View Single Post

Thread: [D&D3.5] Weapons, Upgrades, and More

  1. - Top - End - #15
    Firbolg in the Playground
    Join Date
    Apr 2005

    Default Re: [D&D3.5] Weapons, Upgrades, and More

    Quote Originally Posted by averagejoe View Post
    I like this a lot. It's a really nice, elegant idea, and I'm generally in favor of any efforts to make less christmas tree-ing.
    I think you'll like the latter half of it when I get around to finishing/posting it then. (I'm working on a half dozen things at once which leads me to be pretty slow at all of them... alas). This portion alone is basically just rebalancing weapons, reducing the christmas tree effect comes next, then the third step (the hardest part) is making the remaining magic items useful without needing a full WBL worth of them.

    A couple things. It would be helpful to point out which properties apply to range weapons, which apply only to range weapons, and so on. Some are obvious, but some (for example, "Can be used to trip") aren't. There's also an issue of choosing damage type or the, "Additional damage type," property; this seems to be a property of ammunition, not of a bow/crossbow.
    Good point. I think I can add two new columns to the table to indicate what can be used by what. That said I'm not sure that "can be used to trip" shouldn't be available to ranged. Isn't that basically what a bola is after all? If someone wants to invent a bow that shoots bola rounds or something, go nuts. Hell in my weapon styles feats I already have a feat that lets ranged weapons use any combat maneuver they like.

    As for the additional damage type however, ironically enough in the core rules damage type is determined by the weapon, not the ammunition. Check the SRD, the bow is listed as piercing damage, while the arrow has - in that spot. Seriously. It might be something worth changing, but seems like a needless complication when the same thing could be gotten across either way. (though some customization options exclusive to masterwork ammunition may be in order, I'd have to be careful to avoid stepping on the toes of what the weapon itself can do)

    edit: Updated the table. Only one I wasn't sure about was disallowing a double ranged weapon. I mean I could easily see a two handed crossbow firing two things at once being treated as a double weapon... but then again that's just asking for abuse, so probably better to just say no, and let the person pick up two hand crossbows.
    Last edited by Seerow; 2011-06-12 at 08:37 PM.
    If my text is blue, I'm being sarcastic.But you already knew that, right?