doesnt this enhancement make vorpal weapons crappier than they already are? Skizzlefrits 15:12, May 25, 2010 (UTC)

What does this have to do with vorpal weapons? Vorpal sucks major ass in my opinion because it only affects creatures not already immune to critical hits, meanwhile this deals typeless damage and/or a disintegrate effect, which can own such creatures (since undead, constructs, and other creatures immune to criticals tend to have no Con score and thus a low Fortitude save. If anything, this makes vorpal weapons obsolete. Good riddance. - TG Cid 17:36, May 25, 2010 (UTC)
Just interjecting that vorpal is a +5 bonus, though i really dont agree with that. The 2d6 typeless damage and the ability to hit incorpreal and ethereal creatures is already past +5 and the disintegrate effect just adds to it. I believe that the bonus breakdown is as follows: +2 for 2d6 damage, +1 because damage is typeless and a force effect, +1 for ghost touch, +1 for hitting ethereal creatures, and +whatever for a 6th level spelllike ability infinity times per day that does not provoke and AoOs that uses BAB as part of the save. There you have it, a crazy blade of disaster broken down. Skizzlefrits 01:30, May 26, 2010 (UTC)
Let's compare to what amounts to +5 bonus of weapon enhancements. The most standard is +5d6 damage in random energies. Typeless damage beats that part since nothing will be immune or resistant to it, but that's only 2d6 damage. Disintegrate is the biggie though, adding another 5d6 damage even on a successful save... Yep, with everything else I'd probably call this an artifact weapon, effectively at least a +8 (maybe higher) bonus. Disintegrate at will on every successful hit is a bit much pre-epic. --Ghostwheel 02:08, May 26, 2010 (UTC)
I think your pluses are off Skizz. Force effects already hit incorporeal and ethereal targets without the regular miss chance normally associated with them, and you can make your weapon deal force damage with a +2 ability from the MIC (that's supposed to be for ranged weapons, but whatever). Add another +2 for the damage boost (since the ability is unclear if it translates energy damage or not into force as well, I'm going to assume that it does because I think it's overpriced anyway) and we're at +4 before the special thing.
The special thing is fairly strong, but you're trading all of your iterative and secondary attacks for it. You can make 3 or more attacks that deal something like 4d6+12 each with a greatsword or one that might just kill them, but they get a save (it's not any better a save than a spellcaster who isn't boosting with feats would have). I actually think it works well as an upgrade here (like flaming burst is supposed to upgrade flaming, can't get it without the other stuff) because of the trade off, but I'd never let that be it's own +1 thing. It is a really good ability on it's own, but in conjunction with the rest of the ability it isn't that far out there. So good? Yeah. Crazy good? I don't think so.
Also, ugh edit conflicts. It's not on every hit Ghost. It's a standard action, so you don't get to do a full attack if you use it. And you can't do it on a charge. It's not that awesome. - TarkisFlux 02:27, May 26, 2010 (UTC)
That changes things a bit *nod* Though with the right character who focuses on a single attack and has things that don't require a channeled spell (duskblade) or martial strikes, it could be pretty funky. Plus, it's a single attack at your highest BAB, whereas by the third iterative attack with a weapon you've fallen off the RNG. --Ghostwheel 02:30, May 26, 2010 (UTC)
Your third attack is just fine if your first was off the RNG like happens all too often in non-managed setups, so I think the damage tradeoff is likely to be there there. Anyway, even though you very likely hit with the effect, you run into monster save bloat at any level where you could bust this out. Coupled with your inability to boost this with feats and you have a save that is solid, but it's nothing fantastic. Especially considering the number of creatures with solid Fort saves. So I don't really see this as a big deal for most Str based classes, and a trap for all of the rest since the save is Str based. - TarkisFlux 02:46, May 26, 2010 (UTC)
Then do yo all see this as a fair enhancement for +5? If so, would it be prudent to modify the vorpal quality? if such a thing has been done may i get a link? It was good that there are people on the wiki that can analyse this stuff, and it would be good if we could set some ground rules about what bonuses go where. Maybe we should add the balance ratings (monk, fighter, rogue, and wizard) or some other system to judge the general strength of such things?
I do, or at least not too far out of line, but I'm not sure if Ghost agrees with me. I'll throw together a variant vorpal in a bit. - TarkisFlux 22:42, May 26, 2010 (UTC)
I was already thinking about that. Vorpal down to a +4, or have it work on the natural threat range of the weapon?--Tavis McCricket 23:00, May 26, 2010 (UTC)
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.