Mithral As A Weapon Material - What Should It Do?

[Fax Celestis]

As title.

Right now I am thinking about making it increase the weapon damage by one size category (as the blade is lighter, so you can wield a bigger one), but that seems a little uninspiring past, say, 5th level. Alternatives?

Obviously whatever the result is, it would bypass DR/Mithral and cut the item's weight in half.

[Immabozo]

perhaps an extra attack? Although that might be too strong. Perhaps an effective +2 or +3 to BAB for to-hit and determining iterative attacks (but not for PrC, etc pre-requs)

[Fouredged Sword]

I think it should allow a weapon to be used with weapon finesse regardless of size. If the weapon can already be used with weapon finesse, it should grant +2 to attack rolls when being wielded by a character with weapon finesse.

[Yogibear41]

I have heard some people that allow it to bypass dr/silver because its true silver or w/e.

You could let one handed weapons that are not light such as longswords count as light for purposes where that would be relevant.

Other than coolness factor I don't really see any other reason to use a mithril weapon over a steel one, except maybe hardness and hit points.

Mithril is about being good metal at a low weight, IMO it should be immune to things like a rust monsters attack too, because Mithril doesn't rust. IMO

Anyway sort of rambling but basically, I don't think you should give it any special abilities other than making the weapon light or something. (It should be noted that even if the weapon is lighter and you choose to use a larger version of it to deal more damage then the weapon is still going to be more difficult to swing because of its proportions even if the weight is the same or less so there should still be a size penalty, IMO.)

[Fax Celestis]

Well, Yogi, the main thing I'm trying to address is the no-brainer choice for adamantine weaponry and mithral armors at higher levels--yes, that changes somewhat when you step outside of core, but for the most part that's what people go with. There should be some choice involved there.

[Tehnar]

Unless you are changing what other materials do, I don't think it should do much for weapons.

With weapons you generally want them to be as heavy as possible (while retaining ease of use). Steel is light enough for a trained person to use it comfortably.

Personally if I changed anything it would be to give a mithril weapon +1 to hit and that it reduces the weapons damage by one "size" category. So a longsword would be d6.

[Phelix-Mu]

Some lore I recall from Tolkien involved it being ideal for forging because it could be shaped into very fine forms, but still had the strength to retain that form. So, maybe a critical-increasing effect, since you could get it to hold a very nice edge? That seems redundant with several other types of metal, though, but there is, in fact, only a few things that it could do.

[hymer]

Just some random thoughts:
When I use mithril [sic] in my campaigns, I have slashing and piercing weapons made of it cut DR as silver, cold iron and adamantine, and you can choose which type of damage you deal with it. And there's no reason to think a mithril weapon wouldn't be enchanted, of course. Generally speaking, these weapons let the melee do away with the golfbags.
Mithral [sic]... How about something that gets casters? It retains its permanent enchantments in antimagic fields, and it makes a targeted dispel at the user's level every time it hits? Or anyone hit must make a fortitude save or lose the highest level spell available, as the metal sucks magic right out?

[OldTrees1]

Mithral
Light:
Can be used as if you had Weapon Finesse. If you already had Weapon Finesse, then add your Dex to Damage instead of your Str. (You get full Dex mod to damage)

One Handed:
Counts as a Light or a One Handed weapon, whichever is more beneficial.

Two Handed:
Counts as a One Handed weapon or a Two Handed weapon, whichever is more beneficial.

(not sure of gold costs for these effects, I tried to make it have relatively equal benefit)

[Fax Celestis]

Just some random thoughts:
When I use mithril [sic] in my campaigns, I have slashing and piercing weapons made of it cut DR as silver, cold iron and adamantine, and you can choose which type of damage you deal with it. And there's no reason to think a mithril weapon wouldn't be enchanted, of course. Generally speaking, these weapons let the melee do away with the golfbags.
Mithral [sic]... How about something that gets casters? It retains its permanent enchantments in antimagic fields, and it makes a targeted dispel at the user's level every time it hits? Or anyone hit must make a fortitude save or lose the highest level spell available, as the metal sucks magic right out?


Mithral
Light:
Can be used as if you had Weapon Finesse. If you already had Weapon Finesse, then add your Dex to Damage instead of your Str. (You get full Dex mod to damage)

One Handed:
Counts as a Light or a One Handed weapon, whichever is more beneficial.

Two Handed:
Counts as a One Handed weapon or a Two Handed weapon, whichever is more beneficial.

(not sure of gold costs for these effects, I tried to make it have relatively equal benefit)

Both of these are pretty cool. I might steal the former for a different material.

[Haldir]

Mithral could become a niche build material if you allowed mithral forged weapons to be used in two-weapon fighting at reduced off-hand and iterative penalties, potentially making TWF more viable.

[OldTrees1]

Both of these are pretty cool. I might steal the former for a different material.
Thank you.

[Immabozo]

Mithral could become a niche build material if you allowed mithral forged weapons to be used in two-weapon fighting at reduced off-hand and iterative penalties, potentially making TWF more viable.

That is not a bad idea

[Phelix-Mu]

Non-magical weapon tech is an important tool in the arsenal of mundanes, and I like that most of these suggestions are really pretty useless to full casters. I do like many of the suggestions for tweaks that come up on this forum, but many I end up discarding because they are just as nice for the casters as for the mundanes.

[Artillery]

I like the approach of it letting you reduce the requirements for wielding it.

Mithral Greatsword can be wielded one handed. It would let you one-hand reach weapons for proper phalanx.

Mithral one-handed weapon can be used with weapon finesse but can still be used to power attack etc.

[StreamOfTheSky]

Mithral
Light:
Can be used as if you had Weapon Finesse. If you already had Weapon Finesse, then add your Dex to Damage instead of your Str. (You get full Dex mod to damage)

One Handed:
Counts as a Light or a One Handed weapon, whichever is more beneficial.

Two Handed:
Counts as a One Handed weapon or a Two Handed weapon, whichever is more beneficial.

I like this one.

[Yogibear41]

Well, Yogi, the main thing I'm trying to address is the no-brainer choice for adamantine weaponry and mithral armors at higher levels--yes, that changes somewhat when you step outside of core, but for the most part that's what people go with. There should be some choice involved there.

I see your point, but if you start adding stuff then its no longer a core game anyway so you might as well expand out into other materials (they make things more interesting anyway then just the standard X,Y, and Z) as far as the no brainer adamantine vs mithral choices at higher levels in a way the game was designed with that in mind, as that you never see any thing with DR/mithral and your dexterity score is bound to increase a little from character creation do to itmes so its only natural that you would want a higher maximum dex bonus to AC (not to mention the benefits of higher movement rate) and from a non-game related view point sometimes certain things are just better at one task than another. Cars may get great gas mileage but sometimes you just need a truck to pull that heavy load.

With all that being said, I think the weapon finesse idea is still a good one. I wouldn't over due it with all that anti-magical super buffs because then there is no reason to use adamantine and your problem just repeats itself.

[Larkas]

Mithral
Light:
Can be used as if you had Weapon Finesse. If you already had Weapon Finesse, then add your Dex to Damage instead of your Str. (You get full Dex mod to damage)

One Handed:
Counts as a Light or a One Handed weapon, whichever is more beneficial.

Two Handed:
Counts as a One Handed weapon or a Two Handed weapon, whichever is more beneficial.

(not sure of gold costs for these effects, I tried to make it have relatively equal benefit)

I like these ideas, though I'm not entirely sold on the "add your Dex to damage" part.

I also like mithral bypassing Silver DR, though I'd also make it bypass Cold Iron DR. This way, it becomes the go-to material for when you're fighting something strange.

A couple other ideas:

- Thrown weapons made mostly of mithral have double the range increment.

- Mithral is exceptionally easy to enchant. You can enhance a weapon to +1 for just 500gp, and any further enhancement can be done as if the target enhancement was one level lower. For example, you can enhance a weapon to +3 for just 8,000gp, the price for a regular +2 weapon. Of course, this could also work for mithral armors.

[Manly Man]

Mithral
Light:
Can be used as if you had Weapon Finesse. If you already had Weapon Finesse, then add your Dex to Damage instead of your Str. (You get full Dex mod to damage)

One Handed:
Counts as a Light or a One Handed weapon, whichever is more beneficial.

Two Handed:
Counts as a One Handed weapon or a Two Handed weapon, whichever is more beneficial.

(not sure of gold costs for these effects, I tried to make it have relatively equal benefit)

I'd combine this with the silver DR, myself, and leave it at that.

[Chronos]

Yeah, one category lighter and bypass DR/silver looks good to me, too. Much more than that, and the pendulum swings the other way, and everyone would always want mithral weapons instead of everyone always wanting adamantine weapons.

[weckar]

I'd think Mithral would be a terrible weapon material, and would at the very least require exotic weapon proficiency. Problem is that you very quickly run into the lightsaber problem where the (lack of) mass gives no feedback on your movement. It is like trying to control a sword with a joystick.

[OldTrees1]

I like these ideas, though I'm not entirely sold on the "add your Dex to damage" part.

Since the benefit for Light Weapons was to get a free feat, I gave them the effects of a second feat if they already had the first feat.

[Fax Celestis]

I'd think Mithral would be a terrible weapon material, and would at the very least require exotic weapon proficiency. Problem is that you very quickly run into the lightsaber problem where the (lack of) mass gives no feedback on your movement. It is like trying to control a sword with a joystick.

Why? It's obviously a very hard material (harder than steel, according to HP and Hardness per inch of thickness in the DMG), while also lighter. Where our real-world equivalent of adamantine is tungsten carbide, the real-world equivalent of mithral might be titanium.

[Lord Vukodlak]

Well, Yogi, the main thing I'm trying to address is the no-brainer choice for adamantine weaponry and mithral armors at higher levels--yes, that changes somewhat when you step outside of core, but for the most part that's what people go with. There should be some choice involved there.

What if Mithril counted as both silver and cold-iron for DR purposes. If a party fights a lot of demons and devils at high level a special material that counts as both would be more valuable then adamantine.

[weckar]

Oh it's hard, I'll grant you that. It's Feedback and inertia I'm concerned with.

Feedback:: If the weapon doesn't resist the movement (see below) it is not going to transfer the sensation of that movement back to the user, thus making the strike likely less accurate.

Inertia:: In basic terms, something with less mass can store less energy, so is generally less suitable as a weapon.


Again, I refer to the lightsaber problem, and why only Jedi can properly use them: Lack of mass.

[SiuiS]

Unless you are changing what other materials do, I don't think it should do much for weapons.

With weapons you generally want them to be as heavy as possible (while retaining ease of use). Steel is light enough for a trained person to use it comfortably.

Personally if I changed anything it would be to give a mithril weapon +1 to hit and that it reduces the weapons damage by one "size" category. So a longsword would be d6.

Well, mithril is supposed to be stronger than steel a t the same weight, or sometimes as strong as steel at half the weight (and depending on how you read them, they could both be true; a stronger material with less material being equal to a large amount of plate) so... Yeah. Weapons don't really benefit except they never need sharpening, never tarnish, and rarely fatigue you.

I think the cut DR silver/iron works best myself. That and depending on how rare adamant really is, you could have some neat effects. Like, adamant only ignores DR lower than it's own, so mithril with sufficient reinforcement would turn away adamant sundering.

[Fax Celestis]

Still not buying it. The rapier and sabre are perfectly effective weapons and were for quite some time the preferred nobleman's weapon, despite being rather flimsy and lightweight.

[weckar]

Well, that's because of their linear sharpness, not their weight. I'm willing to concede that for piercing weapons (and specifically THRUSTING weapons) there may be some merit to it, but none other.

[SiuiS]

Oh it's hard, I'll grant you that. It's Feedback and inertia I'm concerned with.

Feedback:: If the weapon doesn't resist the movement (see below) it is not going to transfer the sensation of that movement back to the user, thus making the strike likely less accurate.

Inertia:: In basic terms, something with less mass can store less energy, so is generally less suitable as a weapon.


But then you get issues with other materials, as well.

My favorite concept is that stuff like adamant, which is lighter but denser, actually shunts some of it's mass laterally into conceptual space. Adamantine weaponry strikes against other inanimate materials with much greater and more precise force that we would expect.

Mithril, at... What, half the weight of steel? Would not have this problem. A mithril long sword would have a flares tip and much weight toward the hilt, it would feel like flicking a baton as much as swinging a sword, but it could easily be made workable. It's just that swinging a long sword would feel like swinging a Bowie knife. After several hours of practice you'd get the hang of it. Which actually makes the whole finesse idea make more sense.


Again, I refer to the lightsaber problem, and why only Jedi can properly use them: Lack of mass.

Only Jedi could use light sabers because, despite their lack of mass, they generated spontaneously shifting electromagnetic fields that were like like swinging gyroscopes. The saber generated a sense of mass from resistance to movement, only it would shift sporadically. The Jedi could predict these movements of mass and account for them.

[Seerow]

Personally I'd let Mithral count as both Cold Iron and Silver for bypassing DR, since the distribution of those two materials are fairly random and a pain in the ass to remember, and cold iron is dirt cheap anyway. Having DR/Adamantine and DR/Mithril once you're high enough level to have a more expensive special weapon is a fair bit easier to work with.


I also like letting Mithril weapons count as 1 size category lighter when it benefits them, but I don't like it giving dex to damage for light weapons, there's enough other ways out there, another isn't needed. I'd go with one of: +1 to hit, +4 to confirm crits, or +1 to crit threat range, for a light weapon, depending on how valuable you want to make it.

Hrm I could see something like this working:

Power Attack: Now depends on the weapon category rather than how it's being wielded. (So One-Handed always gets x1 returns even if wielded in two hands)


Mithril Weapon-A weapon made from mithril counts as both Silver and Cold Iron for purposes of damage reduction. Your weapon counts as 1 category lower than normal whenever this would benefit you. This allows a two-handed weapon to be wielded in one hand, and a one-handed weapon to be finessed. A weapon that is already light or finessible gains a +1 bonus to its critical threat range.

Adamantine Weapon-A weapon made from adamantine bypasses DR/adamantine, and ignores the first 20 points of hardness of any object it attacks. Your weapon counts as 1 category higher than normal whenever this would benefit you. This allows a light weapon to be used to power attack as though it were a 1-hander, and allows a one-handed weapon to power attack as though it were a 2-handed weapon. A two-handed adamantine weapon deals damage as though it were 1 size category larger than normal.



So with Mithral you could have something like:
Mithral Shortsword: light weapon 1d6 18-20x2
Mithral Longsword: light weapon 1d8 19-20x2 (PA as one-handed)
Mithral Greatsword: 1-handed weapon 2d6 19-20x2 (PA as two-handed)

With Adamantine you instead have:
Adamantine Shortsword: 1-handed weapon 1d6 19-20x2 (PA as 1-handed)
Adamantine Longsword: 1-handed weapon 1d8 19-20x2 (PA as two-handed)
Adamantine Greatsword 2-handed weapon 3d6 19-20x2


So Mithril is better for raw combat capability for light/1-handed weapons, making it ideal for a TWFer or a Sword and Board user (who get a nice buff out of these changes). Adamantine is still useful there but going to be a few points of damage behind, in exchange for the utility of being able to chop through walls like butter. Adamantine really shines for two-handed wielders, who get the extra size category increase at the cost of being able to use an offhand/shield.

[Lord Vukodlak]

Still not buying it. The rapier and sabre are perfectly effective weapons and were for quite some time the preferred nobleman's weapon, despite being rather flimsy and lightweight.

They were light weapons yes however they were designed for that size and weight. If you halves the weight on the rapier you'd negatively impact its use as a weapon.

Which sounds more painful being hit by a Wiffile ball bat or a aluminum baseball bat of the same size. The aluminum bat is going to hurt more not because its made from a stronger material but because its more massive and thus can carry more kinetic energy. The military likes to make bullets out of depleted uranium because the metal is denser and thus can carry more kinetic energy than lead.

Armor you want to be both strong and light but for weapons especially medieval style weapons you still want some weight behind it. Changing the weight completely screws up the balance of a weapon so Mithrial weapons should only be plated and not solid.

If you like one of my players is a physicist he'll be at my house in an hour or so I could ask him to type an explanation for why making a weapon out of mithrial would fail.

[SiuiS]

Eh.

A mithril hammer will do more damage than a steel hammer, if they are both the same size, because speed lends quadratic ally to kinetic impact while mass lends linearly. The problem with reducing weight on most weapons is that they are already moving at optimal speed; you cannot generate more speed with a long sword if it's half weight because your arm is already the limiting factor.

[Seerow]

Eh.

A mithril hammer will do more damage than a steel hammer, if they are both the same size, because speed lends quadratic ally to kinetic impact while mass lends linearly. The problem with reducing weight on most weapons is that they are already moving at optimal speed; you cannot generate more speed with a long sword if it's half weight because your arm is already the limiting factor.

Luckily in fantasy world, you just say "Nope, arm wasn't a limiting factor" and swing faster with the lighter weapon. Even if it doesn't make sense in physics, it can still totally work.

[weckar]

If one pretends the arm is not a limiting factor, the arm will soon disagree, and that disagreement will undoubtedly lead to an untimely divorce.

[Alent]

Aren't most D&D weapons are excessively heavy.... Usually weighing as much as their real world counterparts' weight * (1+1d3)?

Doesn't making them out of mithral actually make their weights more realistic? :smallconfused:

[Haldir]

Well, that's because of their linear sharpness, not their weight. I'm willing to concede that for piercing weapons (and specifically THRUSTING weapons) there may be some merit to it, but none other.

Bilbo's Mithral coat turned a thrust from an orc captains spear, which means it is incredibly good at holding its form. Pretty obvious how this is useful for a weapon, and nobody is going to buy the ridiculous lightsaber argument, because I'm doubting mithral is lighter than wood, and wooden weapons are plenty easy to use without Jedi knowledge.

[TuggyNE]

Bypassing DR/silver seems like a no-brainer. DR/cold iron, maybe. DR/adamantine, probably not.

Changing handedness or size category is interesting and might work well. Especially the former, since it has a parallelism with mithral armor changing from heavy towards light.


Aren't most D&D weapons are excessively heavy.... Usually weighing as much as their real world counterparts' weight * (1+1d3)?

Doesn't making them out of mithral actually make their weights more realistic? :smallconfused:


nobody is going to buy the ridiculous lightsaber argument, because I'm doubting mithral is lighter than wood, and wooden weapons are plenty easy to use without Jedi knowledge.

Heh. Those are some pretty good points.

[Larkas]

Since the benefit for Light Weapons was to get a free feat, I gave them the effects of a second feat if they already had the first feat.

The problem is: it doesn't make much sense. I mean, I could see striking with a lighter weapon giving you a better chance to hit just that spot to cause more damage making sense, but if you can't do that with your bare fists, why would you be able to do that while armed? :smallconfused:

[rollforeigninit]

Whatever is decided, we must avoid any worrying about the real-world actual physics of weapon's use. Catgirls are rare enough as is.

[OldTrees1]

The problem is: it doesn't make much sense. I mean, I could see striking with a lighter weapon giving you a better chance to hit just that spot to cause more damage making sense, but if you can't do that with your bare fists, why would you be able to do that while armed? :smallconfused:

The same argument applies to Mithral granting Weapon Finesse. If you consider it a problem that Mithral Daggers grant Weapon Finesse, then you might prefer Seerow's adaptation.

[Alent]

Whatever is decided, we must avoid any worrying about the real-world actual physics of weapon's use. Catgirls are rare enough as is.

What does comparing a 50% off discount sword to Cheddar monks and laserswords have to do with actual physics?

[JaronK]

For what it's worth, one set of house rules I made had rules for improved weapons based on your craft ranks (it was part of a set of rules to make skill ranks useful). For that, Mithral gave a +2 bonus to AC when fighting defensively or using Combat Expertise for every 5 ranks of craft weaponsmithing the crafter had.

It's not fancy, but Mithral gets heavily used for armor anyway.

JaronK

[Seerow]

For what it's worth, one set of house rules I made had rules for improved weapons based on your craft ranks (it was part of a set of rules to make skill ranks useful). For that, Mithral gave a +2 bonus to AC when fighting defensively or using Combat Expertise for every 5 ranks of craft weaponsmithing the crafter had.

It's not fancy, but Mithral gets heavily used for armor anyway.

JaronK

Eh, I'd rather see Mithral not being so mandatory for armor, and other armor properties improved than mithral weapons being weak or nonexistant to compensate for being the only armor material worth mentioning.

I mean come on, Dragonhide armor gives no bonuses at all, it's just a fancy looking armor for druids? Adamantine gives an amount of DR so small it's irrelevant by the level you can afford it? Screw that.

[JaronK]

Eh, I'd rather see Mithral not being so mandatory for armor, and other armor properties improved than mithral weapons being weak or nonexistant to compensate for being the only armor material worth mentioning.

I mean come on, Dragonhide armor gives no bonuses at all, it's just a fancy looking armor for druids? Adamantine gives an amount of DR so small it's irrelevant by the level you can afford it? Screw that.

Well, they were of course. That overhaul included +1/2 AC bonus as DR/Adamantium for Medium Armor and full AC as DR for heavy armor, with Adamantium armor giving +1 DR/- per 5 ranks to Light Armor, +2 per 5 ranks to medium, and +3 DR per 5 ranks to heavy (and converting the DR from /Adamantium to /-). Thus, a suit of Adamantium Full Plate made by a smith with 15 ranks in Craft Armorsmithing would grant DR 17/-. Of course, DR never reduced damage below 1 with that overhaul. Still, it made heavy armor well worth it. It also means reducing armor from Heavy to Medium (as Mithral does) actually had some downsides.

JaronK

[eastmabl]

Mithral
Light:
Can be used as if you had Weapon Finesse. If you already had Weapon Finesse, then add your Dex to Damage instead of your Str. (You get full Dex mod to damage)

Dex to your damage is problematic, because there's no precedent for it - even through all the 3.5 shenanigans. It lets you effectively ignore your Strength stat while bearing your preferred weapon, and where Strength now only effects carrying capacity (this being second only the location of a wizard's familiar as the most ignored of 3.5 rules). Otherwise, I would pump my dex, take Weapon Finesse and TWF and get two masterwork mithril daggers ASAP (802 gp) for 1d4+Dex damage.

Given the cheap cost of mithril, I would recommend the following:

If you already have Weapon Finesse, the mithral weapon gains a +1 insight bonus to attack. Suddenly, for 500-1500 gp, you get a nice bonus that doesn't blow established game design out of whack.

The rest of the description seems acceptable.

[OldTrees1]

Dex to your damage is problematic, because there's no precedent for it - even through all the 3.5 shenanigans.

Read ToB again (specifically the Shadow Blade feat).*
I said I was giving the wielder the effects of a feat in the case where they already have Weapon Finesse.

*Not to mention several other examples: Dex to Damage (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=125732)

[Chronos]

A hammer or axe might be more effective if it's heavier, but most swords (including the weapon D&D calls the longsword) are designed to be as light as possible, and would be even better if there were some material that could be used to make them lighter. What weight they do have is mostly in the handle, and that's mostly just to keep the center of mass near the hand: If the blade were lighter, you could make the handle lighter too. Mithral, at half the weight of steel for the same strength, should make a great longsword.

[eastmabl]

Read ToB again (specifically the Shadow Blade feat).*
I said I was giving the wielder the effects of a feat in the case where they already have Weapon Finesse.

*Not to mention several other examples: Dex to Damage (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=125732)

I stand corrected - although for 3.5 D&D sources for adding Dex bonuses to melee attacks, there's the Tome of Battle feat, the Dragon Magazine, a feat in Drow of the Underdark and one PrC in Races of the Wild.

- The Shadow Blade feat gives this ability to 5 weapons and unarmed strike.
- The Champion of Corellon Larethian gives the ability to 5 weapons, and limits the ability of the damage to targets not immune to criticals or sneak attack.
- The Drow of the Underdark feat is limited to flat-footed foes, and is in Faerun where balance is suspect because everything's tougher in the Forgotten Realms.
- My Dragon Magazines are in storage, so I can't check them.

Admitting that my initial assertion was incorrect, I think the initial hypothesis remains effectively correct. The proposed bonus of "Dex to Damage for all finesse-able weapons" (totalling at least 9 weapons in the core rules, and perhaps more in the supplemental rules) is beyond existing rules. At the very least, there should be some flavorful limitations - or some other alternative.

[Fax Celestis]

Explain why it need a downside? Adamantine doesn't have a downside.

[Fitz10019]

More brainstorming:

A flaming mithral weapon does 1d8 fire instead of 1d6.

Any mithral weapon holds an enchantment 50% longer (MW, GMW, Bless weapon for example). Does not stack with Extend Spell metamagic.

[JaronK]

Explain why it need a downside? Adamantine doesn't have a downside.

Assuming that was at me, it's basically because Heavy Armor proficiency should actually have benefits. You can still do the whole Dastanas + Chain Shirt + Mithral Chahar Aina deal for lots of AC, but the heavy armor people just do better.

Remember, this system boosts the heck out of heavier armored classes while making skills important. The point was to make mundane classes have some nice things for once. It's not like Mithral is weaker compared to the normal game. Note the Mithral Armor also got +1 Max Dex for every 5 ranks you had in Craft Armorsmithing, Mithral Armor did get better for high dex types. It's just that the other armor materials got better still for heavier armored types.

JaronK

[NichG]

Mithril tends to also be associated with magical workings, the way that cold iron resists them.

So what about something like, a Mithril weapon can be given enchantments without the '+1' that you normally need to stick on first?

[Fax Celestis]

Assuming that was at me, it's basically because Heavy Armor proficiency should actually have benefits. You can still do the whole Dastanas + Chain Shirt + Mithral Chahar Aina deal for lots of AC, but the heavy armor people just do better.

Remember, this system boosts the heck out of heavier armored classes while making skills important. The point was to make mundane classes have some nice things for once. It's not like Mithral is weaker compared to the normal game. Note the Mithral Armor also got +1 Max Dex for every 5 ranks you had in Craft Armorsmithing, Mithral Armor did get better for high dex types. It's just that the other armor materials got better still for heavier armored types.

JaronK

Actually it was at eastmabl.

[eastmabl]

Mithril tends to also be associated with magical workings, the way that cold iron resists them.

So what about something like, a Mithril weapon can be given enchantments without the '+1' that you normally need to stick on first?

I like this. This lets you pay 500 gp/pound for the privilege of not getting your +1 enhancement bonus to damage.


Explain why it need a downside? Adamantine doesn't have a downside.

Since apparently this was directed at me, I suppose that I require clarification.

Before this post, I've only weighed in on the "Dex Bonus to Melee Damage" for finesse-able weapons of mithril make. When I consider homebrew fixes, I typically try to work within the established precedent of the game system.

After being disabused of my preconceptions about the Dex to Melee Damage options, I considered three of the four sources which give allow for this damage in D&D 3.5 (see the link for Dex to Damage (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=125732)). All of them have some form of limitation that is unique to the feat or class ability. The Tome of Battle feat is limited to the six weapons of that school; the Champion of CLarethian is limited to five weapons; the Drow of the Underdark alternative class feature for fighters gives the bonus damage, but only when the opponent is flatfooted. (Again, I did not review the Corsair PrC from a Dragon Magazine). If we are going to develop rules for "Dex Bonus to Melee Damage," I would give whatever granted ability somewhere inside of these outer bounds of established rules. Thusly, there should be some form of limitation, instead of granting the bonus to all finesse-able weapons that can be made of mithral (somewhere around 9 in the core rules, and more when the supplemental rules are allowed).

Therefore, I would recommend one of the following (and these have been modified slightly to reflect consideration since original posts):

1. A limited set of weapons (five) which can allow for Dex Bonus to Damage for Melee weapons when (1) you are using a finesse-able mithril weapon, and (2) you already have the Weapon Finesse feat.
2. A + 1 insight bonus to attacks when (1) you are using a finesse-able mithril weapon, and (2) you already have the Weapon Finesse feat. Make the cost of any mithril weapon 900 + base weapon price to reflect the +1 enhancement bonus (+300 gp) and +1 insight bonus (double the masterwork cost).
3. The suggestion as above; spend 500 gp/lb in order to gain early access to the weapon enhancements. This provides a scaleable bonus that you seem to be concerned about; a mithril vorpal longsword will cost 11,000 less than a +1 mithril longsword does.

As for the downsides of adamantine, I suppose there aren't any - we're discussing the gold standard of the system for armor and weapons. Then again, more often than not in the light weapon category, you're paying more for adamantine than for mithril (+3000 gp for adamantine v. +500 gp/lb for mithril weapons, per the core rules).

[ericgrau]

As title.

Right now I am thinking about making it increase the weapon damage by one size category (as the blade is lighter, so you can wield a bigger one), but that seems a little uninspiring past, say, 5th level. Alternatives?

Obviously whatever the result is, it would bypass DR/Mithral and cut the item's weight in half.
You could make a similar argument that lightening the weapon reduces the damage, and that making it larger only slows it down from poor leverage. There are iron hammers, brass hammers and lead hammers but not any aluminum hammers AFAIK, not even high strength aluminum alloy. Iron is preferred simply because it's cheapest, even though the others are both denser and less dense. Brass and lead are specialty hammers to avoid scratching your target and so on, somewhat similar to mallets.

If you allow mithral on rods and other such magic items I think casters will take it frequently to save weight. Darkwood too. Even with a 5 lb. handy haversack carrying most of your stuff, the moment you draw that rod to use it you're at a scary 10 pounds or almost half your light load. Add a weapon, a spell component pouch, a few magic items and whatever else and your light load budget becomes tight.

DR/mithral makes it that much harder on melee because they need yet another weapon in the golf bag. You effectively weaken all weapons like that unless you boost not only mithral but also all the existing weapons to make up for it.

Final Fantasy has the powerful silver sword which I believe was supposed to be mithral silver. It attacks faster and hits more easily. Both extra attacks or even a +1 to hit (beyond masterwork) is going way too far. But something like rerolling 1s would effectively give you a +0.5 to hit which might be nice. Makes it a tough choice between either that or bypassing certain DR.

[Seerow]

rerolling 1s would be way more powerful than a +1 to hit.

Just about anyone can find another +1 to hit somewhere they can take advantage of, and will typically hit on a 2 with their first attack (plus any bonus attacks not from BAB). No longer missing attacks on a natural 1? That's a big deal.

[ericgrau]

Only in theoretical op. Normally it's quite rare and there is a point to rolling a d20 in 95% of games. Except against the weakest of monsters, then it's kind of nice. It is the defining mark of the system after all, and there is typically a point to the other 18 sides.

[Vanitas]

Only Jedi could use light sabers because, despite their lack of mass, they generated spontaneously shifting electromagnetic fields that were like like swinging gyroscopes. The saber generated a sense of mass from resistance to movement, only it would shift sporadically. The Jedi could predict these movements of mass and account for them.
What about Grievous?

@Fax: about the mithral, I'd just use the stats of feycrafted weapons in addition to mithral.


I mean come on, Dragonhide armor gives no bonuses at all, it's just a fancy looking armor for druids? Adamantine gives an amount of DR so small it's irrelevant by the level you can afford it? Screw that.
Dragoncrafted armor, on the other hand, is pretty cool.

[Seerow]

Only in theoretical op. Normally it's quite rare and there is a point to rolling a d20 in 95% of games. Except against the weakest of monsters, then it's kind of nice. It is the defining mark of the system after all, and there is typically a point to the other 18 sides.

Not just theoretical op. Basically any game hits that point somewhere between 10 and 15 for a full BAB attacker. It stays there from that point on. At that point the first attack is all but guaranteed to hit, it's the followup attacks that you worry about missing with.

[ericgrau]

Nah I figured about 75% before, and less on secondaries. There's no way you even get close on all your secondaries. Both AB and monster AC scale at about 1.25 per level.

But if it makes you feel better you could reroll 2s. Almost the same effect. Worth almost +0.45 even with the increased 1s.

[Alefiend]

Still not buying it. The rapier and sabre are perfectly effective weapons and were for quite some time the preferred nobleman's weapon, despite being rather flimsy and lightweight.

False and false. A rapier weighs about the same as any other one-handed sword, it's just balanced differently. As to flimsiness, that's just not so. You can't thrust effectively with a flexible blade. Many later rapiers (and then smallswords and court swords) had triangular blades that couldn't cut at all, but were great for thrusting due to their inflexibility.

[OldTrees1]

I stand corrected - although for 3.5 D&D sources for adding Dex bonuses to melee attacks, there's the Tome of Battle feat, the Dragon Magazine, a feat in Drow of the Underdark and one PrC in Races of the Wild.

Admitting that my initial assertion was incorrect, I think the initial hypothesis remains effectively correct. The proposed bonus of "Dex to Damage for all finesse-able weapons" (totalling at least 9 weapons in the core rules, and perhaps more in the supplemental rules) is beyond existing rules. At the very least, there should be some flavorful limitations - or some other alternative.

You missed the Sword of Graceful Strikes (remember 3.5 imports all of 3.0 that it doesn't update). That sword gives +dex to damage instead of +str.

Personally I do not see a need for a flavorful further limitation considering it is already restricted to mithral light weapons. However add a limitation if you wish.

[eastmabl]

You missed the Sword of Graceful Strikes (remember 3.5 imports all of 3.0 that it doesn't update). That sword gives +dex to damage instead of +str.

Personally I do not see a need for a flavorful further limitation considering it is already restricted to mithral light weapons. However add a limitation if you wish.

I don't believe a single shortsword that is a specific magic item speaks to a broader array of weapons falling into the "balanced" category - if anything, it's most narrow of all of the other options.

[ericgrau]

False and false. A rapier weighs about the same as any other one-handed sword, it's just balanced differently. As to flimsiness, that's just not so. You can't thrust effectively with a flexible blade. Many later rapiers (and then smallswords and court swords) had triangular blades that couldn't cut at all, but were great for thrusting due to their inflexibility.

The confusion might come from the fencing foil which isn't really a useful military weapon.

Most weapons benefit from being a reasonable weight for the wielder, not lighter nor heavier. Not that reality needs to be an issue in a fantasy world. You can say anything is because it's mythical and call it a day. Anything you do that makes mithral weapons better than adamantine weapons for certain builds and adamantine armor better than mithral for certain builds would work well. You probably want to see the heavy melee in adamantine armor and the roguey types with mithral blades. So you either make adamantine armor better with low dex/low precision damage/not-med-BAB or better with high strength/heavier armors/full-BAB. And vis versa for mithral.

[OldTrees1]

I don't believe a single shortsword that is a specific magic item speaks to a broader array of weapons falling into the "balanced" category - if anything, it's most narrow of all of the other options.

Wait. So your concern is not about it being "unprecedented" or something like that. Your concern is about balance? Two things to remember:
1) Martial characters are lower tier & dex based combat tends to be weaker than str based combat.
2) Balance is dependent on benefit/cost. I only specified benefit, not cost.

[SiuiS]

Luckily in fantasy world, you just say "Nope, arm wasn't a limiting factor" and swing faster with the lighter weapon. Even if it doesn't make sense in physics, it can still totally work.

Well yeah, but as soon as you move into "this doesn't make sense to me because physics" you've got to take all the physics, not just the stuff you think you know. Most people don't really grasp that you can effectively halve the weight of a load using a simple pulley system, for example.

The shenanigans I've pulled using pulleys, oils, rope, and the encumbrance rules, man, you wouldn't believe.


Bilbo's Mithral coat turned a thrust from an orc captains spear, which means it is incredibly good at holding its form. Pretty obvious how this is useful for a weapon, and nobody is going to buy the ridiculous lightsaber argument, because I'm doubting mithral is lighter than wood, and wooden weapons are plenty easy to use without Jedi knowledge.

Bilbo's mithril actually is best represented by adamant in D&D.

Wooden weapons are not not and can not be made as thin as metal, so this comparison doesn't hold. A wooden sword is many times thicker than a metal one, even professionally fabricated wasters.


Eh, I'd rather see Mithral not being so mandatory for armor, and other armor properties improved than mithral weapons being weak or nonexistant to compensate for being the only armor material worth mentioning.

I mean come on, Dragonhide armor gives no bonuses at all, it's just a fancy looking armor for druids? Adamantine gives an amount of DR so small it's irrelevant by the level you can afford it? Screw that.

Adamant becomes much more affordable with a few ranks of craft and profession.


A hammer or axe might be more effective if it's heavier, but most swords (including the weapon D&D calls the longsword) are designed to be as light as possible, and would be even better if there were some material that could be used to make them lighter. What weight they do have is mostly in the handle, and that's mostly just to keep the center of mass near the hand: If the blade were lighter, you could make the handle lighter too. Mithral, at half the weight of steel for the same strength, should make a great longsword.

This doesn't take repercussions into account, however. There's a reason sword manufacture is it's own art.


What about Grievous?

Or Jango Fett? Or that the robes Obi Wan was wearing that were specific to a certain group of people he was hiding amongst became de-facto the uniform dress of an order of monks in the past?

Don't tell me you're going to base your understanding of an original design by what got lost in the cracks when they developed the EU for money, hon. That would be silly.


You missed the Sword of Graceful Strikes (remember 3.5 imports all of 3.0 that it doesn't update). That sword gives +dex to damage instead of +str.

Personally I do not see a need for a flavorful further limitation considering it is already restricted to mithral light weapons. However add a limitation if you wish.

Neat! Magic or mundane capacity?

[OldTrees1]

Neat! Magic or mundane capacity?
Huh?
The Sword was a specific magic weapon from Arms and Equipment Guide
The Mithral suggestion (which shared the Dex to Damage but limited it to light weapons wielded by weapon finessing weilders) was mine but since it is just a suggestion, users could adjust it as they wish.

[shylocke]

http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/SRD:Mithral

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/specialMaterials.htm

[OldTrees1]

http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/SRD:Mithral

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/specialMaterials.htm

The question is what should Mithral do for weapons. Did you mean to say that it should do what it does do (aka pretty much nothing)?

[shylocke]

Sorry. Using my phone and my touch screen is being kinda screwy. Mithril counts as +1 but doesn't give off a magic aura and is always masterwork. One of my dm's let it stack with regular enchantments.

[eastmabl]

Wait. So your concern is not about it being "unprecedented" or something like that. Your concern is about balance? Two things to remember:
1) Martial characters are lower tier & dex based combat tends to be weaker than str based combat.
2) Balance is dependent on benefit/cost. I only specified benefit, not cost.

Precedence is a good indicator of what is balanced when you are homebrewing. Inherent to every discuss of revised or new rules is game balance. I did not bring up balance, as I believed it to be inherent to the discussion we were having.

1.) As noted before, Dex Bonus to Melee Damage is rare for a reason - a character can completely ignore his Strength score provided he can hold his weapons and his armor. The same cannot be said of a Strength-based character ignoring his Dex.

2.) I have been discussing costs the whole time. Per the SRD, the mithril costs 500 gp/lb for other items (to include weapons).

Under the proposed rule, if I have a mithril dagger (502 gp) and weapon finesse, I get the benefit of weapon damage + strength damage + dex damage. This is the equivalent of (1) a feat that is unique to one or two classes in the Tome of Battle, (2) a special ability from a single, race-specific prestige class, (3) an alternate class feature from a high-powered setting for the Fighter class, or (4) a specific magic item from a 3.0 splat book that is effectively a 22,000 GP upgrade over a +3 disarming shortsword whose magical effects were never again duplicated in a 3.5 supplement, despite the numerous tomes dedicated to every aspect of the game.

What would you propose would be the appropriate cost for this benefit? 502 gp seems a little light to me. Might you consider alternative scheme for pricing? What about a different benefit entirely?

[OldTrees1]

What would you propose would be the appropriate cost for this benefit? 502 gp seems a little light to me. Might you consider alternative scheme for pricing? What about a different benefit entirely?

The question was "what should mithral do?". So I designed 3 effects (light, one-handed and two-handed). Then I said "(not sure of gold costs for these effects, I tried to make it have relatively equal benefit)". So the 3 prices (L, 1H and 2H) would be set relative to the benefits.

Feycraft Weapons gave me the idea for downgrading the handedness/granting weapon finesse. Feycraft weapons cost +1500gp. My suggestion is stronger so call it +3000gp.

[Jeff the Green]

Precedence is a good indicator of what is balanced when you are homebrewing.

This forum needs a "ROFL" smiley.

[Deophaun]

What would you propose would be the appropriate cost for this benefit?
Considering pretty much all of the other things listed are overpriced...

Keep in mind, if mithral is making a weapon light, it no longer qualifies for Power Attack, so you're still not going to be competing with a Strength-based ubercharger. And if you are just using it to get a two-handed weapon down to a one-handed weapon, you aren't Finessing it, so the Dex-to-damage effect is unlikely adding all that much.

Beyond that, there is a point that if mithral is actually giving a weapon a property beyond simple weight-saving, it should be more expensive than it is.

[Alent]

Precedence is a good indicator of what is balanced when you are homebrewing.

...

Under the proposed rule, if I have a mithril dagger (502 gp) and weapon finesse, I get the benefit of weapon damage + strength damage + dex damage. This is the equivalent of (1) a feat that is unique to one or two classes in the Tome of Battle

The benefits of the feat are available to any class as a feat chain, accessible rather early with minimal optimization.

Martial Study (Shadow Hand Maneuver) -> Martial Stance (Shadow Hand Stance) -> Shadow Blade to get Dex to Damage passively.

That said, I think you should also be contrasting against the composite longbow as a point of balance reference, since the composite longbow doesn't benefit from power attack and depends on number of hits to deal damage, similar to light weapons in TWF builds. The Composite longbow adds 100gp of price for every point of str mod you get to damage.

So why not just add a static price, say, 500 gp for every point of dex mod to damage? That way a low level finesse weapon user can blow a feat and 502gp for +1 dex to damage early on (or 1002gp, depending on how you want to set the entry point on a dex bonus at the initial 500gp or add another 500gp. Keeping pattern with the longbow it'd be 1002gp.), and have to spend money continually to upgrade to keep up with his dex.

2502gp(3002gp?) for a +5 dex to damage +1 dagger that you then still have to enchant with regular magic bonuses sounds like a more substantial pricetag to me.

I'm not entirely sure I like it, myself, but as costs and game balance go I don't think it's terribly unreasonable. I'd probably do something different if I were houseruling it. I'm much more fond of Janken bonuses where every tool has a purpose, and carry around an arsenal of weapons with spares... but people like to complain about that as being the "golf club bag effect" or something along those lines.

[Larkas]

The same argument applies to Mithral granting Weapon Finesse. If you consider it a problem that Mithral Daggers grant Weapon Finesse, then you might prefer Seerow's adaptation.

Nah, I like your adaptation just fine, I just think I'd nix the part about light weapons and add in double range increment for thrown weapons. :smallsmile: Mithral light armor isn't considered lighter (i.e.: clothing), so I don't have a problem with mithral light weapons not having special abilities. Note that I don't think there's a balance problem with the changes you propose (I actually have a magical weapon property in my campaigns that lets you add Dex to damage at the cost of 2,000gp and no weapon bonus). Besides, monks could always just use mithral cesti (http://images4.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20110611061427/assassinscreed/images/7/78/Metal-cestus-transparent.png) and be done with it. It's just that giving that as a function of the material doesn't sit well with me.

[Seerow]

Adamant becomes much more affordable with a few ranks of craft and profession.


And about a year of downtime unless you've got a fair bit more than "a few ranks" or are using houserules.

[OldTrees1]

Considering pretty much all of the other things listed are overpriced...

Keep in mind, if mithral is making a weapon light, it no longer qualifies for Power Attack, so you're still not going to be competing with a Strength-based ubercharger. And if you are just using it to get a two-handed weapon down to a one-handed weapon, you aren't Finessing it, so the Dex-to-damage effect is unlikely adding all that much.

Beyond that, there is a point that if mithral is actually giving a weapon a property beyond simple weight-saving, it should be more expensive than it is.
Corrections about the suggestion being discussed:
1) My suggestion of Dex to damage was for Mithral Light weapons whose wielder already had Weapon Finesse (and thus could not benefit from the free Weapon Finesse).
2) My suggestion allowed Mithral One-Handed weapons to be treated as Light for Weapon Finesse and One-Handed for Power Attack. No Dex to Damage effect.



Nah, I like your adaptation just fine, I just think I'd nix the part about light weapons and add in double range increment for thrown weapons. :smallsmile: Mithral light armor isn't considered lighter (i.e.: clothing), so I don't have a problem with mithral light weapons not having special abilities. Note that I don't think there's a balance problem with the changes you propose (I actually have a magical weapon property in my campaigns that lets you add Dex to damage at the cost of 2,000gp and no weapon bonus). Besides, monks could always just use mithral cesti (http://images4.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20110611061427/assassinscreed/images/7/78/Metal-cestus-transparent.png) and be done with it. It's just that giving that as a function of the material doesn't sit well with me.

Thanks.

The other suggestion I referenced was almost identical to mine except for the Dex-Damage bit. (Hence my referencing it for your tastes)

The balance discussion was with the other poster.

[Fax Celestis]

Precedence is a good indicator of what is balanced when you are homebrewing. Inherent to every discuss of revised or new rules is game balance. I did not bring up balance, as I believed it to be inherent to the discussion we were having.

1.) As noted before, Dex Bonus to Melee Damage is rare for a reason - a character can completely ignore his Strength score provided he can hold his weapons and his armor. The same cannot be said of a Strength-based character ignoring his Dex.

2.) I have been discussing costs the whole time. Per the SRD, the mithril costs 500 gp/lb for other items (to include weapons).

Under the proposed rule, if I have a mithril dagger (502 gp) and weapon finesse, I get the benefit of weapon damage + strength damage + dex damage. This is the equivalent of (1) a feat that is unique to one or two classes in the Tome of Battle, (2) a special ability from a single, race-specific prestige class, (3) an alternate class feature from a high-powered setting for the Fighter class, or (4) a specific magic item from a 3.0 splat book that is effectively a 22,000 GP upgrade over a +3 disarming shortsword whose magical effects were never again duplicated in a 3.5 supplement, despite the numerous tomes dedicated to every aspect of the game.

What would you propose would be the appropriate cost for this benefit? 502 gp seems a little light to me. Might you consider alternative scheme for pricing? What about a different benefit entirely?
To be fair, his original suggestion was to allow you to replace your STR mod with your DEX mod when fighting with a mithral light weapon, not add your DEX mod.

[SiuiS]

Huh?
The Sword was a specific magic weapon from Arms and Equipment Guide
The Mithral suggestion (which shared the Dex to Damage but limited it to light weapons wielded by weapon finessing weilders) was mine but since it is just a suggestion, users could adjust it as they wish.

Magic then.


And about a year of downtime unless you've got a fair bit more than "a few ranks" or are using houserules.

Usually backstory and a hand wave. If you're coming in as a level 1 anything with with 10*nd4, you're screwed. If you're coming in with a second level character, having ranks in miner, black smith and armorer can cut the price significantly unless extrapolation isn't allowed and the game runs on negative prescriptive RAW.

[Seerow]

Usually backstory and a hand wave. If you're coming in as a level 1 anything with with 10*nd4, you're screwed. If you're coming in with a second level character, having ranks in miner, black smith and armorer can cut the price significantly unless extrapolation isn't allowed and the game runs on negative prescriptive RAW.

Yes, because DMs frequently allow all characters to trade a handful of skill ranks for 15,000+gp?

Because if you're including Profession(Miner) you're not just trying to get the crafting reduced cost (which is normal and generally accepted), but trying to get the materials for free too.

But let's see... 2nd level character, we'll say he has int 13 (going for combat expertise or something) and 5 ranks in both skills. Looking at a +6 bonus. We'll even say he blows some of his money on masterwork tools of each, getting him up to +8. Taking a 10 on crafting a DC18 gets 324 silver, or 32.4 gold per week done. So just the time taken to craft your adamantine armor is a little shy of 10 years.

Now, that 16,500g requires 5,500g worth of raw materials, or of Adamantine in this case.

Profession gets you half your profession check in goldpieces per week. So with a +8 profession(miner) check, you're averaging about 9gp per week. At 9gp per week you will collect your 5,500gp worth of raw materials in 611 weeks, or just under 12 years.

Altogether your character as a part of backstory will have devoted more than half of his life to mining and smithing to make this suit of adamantine armor. So that you, the player, can start play as a character with an item worth 18 times more than your wealth by level without paying for it. This is roughly equivalent to saying "I'm a noble in my background, so I've got a land, a castle, an army, and thousands of extra gold budgeted just for my adventures!"

Yeah I don't see that flying. In any game. Ever. I was even being generous in my crafting assumptions, assuming that the Adamantine was a part of the armor component, and thus didn't have a higher DC (such as masterwork for example), which would have potentially tacked on so much more that you couldn't succeed in a single lifetime without either being higher level or having more resources invested.

[Der_DWSage]

Moving along...

I'd see Mithral being the material of choice for those that use two-weapon fighting, so the option of making weapons one category lighter sounds like a solid one. (Even if it results in a Buster Sword shenanigan where someone starts using a Large-size Greatsword.)

Perhaps have Mithral reduce the penalties on TWF by -2, in addition to the reducing weight categories? Makes it the weapon of choice for TWFers, while not having the Adamantine issue of 'Why have anything else ever?'

[Garagos]

I really like the idea of this thread. I assume that everyone is just ignoring or deciding to throw out this statement in the SRD Mithral entry?

"In the case of weapons, this lighter weight does not change a weapon’s size category or the ease with which it can be wielded (whether it is light, one-handed, or two-handed)."

I know my DM would not be willing to ignore this, so if the rest of you get to start wielding mithral greatswords in one hand, i'll be very jealous!

[ericgrau]

stuff
That and adventuring is generally 100 times more profitable. It would make more sense to throw extra levels into your backstory.

For mithral you need to make sure you don't flip the issue to "why have anything besides mithral ever". If you limit it to TWF that gives a reason why others don't have it, but you are basically stealth-buffing TWF by making it an automatic choice for them. And if it's that strong they'll get it sooner. With adamantine there is at least a long time where you prefer steel for the cost. In that sense it seems like less character choice because you obviously have to save for your mithral weapons early on.

[Seerow]

I really like the idea of this thread. I assume that everyone is just ignoring or deciding to throw out this statement in the SRD Mithral entry?

"In the case of weapons, this lighter weight does not change a weapon’s size category or the ease with which it can be wielded (whether it is light, one-handed, or two-handed)."

I know my DM would not be willing to ignore this, so if the rest of you get to start wielding mithral greatswords in one hand, i'll be very jealous!

This is about making houserules to make Mithral weapons useful, not alternate interpretations of RAW. You are correct that by RAW Mithral does nothing beneficial to the weapon except reducing the weight for encumbrance purposes.

[OldTrees1]

I really like the idea of this thread. I assume that everyone is just ignoring or deciding to throw out this statement in the SRD Mithral entry?

"In the case of weapons, this lighter weight does not change a weapon’s size category or the ease with which it can be wielded (whether it is light, one-handed, or two-handed)."

I know my DM would not be willing to ignore this, so if the rest of you get to start wielding mithral greatswords in one hand, i'll be very jealous!

Everyone is saying how they would change the SRD Mithral in order to make it worthwhile for weapons. A frequent suggestion was having it be treated as a lighter category when beneficial (with a suitable and higher gp cost).

[Thiyr]

Something I wanted to bring up: Mithral seems, thematically, like a perfect material for ammunition, and none of these suggestions really seems to work with that terribly well. I'm not coming up with anything offhand, but any thoughts?

[OldTrees1]

Something I wanted to bring up: Mithral seems, thematically, like a perfect material for ammunition

How so? (To inform how it should be mechanically represented)

[Seerow]

Mithral never seemed to me to be a great ammunition property. But I could see something like increasing range increment, or getting whatever benefit is decided on for light weapons.

[Maginomicon]

I'd give a mithral arrow an increased threat range because it retains its "keen edge" (moh's hardness) on impact.

[Vanitas]

This forum needs a "ROFL" smiley.

This forum needs people that are less elitist and condescendent.

[Person_Man]

My vote is that Mithral weapons should count as one category lighter when it is beneficial to do so. For example, a two handed greatsword could be used as a one-handed weapon (dealing 2d6 + Str bonus damage, not Str*1.5), a one handed weapon can count as a light weapon for TWF purposes (but could still be used to qualify for Power Attack), a light weapon can be used as a thrown weapon with a range increment of 20 feet, and thrown weapons and ammo get +20 feet added to their ranged increment.

[Philistine]

Obviously mithral should improve a weapon's speed, thus making it more useful for interrupting spellca- Oh, wait.