Should two-handed weapons be weakened in Conan 2nd?

[sbarrie]

Case 5:
Assume the opponents are unarmoured.

<snip>

RAW appears to work properly on unarmoured foes...

If by properly, you mean the greatsword is always the best weapon regardless of how much you power attack, then sure.

Note that in all of the unarmoured cases, no PA with a greatsword was the best option. That makes sense - power attack is best for smashing through armour in Conan.

Case 6:
Assume Mail Shirt, Brigandine Coat, and a Helmet, DR9

Your Method...
No PA.
G has a base 75% (50 + 25, or 11/15) for a mean 7.5 pts a round
B/S has a base 115% (70+45, or 7/12) for a mean 3.565
Wow, Armour is significant in Conan... (not surprising really, it should be)

PA 5.
G has a Base 30% (25+5, or 16/20) for a mean 4.5 (yet can top at 33 a hit)
B/S has a Base 65% (45+20, or 12/17) for a 4.875 (yet top 21 a hit)

PA 10.
G has base 10% (5+5, or 20/20) for a 2 (yet a top of 38 a hit, 29 average hit)
B/S has a base 25% (20+5, or 17/20) for a 8.125 (yet max 26, 21.5 average)

What's going on here?

A math error. A broadsword with PA 10 does does 21.5 - 9 = 12.5 points of damage on average. 12.5 * .25 = 3.125, not 8.125.

The best option for the greatsword user seems to be not to use power attack, unless you're getting attack bonuses from another source. That's good, it shows respect for a skilled opponent.

The best option for the broadsword user seems to be a medium power attack, to make up your weapon's lack of penetration.

Again, the greatsword does better in the heavy armour case, when each character uses their optimal strategy.

RAW
No PA.
G has a base 75% (50 + 25, or 11/15) for a mean 7.5 pts a round
B/S has a base 115% (70+45, or 7/12) for a mean 3.565
Reprinted for basis.

PA 6
G has a 45% (35+10, or 14/19) for a mean 7.2 (yet a 25 top, 16 average hit)
B/S has a 55%(40+15, or 13/18 ) for a mean 4.675 (yet a 13/8.5 per hit)

PA 10
G has a Base 30% (25+5, or 16/20) for a mean 6 (yet a 29/20 per hit)
B/S has a base 25% (20+5, or 17/20) for a mean 3.125 (yet 17/12.5 a hit)

Would you look at that, RAW remains fairly consistent even with armour! 8)

So? You've proven that Power Attack in RAW makes the greatsword the best weapon - period! That's a very bad thing. You were supposed to be arguing that the RAW made all the combat styles balanced, remember?

Let's try that again - are the combat styles balanced in RAW?

 

[Netherek]

Actually, I've proven your method is inconsistent, even with my slight error (easy to do since I don't have an excel program to quickly map it all out).

Yes, a great sword when PA is king, when it comes to that particular feat it should be. I'll post some other comparisons later tonight that compare PA to other feats...

Though, it may be that PA could use a reduction to match the damage bonus with the Str bonus granted by weapon type. This would remain as consistent as RAW, but reduce the advantage to more reasonable levels...

 

[Netherek]

This may look good, but lets look at when the first blow hits for each weapon.

Case 4 w/o Armour
PA10
G averages 29 a hit, with a max of 38 w/o a crit.
2B hit on first set, have 41 average and a 50.

Why would you consider a calculation like this? To prove that the only time to use two broadswords is if you can automatically hit unarmoured opponents? If a character is in that situation, he could just as well use a large hat as a weapon.

What, you've never rolled two 12's in a row??? Come on...

That is highly scewed in favor of 2B, in addition, despite the mean average damage, your positions PA w/ 2B when facing light/unarmoured opponents of low level as you have a greater frequency of hits.

This is not a good fix, 2B has enough reason to take it w/o the boost you are giving it by nerfing 2hand PA.

I think I've shown very clearly that my fix does not give two weapons an advantage against two handed weapons. And your math doubly confirmed it. Seriously, the only type of foe you've put forward against whom the two broadsword character excels is one with no armour and who does not move.

There should be some times when using two weapons is useful. Multiple, lightly armoured foes is one of those times, due to your ability to spread the damage around. Heavily armoured foes, multiple or not, is not one of those times. My Power Attack tweak supports this quite well.

Actually your method shows that it's strangely wise to PA with a one hander as there potential increases with PA and the 2H decreases in many cases. When you have a feat that modifies abilities it should go in the same direction, at roughly the same rate, PA in RAW does this, yours does not.

The best option for the greatsword user seems to be not to use power attack, unless you're getting attack bonuses from another source. That's good, it shows respect for a skilled opponent.

Actually, what I proved is that something is wrong with your method, in no way is the B/S guy any more skilled so why would he be better at PA than the G guy. There is none except a knee-jerk emotional reaction to the PA RAW.

So? You've proven that Power Attack in RAW makes the greatsword the best weapon - period! That's a very bad thing. You were supposed to be arguing that the RAW made all the combat styles balanced, remember?

Let's try that again - are the combat styles balanced in RAW?

In relation to consistency and logic, yes. The figures were very close on unarmoured opponents in RAW until you reach the limits of the feat. That says they are balance as well as consistent on unarmoured opponents. The consistency was virtually the same when facing an armoured opponent with the 2h at about double. This is the quirkiness of the Armour rules of Conan, not PA.

 

[Sutek]

Yes, PA and DR are strnge bedfellows. Essentially you can deal 68 point sof horrendous damage and still have to deal with a decent DR...although it a moot point because of the ammount of damage you just did.

:?

Another point is that, you risk missing the higher you crank damage up, adn that can take the edge off so to speak. You'd better have "to hit" bonuses coming from somewhere else or it's only doing you any good if you connect. If.

As it turns out, I've been reading Power Attack wrong all this time, thinking the x2 multiplier was to the STR bonus involved, not the ammount risked. That's rediculous if it doesn't also double the penalty to hit. That makes some sense aesthetically (a wild swing with more power behind it tends to miss a lot more often) but the even numbers that are generated make me feel un comfortable.

Bottom line: I'm still happy with the way it is, but I'd like to change my answer to something else for what I think should happen to Power Attack:

Two-handers double AP.

That's it. Simple swap, no more damage, big weapons aren't necessariyl more likely to get through armor, but now a Dagger probably can.

Now that makes sense to me. 8)

 

[Netherek]

Now lets re-examine Case 5 and 6...

Let's take are heroes and have them fight each other yet again, this time the Broadsword and Shield Hero will have Combat Expertise instead of PA.

Case 5:
Assume the opponents are unarmoured, your method.

No PA, No CE.
G has a base 75% (50 + 25, or 11/15) for a mean 14.25 pts a round
B/S has a base 115% (70+45, or 7/12) for a mean 13.225
Now this would match up with any PA style and clearly shows a favor to shields.

PA 5, CE 5.
G has a Base 10% (5+5, or 20/20) for a mean 2.4 (yet can top at 33 a hit)
B/S has a Base 65% (45+20, or 12/17) for a 7.475 (yet top 16 a hit)

PA 10, CE 5.
G has base 10% (5+5, or 20/20) for a 2.9 (yet a top of 38 a hit, 29 average hit)
B/S has a base 65% (45+20, or 12/17) for a 7.475 (yet top 16 a hit)

Clearly the shield and Combat Expertise has been under-rated and is insane not to choose this setup in your method.

Using RAW
No PA.
G has a base 75% (50 + 25, or 11/15) for a mean 14.25 pts a round
B/S has a base 115% (70+45, or 7/12) for a mean 13.225
Reprinted for basis.

PA 6, CE 3.
G has a 25% (20+5, or 17/20) for a mean 6.25 (yet a 34 top, 25 average hit)
B/S has a 85%(55+30, or 10/15 ) for a mean 9.775 (yet a 16/11.5 per hit)

PA 10, CE 5.
G has a Base 10% (5+5, or 20/20) for a mean 2.9 (yet a 38/29 per hit)
B/S has a base 65% (45+20, or 12/17) for a 7.475 (yet 26/21.5 a hit)

RAW still favors CE, yet not as extreme as your method. I think it's pretty obvious that PA is far from the most powerful thing when facing the unarmoured....

Case 6:
Assume Mail Shirt, Brigandine Coat, and a Helmet, DR9

Your Method...
No PA.
G has a base 75% (50 + 25, or 11/15) for a mean 7.5 pts a round
B/S has a base 115% (70+45, or 7/12) for a mean 3.565
Wow, Armour is significant in Conan... (not surprising really, it should be)

PA 5, CE 5.
G has a Base 10% (5+5, or 20/20) for a mean 1.5 (yet can top at 24 a hit)
B/S has a Base 65% (45+20, or 12/17) for a 2.015 (yet top 7 a hit)

PA 10, CE5.
G has base 10% (5+5, or 20/20) for a 2 (yet a top of 29 a hit, 20 average hit)
B/S has a base 65% (45+20, or 12/17) for a 2.015 (yet top 7 a hit)average)

RAW
No PA.
G has a base 75% (50 + 25, or 11/15) for a mean 7.5 pts a round
B/S has a base 115% (70+45, or 7/12) for a mean 3.565
Reprinted for basis.

PA 6, CE 3.
G has a 25% (20+5, or 17/20) for a mean 4 (yet a 25 top, 16 average hit)
B/S has a 85%(55+30, or 10/15 ) for a mean 2.635(yet top 7 a hit)

PA 10, CE 5.
G has a Base 10% (5+5, or 20/20) for a mean 2 (yet a 29/20 per hit)
B/S has a base 65% (45+20, or 12/17) for a mean 2.015(yet top 7 a hit)

Strange, under your method PA is totally nerfed by CE! That's completely insane. Under RAW armour is the factor yet again...

 

[Sutek]

:shock:

...too much numbers...

 

[Netherek]

Sutek, don't forget that the max damage bonus is your BAB, so 2h are just more accurate at PA.

Re-examine Case 5 and 6...

This time we'll use the nerfed variant of PA I presented in the PA thread that appears to have died out.
Case 5:
Assume the opponents are unarmoured.

Your method...
No PA.
G has a base 75% (50 + 25, or 11/16) for a mean 14.25 pts a round
B/S has a base 115% (70+45, or 7/12) for a mean 13.225

PA 6.
G has a Base 25% (20+5, or 17/20) for a mean 6.25 (yet can top at 34 a hit)
B/S has a Base 55% (40+15, or 13/18) for a 9.625 (yet top 22 a hit)

PA 10.
G has base 10% (5+5, or 20/20) for a 2.9 (yet a top of 38 a hit, 29 average hit)
B/S has a base 25% (20+5, or 17/20) for a 5.375 (yet max 26, 21.5 average)

Clearly the shield has been under-rated.

Using my Reduced Method.
No PA.
G has a base 75% (50 + 25, or 11/15) for a mean 14.25 pts a round
B/S has a base 115% (70+45, or 7/12) for a mean 13.225
Reprinted for basis.

PA 6
G has a 35% (30+5, or 15/20) for a mean 8.75(yet a 34 top, 25 average hit)
B/S has a 55%(40+15, or 13/18 ) for a mean 9.25 (yet a 22/17.5 per hit)

PA 10
G has a Base 25% (20+5, or 17/20) for a mean 7.25 (yet a 38/29 per hit)
B/S has a base 25% (20+5, or 17/20) for a mean 5.375 (yet 26/21.5 a hit)

Less extreme, but doesn't remain consistent, but better for those looking to reduce PA.

Case 6:
Assume Mail Shirt, Brigandine Coat, and a Helmet, DR9

Your Method...
No PA.
G has a base 75% (50 + 25, or 11/15) for a mean 7.5 pts a round
B/S has a base 115% (70+45, or 7/12) for a mean 3.565
Wow, Armour is significant in Conan... (not surprising really, it should be)

PA 6.
G has a Base 25% (20+5, or 17/20) for a mean 4 (yet can top at 25 a hit)
B/S has a Base 55% (40+15, or 13/18) for a 4.675 (yet top 13 a hit)

PA 10.
G has base 10% (5+5, or 20/20) for a 2 (yet a top of 29 a hit, 20 average hit)
B/S has a base 25% (20+5, or 17/20) for a 3.125 (yet max 18, 12.5 average)


My reduced Method

No PA.
G has a base 75% (50 + 25, or 11/15) for a mean 7.5 pts a round
B/S has a base 115% (70+45, or 7/12) for a mean 3.565
Reprinted for basis.

PA 6
G has a 35% (30+5, or 15/20) for a mean 5.6 (yet a 25 top, 16 average hit)
B/S has a 55%(40+15, or 13/18 ) for a mean 4.675 (yet a 13/8.5 per hit)

PA 10
G has a Base 25% (20+5, or 17/20) for a mean 5 (yet a 29/20 per hit)
B/S has a base 25% (20+5, or 17/20) for a mean 3.125 (yet 17/12.5 a hit)

Well, mine is at least a little more consistent, and the gap between the two are closer.

Still I'd go with RAW for my games, you can do what you like.

 

[Netherek]

:shock:

...too much numbers...

No joke, it'll give one a head ache. It just goes to show that there many ways to examine the numbers in d20. As quirky as they can seem, and how obvious some factors are, how hidden others are, the SRD, the RAW are all pretty well thought out.

I would need an excel program to factor every combo before I'd really declare something broke. There's a counter to everything that I've seen, just some are less obvious than others.

I am finished here, I hope.

 

[Trodax]

Sutek, don't forget that the max damage bonus is your BAB, so 2h are just more accurate at PA.

Nope. If I have BAB +10 and hold a broadsword in one hand, the maximum use out of PA I can get is taking a -10 attack penalty to gain a +10 damage bonus. If I grip that sword two-handed, the maximum I can get out of it now is taking a -10 penalty to gain a +20 damage bonus.

This isn't 100% clear from the feat description, but I think it was cleared up in some erratta or whatever. Don't have a source, but I'm fairly certain this is how it works.

 

[Foxworthy]

Nope. If I have BAB +10 and hold a broadsword in one hand, the maximum use out of PA I can get is taking a -10 attack penalty to gain a +10 damage bonus. If I grip that sword two-handed, the maximum I can get out of it now is taking a -10 penalty to gain a +20 damage bonus.

This isn't 100% clear from the feat description, but I think it was cleared up in some erratta or whatever. Don't have a source, but I'm fairly certain this is how it works.

Yup that's how it works.

 

[arderkrag]

I think the damage scale is just fine.

 

[Sutek]

As quirky as they can seem, and how obvious some factors are, how hidden others are, the SRD, the RAW are all pretty well thought out.

I would need an excel program to factor every combo before I'd really declare something broke. There's a counter to everything that I've seen, just some are less obvious than others.

And that sums it up nicely.

Damage isn't broken. Armor isn't broken. 2 handed PA isnt' broken.

It all becomes accounted for once one starts dissecting the SRD and the OGL material. Conan doesn't ammend this stuff. It's pretty much copy/pasted interms of function, and the cranked up damage values for weapons are reflected, and I use that word very specifically, in the DR that armor affords.

I can't keep up with your stats there, but I'm sure if you are a numbner cruncher, you can see that it all works out as fairly ballanced in the end, because everything is so tight. One rule covers another and so on.

Defensive Blast not withstanding...(LOL)

 

[Netherek]

Actually, you are incorrect.

Check the FAQ, it's the first topic under feats, and look at Monster Slayer.

Monster Slayer:When making a Power Attack against a foe of Large size or greater, you now add twice as much to your damage as you subtract from your attack roll, rather than the same amount as is usual for Power Attack. For example, you can use your PA to gain a +2 to damage for a -1 penalty to your attack roll, or a +6 bonus to damage for a -3 penalty to attack, or even a +10 bonus to damage for a -5 penalty to attack. As ever with Power Attack the bonuses and penalty apply to all your attacks this round. The total damage my not exceed your Base Attack Bonus.
Special: When using this feat with a two-hander, or with a one-hande used in two hands, instead add 3x the number subtracted from your attack rolls. The total damage gained still may not exceed attack your base attack bonus.

Last line: When using both feats with a two handed sword, second example would be correct, however your damage bonus cannot exceed your total BAB.

Logic would really fail if you can somehow exceed BAB with PA, but not with MS as it makes 2hander suddenly unable to exceed the BAB. IF you have a BAB of 10, why would in one instance be able to do an extra 20, but only an extra 10 on the other. In fact, with MS you can't get any more damage out of 2hander than a 1hander, period. Logic would say the same applies to the lessor feat.

Other wise the reading to follow it to the other logical conclusion would be that 2handers could not exceed 2xBAB, so that it was mechanically the same as in both instances.

 

[Sutek]

Monster Slayer says you get x3 to what you sacrifice to add to damage, so if you have a +10 BAB, you are able to take -3 on your attacks for that round, and gain +9 damage, not exceeding your BAB.

Power Attack is also limited by BAB, but you'd have to risk more off your attacks. If your BAB is +10, you could gain +10 damage, but you'd be at -10 on attacks.

When both feats say "total damage" cannot exceed BAB, it means the total damage bonus gained through the points sacrificed on the attack rolls.

You do less damage with the Monster Slayer feat (by 1pt - big whoop) but you hit much, much more easily.

 

[Trodax]

Logic would really fail if you can somehow exceed BAB with PA, but not with MS as it makes 2hander suddenly unable to exceed the BAB.

I know it's weird, but this is actually exactly the case. In this thread, I posted a couple of things I got rulings on by the Rulemasters. I'll quote the question and answer below, with the relevant passage bolded:

Q: I'm unsure of how the feats Power Attack (PA) and Monster Slayer (MS) are supposed to work in conjunction with two-handed weapons. I've seen the entry about this in the Conan FAQ, but I'm still a bit unclear on it.

So, to the question; is the BAB-restriction of these feats on the attack roll or on the damage bonus?
In other words, what's the maximum usage I can get if I have both feats and a two-handed weapon?

I can see three scenarios, and I'm not sure of which is the right one:

1) It is only the attack penalty that is restricted by BAB. Therefore, if I for example have BAB +6, I could take a -6 attack penalty to get a +18 damage bonus (+12 from PA, +6 from MS).

2) It is the damage bonus that is restricted by BAB. With BAB +6, I could at a maximum go for a -2 attack penalty, giving me a +6 damage bonus (+4 from PA, +2 from MS).

3) The two feats (PA and MS) are different in regards to this. For PA, number 1 above is true (attack penalty is restricted), while for MS it is number 2 (damage bonus is restricted). This is actually the conclusion I would come to from a strict reading of the feat descriptions, but it seems very strange to me...

A: Option 2 is the correct option. Monster Slayer is not supposed to allow PCs to strike for mind-blowing amounts of damage against Large creatures - it is just supposed to increase a PCs effectiveness when using PA against these creatures.

For instance: A 6th-level soldier wielding a two-handed sword with PA and MS faces off against a Large ape. If he just uses a full PA, he can get a +12 damage bonus at the price of a -6 penalty to attack. Or, he can employ his MS feat and get only a +6 damage bonus - but suffer only a -2 penalty to attack.

I really do agree it's weird that Monster Slayer and Power Attack should obey different rules, but this is more a quirk of MS than of PA (cause I'm quite sure that the way I described PA above is the way it's supposed to work in D&D, the SRD and Conan).

 

[Netherek]

Monster Slayer is not supposed to allow PCs to strike for mind-blowing amounts of damage against Large creatures - it is just supposed to increase a PCs effectiveness when using PA against these creatures.

That's just it, it doesn't really improve it if it changes the format. It does work well for One handers, it halves their penalty. It really does suck if you are essentially reducing the two hand potential for a paltry 1-2 points of attack bonus.

They should be on the same system period. I don't which way it happens to work, so long as it's consistent.

MS is completely inconsistent if PA doesn't limit damage bonus to BAB. The reasons are simple, it truly only benefits the one handed weapon. Here's why, you have limited the potential damage of two handers to that of a one hander, the benefits are horribly unequal in relation. If you have PA follow the same suit as MS, the benifits are closer together. If you limit the MS so that it haves the penalty for PA, it would be even. Either way, the situation should be consistent.

Besides, the Rulemasters are not always right, they didn't get it right on AP and that one is clearly defined in the book.

So that is one that needs repair in the next edition, fix the two feats to match...

Either limit PA damage bonus to BAB, or have MS reduce the PA penalty in 1/2 after damage bonus is taken i.e. 1h limit BAB, 2h limit 2xBAB.

 

[Trodax]

So that is one that needs repair in the next edition, fix the two feats to match...

Either limit PA damage bonus to BAB, or have MS reduce the PA penalty in 1/2 after damage bonus is taken i.e. 1h limit BAB, 2h limit 2xBAB.

I agree with you 100% that Monster Slayer needs fixing; it's very unintuitive that it should work differently than Power Attack. I noted this in the "This should be done differently in 2nd"-thread. Actually, I wouldn't mind simply removing Monster Slayer.

It's kind of ironic that we've been arguing about whether two-handed weapons (and their Power Attacks) are unbalanced for pages and pages in two threads, and now it turns out that we've been reading the rules differently...
Of course, it will not always be a factor, as it's often a bad idea to max-out Power Attack (as your analysis against the shield-guy shows). However, against for example a flat-footed (defense 10) opponent, it can really make a difference if I (with BAB +10 and a greatsword) can max-out to -10/+20 or if I'm limited to -5/+10.

 

[Trodax]

It all becomes accounted for once one starts dissecting the SRD and the OGL material. Conan doesn't ammend this stuff. It's pretty much copy/pasted interms of function, and the cranked up damage values for weapons are reflected, and I use that word very specifically, in the DR that armor affords.

I can't keep up with your stats there, but I'm sure if you are a numbner cruncher, you can see that it all works out as fairly ballanced in the end, because everything is so tight. One rule covers another and so on.

I agree that D&D 3.5 and the SRD are a really tight ruleset, stuff is very well thought out and balanced. The issues I have for Conan mainly concern the rules that were added to this game (armor=DR, massive damage as an important factor). Not saying they are bad rules (in fact, I love them!), but I think things need a slight tweaking to get them "just right". And why shouldn't it be so? After D&D 3.0 was released it was playtested for three years by thousands of fans around the world, and then stuff that needed it was tweaked for D&D 3.5.

I'll reiterate why I think the damage for two-handed weapons should be lowered:

In D&D, a longsword (=broadsword) does 1d8 and a greatsword does 2d6. For Conan, it was decided that weapon damage should be upped slightly (which I think was good). A broadsword now dealt 1d10, and the logical thing would be to raise the greatsword to 2d8. However, at the same time fighting with two weapons or with a shield was made much better (no penalty, and fewer feats required for two weapons, higher shield bonus for shields), so it made sense that two-handed weapons should also receive a boost. The greatsword ended up at 2d10. In my mind, though, this took things a little too far since two-handed weapons were already receiving heavy advantages from other changes that were made to the rules (armor=DR, massive damage).

That's all just theoretical thinking, though; what really made me think that two-handed weapons were a bit too much was when I saw how they turned out in play in my game. They just pretty much end up being the best choice if you want to be effective in combat. That's why I think the damage should go down from 2d10 to 2d8. I think that tweak would put things at least closer to "just right".

 

[slaughterj]

I really do agree it's weird that Monster Slayer and Power Attack should obey different rules, but this is more a quirk of MS than of PA (cause I'm quite sure that the way I described PA above is the way it's supposed to work in D&D, the SRD and Conan).

They should be consistent, and I'll house rule it to make it so. Though it doesn't matter, as I haven't had anyone take it.

 

[Netherek]

I don't really see the damage as a problem, though. If I made a comparison of a Broad vs. a Dagger, no one would blink that the Broad is 2 times as effective before PA, and about 6 times as effective with +10 from PA in sheer damage. In fact, the dagger can never force an MD while the Broad can.

Does anyone else see the Irony here?

There are many Roleplay reasons not to use a 2hander...

1. Within city limits, they should be illegal for everyone but the Nations soldiers (actual army) and the Town guard.

2. Cramped locals whether dense foliage or within tombs/ruins.

3. It's asking for a fight, one should be treated as such, i.e. the peasants running in fear, bravos picking unnecessary fights, problems with the local militia or guards, etc. etc.

4. They draw attention, whether you want it or not.

5. They can be taken, removed, destroyed, lost, etc. so if you build a character around one you are one dimensional and therefore easily thwarted.

6. Should be the first target of archers, they are easier to hit when compared to those with a shield.

7. They can't be used in a grapple, if you have lots of mooks, have them grapple the 2hander on occasion.

While a Broad does suffer from 2,5, and 7, it is still a lot of reasons with out mechanics of CE and related feats to thwart the 2hander.

Now having said that, I'll think about the #'s for a reducing the Top end 2handers, dropping the die down will mean some kind of boost elsewhere.