Talk:Macuahuitl (4e Equipment)

From D&D Wiki

Jump to: navigation, search

Technically there is nothing wrong with this. However there is one issue. The 3d4 damage though technically being the same as 1d12 or 2d6 it has a higher average damage than both (1, and .5 respectively) this may not seem like much but with 4e being a very math heavy version with ample balancing to fine tune damage and hit chance, the 3d4 causes and issue. There are two solutions for this, one is to change the 3d4 to 2d6 (though i don't think your fond of this idea) alternatively you can add a minor drawback of some sort to help balance the extra damage. If you would like any help with doing so please let me know. --Aitharious (talk) 19:27, 4 June 2016 (MDT)

Well, it's equal to the executioner's axe with an average damage of 7.5 and the high crit ability. The Executioner's axe with Brutal 2 and a D12 does 3 + 12/2 or, 7.5 average damage, compared to this at an average damage of 7.5. In addition, the minimum damage is the same, at 3. Functionally, it ends up the same but you roll 3 dice xD --JohnSmith82 (talk) 21:13, 4 June 2016
You do have a fair point there, but it's not in line with the guidelines that the dandwiki uses (currently at least) with regards to making 4e weapons. Additionally when looking at the mordencrad (which has 2d6 damage) it has only the brutal 1 property. Making your weapon an almost pure upgrade when comparing. --Aitharious (talk) 20:42, 4 June 2016 (MDT)
Actually, a mordenkrad does 8 damage on average compared to 7.5 for the Macuahuitl and has a minimum damage of 3, compared to 4. The Mordenkrad brutal 1 applies to two sets of dice. I think that if the sight's system sees this as a more powerful weapon, than it's balance must be broke. But, I don't really see much mention of it.--JohnSmith82 (talk) 23:11, 4 June 2016
I'm sorry about commenting again but this is really bugging me for some reason. Yes it is mathematically balanced in all regards. But, 1 going by the rules on the Dand wiki 3d4 would act as a higher damage dice value than 1d12 since the classifications pattern moves by a value of 1
1d4 has 2.5
1d6 has 3.5
1d8 has 4.5, 2d4 has 5 but we treat in the same level as 1d8
1d10 has 5.5
1d12 has 6.5, 2d6 has 7 but is in the same level as 1d12
By this logic the 3d4 with 7.5 is another weapon dice size up and should be treated as such.
Now that my rant is done, I just feel that the weapon has too much going for it. It's a top tier weapon within the superior weapons in terms of raw stats (which doesn't fit the weapon well as it is an older and less reliable, if brutally sharp weapon), in addition it has three weapon types allowing for a huge range of feats coverage and potential math breaking. You don't have to change anything but i'd like your opinion and do a few test games with it to see how it plays, I might be totally wrong. Sorry for the rant, and thank you for your time. --Aitharious (talk) 20:42, 7 June 2016 (MDT)
If we're going to treat the weapon as another damage die up, then we'd have to compare it to say, the Mordenkrad which does an average of 8 damage with Brutal 1. 2D6 + Brutal 1 = going from 7 damage to 8 damage. At the moment, it is less powerful than a mordenkrad. If I had added a brutal effect or the like I could see that being overpowered, but since the average damage pans out it's more or less the same. In fact, it's exactly equal to the Executioner's Axe, with an average damage of 7.5, a minimum damage of 3, and the high crit property. Essentially, this weapon can't be brutal. In other words, according to the sight to add a special effect, such as Brutal, you have to reduce the damage die. In comparison, the weapon is of equal power without a special effect (like brutal), so it would be equal. Even if we're just assuming that's the case. JohnSmith82 (talk) 03:29, 8 June 2016 (MDT)
Home of user-generated,
homebrew pages!