AMIA ARCHIVE • View topic

In a thread by Bobo in "Requests" he is rebuilding a Greatsword he uses. He is reforging a Wonderforged Greatsword from the past into the commonly used Warforged version of today, a sword that is used one-handed because of Monkey Grip.

In it he is asked by MoshingChris to cut the massive critical damage from 2d6 to 2d4.

"Change the mass critical to 2d4 and it's fine. It's still better than 1d8 but it doesn't make me go "oh fuck". Thanks for pointing out though that a change needs to be made to Monkey Grip with regards to a hard, hard cap on Mass Criticals."

I simply ask "Why?"

The Warforged Greatsword as currently stands has Keen, 2d6 damage and 2d6 massive critical. But other warforged weapons offer even greater massive critical damage like 3d6.

When requesting Monkey Grip the person already takes a hit on half the damage they do through strength, and then for man-sized toons TWO more penalties. What Mosh is asking now is that the person with Monkey Grip cause another 8 hit points LESS of damage.

I'm guessing we are now getting into a range where having monkey grip with all the minuses is on par with a non-MG'd person, rendering the use of MG useless, if not worse!

If a weapon already has a base damage and base critical damage as designed and approved by the DM team, why now try to reverse engineer it through a request?

The next entry in Bobo's request is by him and he writes:

"I'm okay with that, as long as it becomes the standard for Monkeygripped Warforgeds.

Edit: I updated it to 2d4 Mass crits down from 2d6."

I wholeheartily disagree! For months my main toon Jerand has RPed the training for learning Monkey Grip and had to go through an approved self-rebuild to become expert with Greatsword. All that effort is for naught with this one request if approved, which is looks like it is.

Off the top of my head:

Trueforged Longsword
1d10 base damage
1d8 massive crit
12 damage for strength

so damage of 30-76 per crit hit

Warforged Greatsword, no Monkey Grip, no shield
2d6 base damage
2d6 massive crit
12 damage for strength

so damage 36-96 per crit hit

Warforged Greatsword gimped with Monkey Grip, and thus shield
2d6 base damage
2d4 massive crit
6 damage for strength

so damage 24-64 per crit hit

Considerably less damage than the Greatsword alone, but less damage than the longsword even with use of the shield. This doesn't take into account that there are still two MORE penalties that are applied to Monkey Gripped man-sized toons.

I would love to hear from MoshingChris or one of the DM team as to the reasoning of a hard cap for massive crit damage for Monkey Gripped Greatswords or it sounds like any weapon before I make my request for Monkey Grip.

Because I created the extra Massive Critical damage on those weapons specifically for people who actually wield a weapon two-handed. You can rp it away however you like, but the "Massive Critical" property on +5 bin two-handed weapons is to encourage folk to use a weapon two-handed.

Quote:

When requesting Monkey Grip the person already takes a hit on half the damage they do through strength

Not true, the penalty to strength is because we exploit the mechanics with regards to Monkey Grip. Monkey grip because of this exploitation gives the character in question a 1.5 strength mod even when wielding a shield. You don't get a 1.5 strength bonus if you wield a weapon in one hand, so essentially you don't take a hit to damage at all.

Therefore:

Longsword
1d10 Damage
1d8 Mass Crit
12 Strength Mod
Minimum = 2 + 2 + 24 = 28
Maxmum = 20 + 8 + 24 = 52
Average = 40

2d6 base damage
2d4 massive crit
12 damage from strength
Minimum = 4 + 2 + 24 = 30
Maximum = 24 + 8 + 24 = 56
Average = 43

Quote:

The Warforged Greatsword as currently stands has Keen, 2d6 damage and 2d6 massive critical. But other warforged weapons offer even greater massive critical damage like 3d6.

The cap on massive critical damage would apply to all Monkey-Grip weapons.

Quote:

I'm guessing we are now getting into a range where having monkey grip with all the minuses is on par with a non-MG'd person, rendering the use of MG useless, if not worse!

Lets look at this closely. The average damage difference between a Longsword and Monkey-Gripped Greatsword is:

1d8 = 4.5 damage/8 critical damage
2d6 = 7 damage/14 critical damage

Because nwn doesn't do half damage at all, even when the critical roll is worked out the .5 damage does not become additive so the averages above are actually biased against the long-sword because it's damage modifiers aren't 2dX. In basic language what you gain from Monkey-Gripping a Greatsword, on average, is half the damage income you gain from Weapon Spec/Epic Weapon Spec. Yet you do not pay a feat for it. At all. Therefore we added a system of penalties to make up for the fact that you do not invest any feats into Monkey Grip.

I'm confused... So, if I monkey grip a warforged greatsword (which I've been told is +2D6 piercing damage, keen, and +3D6 massive criticals), I'm going to take penalties to the sword in addition to the 2 penalties for being human, because my sword is "too good"?

That makes me feel yucky inside :\

But ... you're getting to use a shield ... which is typically +7 AC plus two more mythal slots >_> It's still in favor of Monkey Grip. It's just not as ridiculously OP now (cause face it, Monkey Grip is OP).

And it's not about the sword being too good, it's the fact that you are no longer wielding it with two hands so you are not hitting as hard.

But I thought that the "warforged" abilities were simply because the weapon was of uber construction, not because you're hitting with it hard; do single-handed and two-handed warforged weapons, i.e. longsword and greataxe, get different stats?

Some of the limitations placed on items are based on balance. It's the nature of playing a video game.

First, I thank you for your quick reply.

Two, I must be dense. If Monkey Grip is so damned good and incredibly powerful and you don't even need to take a feat to get it, why do so few have it? Your explanation seems to be based on bringing Monkey Grip back into line so it is not so overpowered. Yet there are only three toons that I know of who have it, soon to be less if one of them retires as they are saying.

You talk about Monkey Grip giving the player an exploitation of a 1.5 increase in strength. And that with the mandatory decreased strength modifier it brings that exploitation back in line. Where do you get this 1.5 modifier number? Are you talking about the 2d6 massive crit base damage compared to the 1d8 of a longsword? If not, please explain how this 1.5 "exploitation" is derived.

My thought is that if you put in all the time and effort, i.e. RP, and the DCs (13 minimum) to gain Monkey Grip, then gaining a small increase in damage is well earned. Let's face it, there are very FEW Monkey Grippers out there, period. It is not like this aspect of Amia is being over exploited. If anything, the RP involved to acquire such a boon has been thorough, excellent and beyond what is typically required.

Let us go back to your numbers:
Longsword
1d10 Damage
1d8 Mass Crit
12 Strength Mod
Minimum = 2 + 2 + 24 = 28
Maxmum = 20 + 8 + 24 = 52
Average = 40

2d6 base damage
2d4 massive crit
12 damage from strength
Minimum = 4 + 2 + 24 = 30
Maximum = 24 + 8 + 24 = 56
Average = 43

Your own numbers are telling me that a Longsword and Monkey Gripped Greatsword with 2d4 massive crit are essentially the same, just a 3 hp difference on average. THEN, a Monkey Gripper has to contend with TWO penalties, one which would be a 5 point discipline hit and the other the -2 fort save. AND on top of that spend 13 DCs just to get it, on top of hours and hours of pretty cool RP.

Am I missing something here? I think I just explained why people people don't take Monkey Grip even if they could get the 2d6 massive critical damage.

Let me see if I have this right.

Monkey Gripped Greatsword with current 2d6 massive crit
2d6 base damage
2d6 massive crit
12 damage from strength
Minimum = 4 + 2 + 24 = 30
Maximum = 24 + 12 + 24 = 60
Average = 45

So the average went up 5 hit points from the longsword average and the max damage could be 8 hit points more. It doesn't sound overpowered to me at all. If my numbers are wrong, please give me your averages of a Monkey Gripped Greatsword with the 2d6 massive crit.

Again there are still two penalties, a DC cost and tons of RP (again, which is pretty cool).

If anything I've just talked myself into having Jerand going back to the use of sword and board. Other than looking cool wielding a two-handed weapon with one hand there is really no advantage to Monkey Grip.

I agree that paying tons of DC's for a weapon that has penalties and downsides compared to using a slightly, SLIGHTLY tamer weapon, is annoying. We could use a longsword and shield, or we could use a greatsword and shield, and take lots of penalties, garnering only a slight increase in damage - which is purely for role play purposes at this point, and has no real gain, and will reflect in-character like that, making monkey-grip role play even less common.

In my opinion, you should stick with the current system of checks and balances, not add more penalties to people that are spending lots of time and effort to do this.

But my opinion won't matter, and you'll just say "well we decided it's better"

that's usually how these things go with organizations and customer opinions.

Why do so few have it? Because it is gimmicky, and takes a lot of roleplay and effort for not really much benefit apart from a mechanical advantage.

The 1.5 strength modifier is what is applied when wielding a weapon one size category larger than than your race. The number is taken from NWN mechanics, not plucked out of thin air.

People don't take into account the options opened up by monkey grip

lets say you had player A and player B, A is great sword user with monkey grip and B is long sword shield and they both have all the weapon based feats for the weapons they use.

when fighting less threating monsters with lower damage,less AB....what ever the case, player A (great sword user) can swap to two handed great sword (without the negative effects) to do a ton more damage as he as that option open to him, he can go from as much AC as player B "long sword + shield" when needed... to all out glass cannon

The long sword guy is as effective in all combat situations as he is ever going to be without the option to trade AC for damage.

Well that is something I didn't know. Size really does matter. *smile*

So if you give the player a larger weapon to use than is allowed the game automatically gives them more damage. Clear enough. So thus the decreased damage modifier. Makes sense.

But my assertion is still correct. Using a Monkey Gripped weapon isn't any advantage after all the other things are taken into consideration.

And as pointed out other players think it is gimmicky. I love the greatsword, but I've already put in a request to go back to longsword and board.

And damn you Cory to point out the versatility aspect, but it doesn't outsway the negatives.

As a person who has Monkey-Grip on a character, I can say that it made my character a lot more versatile, and while he wasn't necessarily stronger in combat, he had far greater survivability than he had before. Well worth it in my opinion. The reason you don't see so many of them is simply because it's a DC requested thing, and that requires DCs, a request, and the RP to back it up.

It is an advantage when you take into account Large Weapons have a fifth mythal slot available to them.

+3 Damage
+An entire Mythal Slot
+Flexibility

vs

Style Penalties which aren't exactly destroying your character and a limitation on Mass Criticals via bonding which is still better than what you craft

:wink:

More relevant points.

Decisions..........decisions..............

But is it going to be coded from now on NO 2d6 massive crit damage for any warforged weapon?

Monkey Grip isn't coded in that sense. What happens is you make the request. Then, if approved, you get a widget which lets monkey-grip work, and a DM goes into the toolset to make a copy of the weapon you're 'Bonding', which has whatever stats it had along with the monkey grip penalties. In this case, it'd mean that we change any Massive Crits that were on the 'Bonded' weapon from 2d6 to 2d4.

Could such a fact be added to the little tidbit of Monkey Grip in the request subforum? Would be good for people to know.

The same of this cannot be said of a small sized character intending to monkeygrip...

...butwhatisasmallfelladoingwithabigswordinfirstplace?

Actually, this might be slightly off topic, but can a small character acquire monkey grip to wield a greatsword in two hands?

When I asked to a DM (Mana, maybe?) he said aye, SO GO FOR THAT KOBOLD WITH THE SCYTHE THAT I COULD NEVER HAVE!

Just gonna put a quote here (taken from nwn2 feats) and throw in my 2cents:

Quote:

Specifics: This feat (monkey grip) grants the ability to wield weapons that are normally two-handed for your race with only one hand at a -2 penalty to hit. For example: a human could wield a greatsword and a shield using this feat, while a halfling could wield a longsword in each hand. Medium sized characters (humans, half-orcs, elves, dwarves, etc) with this feat can use giant weapons (with -2 to hit). Note that this ability only applies to melee weapons and does not affect the use of crossbows, bows, etc

Monkey grip is a feat. So not only you would lose -2 to your attack bonus (pretty much the biggest penalty you can get on a melee character, in my opinion), but you also would have to pay a feat to get this.

With Amia Monkey Grip:

- You get to pick your poison (not -2 AB unless you want it)
- You receive the x.5 dmg bonus that 2handers get, but gain a bonus of +8 AC on top of it (that's 4 times the armor skin feat that gives +2, that happens to be an epic feat..)
- You don't spend a feat
- You get 5 mythal slot on your now one-handed weapon, instead of 4
- You get better bonuses on your warforged weapon than what surecrap and truebad weapons get (sorry, but these "epic" weapons are weaker than what you can buy in shops and upgrade with mythals

)

For a simulation of a feat that exists in D&D / nwn2, that can be taken the same as, say, +3 to parry checks feat, I say you are gaining quite a freaking lot out of that 13 DC.

I think it's too late now, but if I had been the one to first agree on that request, I would at least have forced players to pick a pointless feat like say Skill Focus: Parry, to at least make sure players pay a feat for it. SOOOOO, I say you are still benefitting 10 times over from getting monkey grip over not taking it, especially as it is done now / even with the changes mentioned

Sorry it took so long to get back to my thread, had to work a VERY long day.

I know I'm probably not going to win this discussion, but I'll just reiterate my point to try to persuade the player base about what is happening here. The slight damage increase gained by keeping a Warforged Greatsword at 2d6 massive critical damage does not make Monkey Grip overpowered. It adds on a few more hit points of damage on average, but nothing earthshaking. I think it should stay as it was originally designed. I don't believe it should be changed just based on one person's request.

In fact, if I was a betting man I would venture to say that the other Warforged Greatsword Monkeygripper out there has 2d6 massive crit right now. And that person is not throwing off the game. Heck, Jerand hunted with Malatril a number of times and was impressed with his damage, but not enough that he immediately dropped everything else to get MG. In fact, it took a chance meeting to find a Warforged Greatsword and months of RPing and a selfer rebuild before Jerand even considered MG. Having the 2d6 massive critical is certainly not persuading people in droves to become MGers.

In Mosh's reply yesterday he said:

"+3 Damage
+An entire Mythal Slot
+Flexibility

vs

Style Penalties which aren't exactly destroying your character and a limitation on Mass Criticals via bonding which is still better than what you craft."

It seems like he is trying to justify why he thinks MG is so great. What he does not add here in the con portion is that you need lots of RP (which again is cool, that's why we play here), 13 DCs and a request to be adjudicated/shredded by the DMs. The extra mythal slot is a bit overrated, too, as you basically can add things that only take up one power, so you might add 1 ability point. Again, nothing earth shattering.

And his words "a limitation on Mass Criticals via bonding which is still better than what you craft" is misguided. Mosh, you set up the massive critical damage yourself apparently, so you apparently didn't think at that time they were overpowered. How did this become an issue of being so overpowered when in other Monkey Grip requests it is NEVER even mentioned. If there would ever be a time when it could be construed as being too powerful it would have to be when Weaponmasters requested MG. Reading both Malatril's and Ania's requests for MG, being overpowered wasn't a concern. It was never even mentioned. And now you have a bard requesting it and all of a sudden it is an issue?

It would be better if the DM team had done a mia culpa and said it was too overpowered and mandated the change. Or even started a thread asking the players how they feel about it. It just leaves a bad taste when something is being reversed engineered through a thread because it is simply said to be overpowered and/or being abused. We know for a fact that MGers are few and far between and it hasn't thrown the game off so far. There is no huge clamor or abuse of MG, it just doesn't exist because it isn't overpowered.

Just one example of what I mean. Remember perhaps a year or two ago when we all logged on and anyone with a Ring of the Ram had the Knockdown feat removed from it? The DM team came to the conclusion that it was a feat being abused and therefore they instituted an across the board change. That is not the case here at all with MG and massive critical damage. It was the opinion of one person.

Just leave it be as is and as it has been since the new Warforged weapons came out so long ago. If people want to put in the time, effort and DCs to gain Monkey Grip, let them retain their slightly higher damage.

If it was up to me, there would be no Monkey Grip at all, or Shifters, for that matter. I hate them both.

I myself would never make a Monkey Griper because I don't think the DC cost is worth the payout.....but if I was a person who used two handed weapons and kept getting my ass kicked because my AC sucked...then you know what that extra AC might be worth the cost. but yes its far from overpowered but its not really weak and don't think anyone would notice a big difference from 2d4 vs 2d6.

Kudark wrote:

If it was up to me, there would be no Monkey Grip at all, or Shifters, for that matter. I hate them both.

They both hate you as well. :lol:

corypx wrote:

They both hate you as well. :lol:

I know *winks*

Kudark wrote:

If it was up to me, there would be no Monkey Grip at all... ...I hate them both.

I agree with Mosh, but then I also know that there were lots of behind the scenes discussions on how to make 2-handers more appealing because the loss of the 4 mythal slots and 8 ac, or the loss of 4 mythal slots and two extra attacks gained by going 1-hander and shield or the dual weapon path made the 2-handers a pretty bad choice. That's why they now get the highest Massive Crittical bonuses and the highest damage bonuses of any weapon out there (RE: Warforged).

I certainly don't think Monkey Grip costs enough to warrant getting the best of both worlds: The best damage and the best AC. It should sit somewhere in the middle.

And honestly Baden, RP isn't a cost to be factored in. It's what this server is supposed to be all about.

Kudark wrote:

If it was up to me, there would be no Monkey Grip at all, or Shifters, for that matter. I hate them both.

This. Because MG is terrible. Shifters, on the other hand, are cool but would be better as a normal class and not a PrC.

O'Raghailligh wrote:

Why do so few have it? Because it is gimmicky, and takes a lot of roleplay and effort for not really much benefit apart from a mechanical advantage.

The 1.5 strength modifier is what is applied when wielding a weapon one size category larger than than your race. The number is taken from NWN mechanics, not plucked out of thin air.

Wait, wait, wait, wait.

I just realized there's something I don't get here:

Mechanically, when a character grabs a weapon, it immediatelly identifies it as two hander, or one hander, hm? Two handed weapons are -always- mechanically one size larger than the user, so mind my words when I say that a greatsword obviously stops being two handed when taken by Idunnowhat, a giant for example.

Since there is no information about the 1.5x strenght damage bonus, I am going to present my conundrum:

When a character shifts to monkeygrip a massive weapon, wouldn't the game take it again as a one-hander, thus lossing the 1.5x bonus, and furthermore, lossing another 0.5 with the impossed penalty of Amia? (Aka half the strenght modifier)

... Or this bonus applies at the moment of striking, as if the game had to make a check to confirm the size of the character each time?

To msheeler:

"I certainly don't think Monkey Grip costs enough to warrant getting the best of both worlds: The best damage and the best AC. It should sit somewhere in the middle."

Apparently lots of players on the server don't agree with you. As it stands MG gives slightly better damage and the best AC, but the penalties and the DC cost outweigh its use. If the gain outweighed the cost don't you think there would be a ton more MGers out there? You can not deny the fact that there are as far as I can tell 3 players with MG. Your assertion is not backed up by the current situation. Removing some of the damage to make it more equal to the damage of sword and board with no other associated costs further penalizes those who wish to invest the time and effort.

I think if you ask anyone who has gained MG or is in the process of learning it that they just want to better their current situation, not overpower or abuse the system. And that is just plain human nature. But if you remove the slightly higher damage you take away the incentive for improvement.

As it stands MG gives slightly better damage and the best AC, and the penalties and the DC cost apparently do outweigh its use.

Msheeler says:

"And honestly Baden, RP isn't a cost to be factored in. It's what this server is supposed to be all about."

(RP) is what this server is all about, I wholeheartily agree. What I meant by using it as a "cost" is that you invest lots of RP time and effort to learn MG. Decreasing the utility of MG reduces the incentive to learn it, thus reducing the incentive to RP. Why reduce another chance for more interaction between toons because MG is optimally learned through training with one who knows it and others who have to make the items needed to have a bonded weapon.

Like I said in previous posts, those who are going for MG go above and beyond what is called for RP-wise to obtain it. And that is a good thing!

I'll give you an example. When Jerand had the gauntlet made needed to bond the sword to Jerand's hand, Jerand helped Dirgs with the process of building it. But it was Ice who was there to help us get the calculations exactly right. He sat off to the side like a mad scientist transcribing pages and pages of numbers as we steadfastly ignored him and his ramblings. He put on such a show of useless sincerity that I personally laughed my ass off for an hour.

Jerand may not have interacted with Ice otherwise. It it wasn't for MG and training with Ania to obtain it Jerand would most likely not RP with Ice. He's too scatterbrained.

I believe the DMs are awesome and the balance of the game is good. I just don't concur that MG is too overpowered. The lack of its use on this server backs my assertion.

It's not a matter of whether or not MG is overpowered, imo. As msheeler mentioned, the Warforged weapons were given a purposeful boost above what other weapons have, which is on top of the boost that 2-h weps already get for just being 2-h weps, to make them more attractive over sword'n'board. The capping on MG is simply re-balancing that "extra boost" that the weapons were given, since they're no longer being wielded as a 2-h weapon, but are now being used as sword'n'board.

It all balances out in the wash.

You guys are giving too much credit to NWN's mechanics.

It sees a weapon marked as large in the hands of a medium-sized character model (or medium for a small character), and it automatically applies a 1.5x STR modifier to the damage, regardless of if there is a shield in hand or not. The way monkeygrip works is by tricking the Polymorph spell into resetting the character as a large character, equipping the shield and large weapon, then polymorphing again and resetting to medium.

Every weapon that is MonkeyGripped requires bonding, which adds a damage penalty equal to half of the character's STR mod in addition to the other penalties. Example: Andrew has 24 Strength or 36 when buffed, equal to a +13 Strength mod. So, his greatsword automatically takes a -6 Damage so that he only adds +13 damage rather than +19 (before any other modifiers).

This is also why every weapon that is to be Monkeygripped requires an additional 3 DCs to apply the MG penalties/style penalties. So, regulating the flow of mass-crits on MG'd weapons isn't that difficult since every weapon has to be touched by the DM team any ways, or the PC loses their MonkeyGrip.

I'm quite a bit of a newbie here, so forgive me if I overstep. LOL. Though, based on the numbers and info posted here Monkey Grip seems really unappealing. Even at a 2d6 massive crit. I could be wrong, but wouldn't I get a better payout on damage by just investing in Power Attack in most cases? My math is terrible so don't ask me to try and prove that

. I feel like the only reason you would invest in Monkey Grip, based on the above, is to in fact bounce back and forth between doing damage (Two handed) and taking a bit more AC when your elected to be the tank. Then again I'm still unfamiliar with the feat completely in NWN. So if your going to shoot me, be subtle ;]

Indra, you are pretty much correct when they make this change. It is the versatility that will be the draw, so in many eyes, not really a draw or worth it at all. You pay 13 DCs and some style penalties to be roughly on par with longsword and shield.

The only thing you have slightly wrong is that power attack does add damage, but it also reduces your AB, your ability to hit things by five points. Monkey Grip doesn't affect AB unless you take a -1 as a style penalty. But otherwise you are dead on the money.

My whole beef in this whole thread is way they are going about it and that I disagree with their reasons behind it.

But as one person on this site once wrote, and this is just a paraphrase, dissension is essential to a successful RP server.

Eep! I stick to what I said then. For what you have to invest and give up trying to acquire this feat, it really doesn't seem worthwhile. If one person says it's overpowered and another says it isn't. Then at the very least, this feat should be looked into/tested.

The DM's should really take it from here though. Your only going to receive biased views on the forums by players. At least that's how I feel. An example of that is if my main was a mage of sorts, then there is no way I would support giving a fighter any more damage/AB/or AC then he/she already dishes out. In the case of potential PvP. (That doesn't apply to everyone of course)

At any rate, I gotta agree with what your saying here and at the very least I hope you don't get written off. Good luck!

MG Warforged Great Sword

Non Critical Damage:

Critical Damage

Trueforged Long Sword

Non Critical Damage

Critical Damage

The damage penalty on MG is not multiplicative. I tested this for an hour in game.

MG Warforged Greatsword Average w/ Improved Critical: 38
Trueforged Longsword Average w/ Improved Critical: 31

Call it justification or opinion or whatever, the numbers don't lie and on average MG provides a, roughly, 20% bonus to damage and an extra mythal slot.

Thank you Mosh for your help! Truly. And thanks to all the others who have provided insight, both in this thread and OOC.

I must say No Mas.

So after contemplating the pros and cons of MG for the last two days I've decided to go where the RP has taken Jerand. It matters not about the stats, the penalties, the costs, the this's and thats. Let the RP be your guide. It should have been the whole time.

I attribute my combativeness these last two days to working a lot of extra hours for Christmas and getting a whole lot less sleep. Something that is not good for an old man. My apologies if I've rankled anyone.

I don't think there is anything else to be gained in this thread. Please lock.

Numbers don't lie - but let's make sure you're getting everything right about the numbers.

Did you test this with AB vs a certain AC, taking into account the possible -1 AB style penalty? What if someone takes that for other character reasons?

Did you use the adjusted MG Greatsword massive critical that's being discussed? We need to see what we're making the weapons into, as well.

Here's a few pictures of graphs I used on http://www.afterlifeguild.org/Thott/nwn/, with the following assumptions:

Each weapon is +5, and has the maximum Mythal elemental damage possible, no massive critical or warforged or any other x-forged abilities, are keen, and they are in the hands of a 20 fighter/10 weapon master, with all relevant feats (overwhelming critical, epic weapon focus, etc.), 36 STR, and are against multiple AC's up to AC 70.

Greatsword:

Longsword:

The Greatsword does a little over 30 more damage; compare ~215 for the Longsword, per round, on average, using power attack, to almost exactly 250 for the Greatsword, using all the same circumstances and enchantments and even the same character.

This is, however, not taking into account ANY penalties, any massive critical enchantments, or anything. These are the exact same weapon, however one is a greatsword, one is a long sword, and the greatsword is used in one hand, not two, meaning no STR boost.

I don't know the stats of a warforged GS, LS, or the proposed stats of a warforged monkey-grip GS, so I can't take those into account with new calculations - however I encourage others to do these calculations and post their findings, since we're worried about balance here, and this calculator is very, very detailed, and helpful in proving points.

This is the URL for the calculation page of the Great Sword, and this is the calculations page for the long sword, so people can see what I did, and not claim BS for any reason; and also, you can use these to base your own calculations, with penalties from Monkey-Grip, warforged weapons, and more.

EDIT: Well, sorry you feel that way, I was just getting into the math of this. Better luck next time?

I used your Graph thing for the per round damage based on the base attributes I brought up, but I got rid of all the superfluous shit like Weapon Master and just went with basic Improved Critical/Keen and +25 BAB. I'm not sure why you are involving things like Power Attack etc in what is essentially a discussion around base damage differentials. I used what you can make via the mythal system on a 38 strength base.

+4 Enhance, Keen, 2d4 Damage, 1d8 mass criticals for Greatsword
+4 Enhance, Keen, 1d6 Damage, 1d8 mass criticals for Longsword

This is the first graph, looks fairly similar to yours if it were a side by side comparison, with regards to damage/round differences between a Longsword and Greatsword. I set the Greatsword side to one handed so absolve us of the extra strength damage as I'm sure you did.

Except that doesn't take into account the fact that said Monkey Gripped weapon has a -7 damage penalty that is applied -after- all other calculations are applied and is not multiplicative. Therefore you will gain 14 - 7 critical damage from your strength modifier on a crit. To take this into account because your thing doesn't seem to take into account negative damage I added a flat +7 damage to critical and left Greatsword as one handed. So the actual comparison graphing looks like this;

I also ran the same scenario I presented above which you were correcting me on I suppose.

That is:

Warforged Greatsword
Base: 2d6
Bonus: 2d6
Massive Critical: 2d4 (what the limitation would be)
Critical hit strength bonus: 7

Trueforged Longsword
Base: 1d8
Bonus: 1d10
Massive Critical: 1d8

And got this:

Here are the calculations: http://www.afterlifeguild.org/Thott/nwn ... n&maxac=68

You'll notice on that graph that Greatsword damage is 190 damage over a full round of five attacks. Divide that by 5.

You get 38. Seems to match up, perfectly, to the numbers I presented.

That differential of 7 damage averaging over five attacks is worth any combination of the style penalties you take and then some. To throw you a bone though I went with the worst ones. -1 AB and -1 Damage on the same Sword. I did this by setting base damage for the Greatsword as 1d5 + 1d6 + 2d6 and giving the Longsword a +1AB bonus comparatively.

Still seems superior doesn't it even though both weapons are basically even from around 50 AC to 60 AC. Though you do need to take into account feats such Weapon Focus, Epic Weapon Focus and Spells/Consumables such as Enhancement, Bless and Aid which would probably change matters. . .in favor of the greatsword.

Also for future reference when you are comparing damage types you don't need to take into account; Power Attack, IPA, Knockdown etc etc because they have same AB penalties and Damage bonus that are the same regardless of what weapon you choose.

Base damage of a weapon

Who is online