released which royaly peed me off when they released it in the next update and I could not have it

[FengXian]

Good deadly weapons, bad deadly weapons, no deadly weapons, artis are still awesome^^ I think the class is kinda win, I just gotta decide which toon I should tr into one, prolly will make an arti life on my main just for fun.

About deadly weapons, I agree the spell has to be changed, 10d6 makes no sense (although it was fun while it lasted XD). Just not sure if force damage is the right way to go. Besides 1d8 is really nothing special, in some situations you'll want the right element's damage instead. At least make the damage untyped. And/Or higher than 1d8.
While being very very good on eSoS and some other high base damage weapons like eChimera Fang, it really was nothing special, IMHO, on common weapons such as some GS (still good on b-swords, 2handers ofc) that have 1d8-1d10 base damage.
On the other hand making it, say, 2d6, would advantage TWF/HWs/repeaters since they make a lot of attacks compared to THF. Make it 2d6 on 2 handers and 1d10 on the rest or something...

[Calebro]

No it nerfs it for EVERYBODY. Most of the reason people take artificers is for deadly weapons, and by nerfing that spell they are directly nerfing the viability of that class in epics.

Once again, as has been stated many times by many people, it is not a nerf.
Deadly Weapons was never supposed to be released in it's current form. The fact that we have it is a mistake. Changing it so that it works as intended isn't a nerf, it's a bug fix. We're just getting a placeholder in the meantime. That placeholder is much closer to the actual design of DW than it's current implementation is.

I'll let the PHB do the talking here for me.

General Guidelines and Glossary
The general rules for what to do when rounding fractions and when
several multipliers apply to a die roll (often encountered as what to
do when doubling something that is already doubled) are provided
below, followed by a glossary of game terms.

<snip>

MULTIPLYING
Sometimes a special rule makes you multiply a number or a die roll.
As long as you’re applying a single multiplier, multiply the number
normally. When two or more multipliers apply to any abstract value
(such as a modifier or a die roll), however, combine them into a
single multiple, with each extra multiple adding 1 less than its value
to the first multiple. Thus, a double (×2) and a double (×2) applied to
the same number results in a triple (×3, because 2 + 1 = 3).

For example, Tordek, a high-level dwarven fighter, deals 1d8+6
points of damage with a warhammer. On a critical hit, a warhammer
deals triple damage, so that’s 3d8+18 damage for Tordek. A magic
dwarven thrower warhammer deals double damage (2d8+12 for
Tordek) when thrown. If Tordek scores a critical hit while throwing
the dwarven thrower, his player rolls quadruple damage
(4d8+24) because 3 + 1 = 4.

Another way to think of it is to convert the
multiples into additions. Tordek’s critical hit
increase his damage by 2d8+12, and the
dwarven thrower’s doubling of damage
increases his damage by 1d8+6, so both of
them together increase his damage by 3d8+18
for a grand total of 4d8+24.

A normal Greatsword is base damage 2d6
The fact that it happens to be an Epic Sword of Shadows means that it does 2.5x base, for a total of 5d6. The base damage for a greatswod is still 2d6. The epic version already applies a multiplier (of 2.5) to that base damage, so when Deadly Weapons is applied the result should be 7d6, not 10d6 as people assume (and as normal math would agree with).
You see, we aren't talking about normal math. We're talking about a specific ruling regarding applying a multiplier to something that has already had a multiplier included. This is called "doubling a double" in PnP terms, and the result isnt't a quadruple as math would suggest.
2d6 (base greatsword damage) +3d6 (for epic) +2d6 (for deadly weapons) = 7d6
Look at a GS greatsword (@ 1.5*w): 2d6 (base greatsword damage) +1d6 (for GS) +2d6 (for deadly weapons) = 5d6

This is the reason that Deadly Weapons isn't working properly. Deadly weapons not working properly is also the reason that weapon damage dice notations will be changing so that the eSoS won't be 5d6 base damage, but rather 2d6*(2.5w) {where w = base damage}

We're talking about a specific Dungeons and Dragons rule here regarding doubling a double. The fact that the first multiplier is implied and already accounted for is what makes the wording unclear. And that's also why the damage notations will be changing.

Does that explain it better for you? Do you now understand why "double weapon damage" for an eSoS shouldn't actually be 10d6, but rather 7d6? Does that explain why it's getting "nerfed" in your mind even though it isn't a nerf, but rather a bug fix? Does that explain why we were never supposed to have DW released in it's current form, because that form is broken?

[fabhpk]

Smart. Exact thing you should be doing on Deadlies.

No one enjoys temporarily messed up content.

So do nothing and wait until you have a satisfactory version complete, then change it.

This seems to be the most wise approach.

[Ziindarax]

~
This is a false statement.
Well built Artificers bring dps and MANY other very useful buffs.
Is it Epic SoS dps? Nope but it FAR outshines the dex monk.
Is it buffage like that of Bardic Songs?
No, but its Different and largely stackable.
A well build mulit Artificer ismuch more useful than the ONE spell they get that melees enjoy most.
Deadly Weapons.
NEVER assume an entire class encompasses the ability of every player and all the gear that player has access to.
Artificers do traps, weaken mobs from distance, have amazingly cool buffs, Can be incredibily hearty, completly self sufficent. many have ZERO requirement for a personal Healer.
(Everyone assumes Barbarians are so powerful because of their sole ability of dps, but really its the barb AND the healer behind him being useful)
Combination of TWO.
You shortchange an entire class. Havent heard this type argument since Arcane Archers started appearing. And that was/is a more useful argument!

You also forgot to mention that an artificer has THE best Scroll healing in the game, bar-none. My heal scrolls on my main character ziind can heal for at least 300 points when the recipient is neither Warforged, nor possessing construct essence. I've even healed one barbarian 4xx hit points with just one heal scroll. Can a "true" healer heal for more, yes, and usually for over a thousand if built correctly.

Additionally, Artificers get heightened clickies, and their scrolls last for much longer than normal. Furthermore, they can retain charges on wands (and scrolls, too IIRC).

I can also verify the bit on DPS - My artificer was able to reliably hit Velah with the greensteel lit2 heavy repeater that he'd been using since level 12 (and that was on Epic).

[Yan_PL]

I'll let the PHB do the talking here for me.

what edition is this one from? 3.5e?

[Calebro]

what edition is this one from? 3.5e?

Yep, 3.5 PHB, page 304 on my digital copy.
I'll be copying this over to the other thread in a minute.

[Yan_PL]

You also forgot to mention that an artificer has THE best Scroll healing in the game, bar-none. My heal scrolls on my main character ziind can heal for at least 300 points when the recipient is neither Warforged, nor possessing construct essence. I've even healed one barbarian 4xx hit points with just one heal scroll. Can a "true" healer heal for more, yes, and usually for over a thousand if built correctly.

Additionally, Artificers get heightened clickies, and their scrolls last for much longer than normal. Furthermore, they can retain charges on wands (and scrolls, too IIRC).

I can also verify the bit on DPS - My artificer was able to reliably hit Velah with the greensteel lit2 heavy repeater that he'd been using since level 12 (and that was on Epic).

I'm glad to confirm that. My Human Tank got healed by one artificer for 643 hp with single scroll. and that's without any monk or paladin levels, or paladin past lives. I prefer Artificer scrollheals to real heals when tanking eChrono or LoB or elite ToD or VoD or HoX, that's because Artificer is highly unlikely to run out of scrolls faster than cleric/fvs would run out of SP/pots.