Add the "Impact" spell

[Anonymous Lemur]

I found this thread from last year recently: http://www.efupw.com/forums/forum/main-forums/bug-reports/86251-keen-edge-on-warmace

Sadly this change was never documented and suggests the need for the spell "Impact" rather than making Keen randomly work on a maul, but not a war mace. Let's keep it consistent with a spell specifically designed for adding keen to bludgeoning weapons. Then remove keen's effect on all bludgeoning weapons.

If this isn't possible it would be nice if this change was documented in spell changes under keen's entry.
 

[Paha]

As I mentioned, main purpose to keep it away from working on war mace was first and foremost fact of balance. It is extremely effective weapon as it is, and as I added it in I opted to not add it on list of weapons keen recognizes and works on. This is on purpose. It working on others, even some bludgeoning ones, is not the end of the world when it does not have as heavy impact as it does on already heavy critting weapon.

[Anonymous Lemur]

I think Keen should be removed from the scythe as well as it always uses the lesser of the two damage types and as such as better than the war mace in every possible way.

Edit: It also allows you to stack weapon enhancement through spells with damage bonuses. For example a scythe with +1 slashing damage will gain +1 piercing damage if magic weapon is cast on it. Which is huge on an x4 weapon.

[zDark Shadowz]

In that regard, do you want all dual-damage types to not have the keen ability on the offchance they possess a damage type thats not their primary? If it was +1 cold damage on the scythe not sure if the same argument could be made.

[SHSLDetective]

I honestly would just prefer consistency. If it works on every other weapon in the game including the weapon that warmace is a direct copy of, and atm it does, it should work on warmaces too.

[Paha]

I can understand the search of consistency. However, this game is far from consistent and many things are swayed by personal testing and opinion of balance from both perspective of players and DM's alike. In the end, we make some decision going one way, or the other.

When I have time, I will see to discussing with the team. Most likely, I will advocate that if we decide to push for this kind consistency, I will see to making keen more consistent, and making sure it does not work on any blunt weapon and possibly remove scythe from that list likewise, rather than add mace on it as well. They are extremely potent in efu levels as it stands, and I will likely always vote against it.

[Knight Of Pentacles]

War maces weigh more than a scythe.  Better versions are also much more rare in the loot table.  You don't need to take away keen to make it "balanced".  That's just kind of asinine.

[Pentaxius]

Weapons in DnD are vastly unequal in terms of raw power. Personally I'd rather see "compensation" reflected in the loot table in creative ways rather than indirect (and a bit obscure) balancing acts through spell exceptions. This is why the Falchion comes on the loot tables by default with -1 damage, for instance - while keen still applies - or (mechanically terrible for its proficiency level) weapons such as short-spears can be found with flavorful modifiers such as saves, or spell per day. This sort of variation adds to the richness of our setting.

[Anonymous Lemur]

In that regard, do you want all dual-damage types to not have the keen ability on the offchance they possess a damage type thats not their primary? If it was +1 cold damage on the scythe not sure if the same argument could be made.

Fairly certain you missed the whole point of my bringing up damage types. Re-read paha's reasoning for not adding keen to warmace and then read my response again and it will be clear.

They are extremely potent in efu levels as it stands, and I will likely always vote against it.

I think you're looking at this from an "NPC's with x4 weapons are extremely potent and so pc's with x4 weapons must be also" perspective. Which is very much not the case. In order to do more damage than a great axe with an x4 weapon over the course of 100 swings you would need barbarian rage + bulls strength throughout. A great axe doesn't even require an extra feat in most cases. Which is huge when you consider most classes only get 4(5 if human) feats on efu. When we're strictly speaking balance a player needs to get value out of his weapon swings over the long term to be potent. An NPC only needs to get value over the short term by critting once to be potent and scary. NPC's can also have any amount of strength a DM wishes.

If you look at the history of efu you will see a lot of players using x3 weapons. Even when scythes were available with ever so slight bonuses. I don't recall ever going up against someone with a scythe and being remotely afraid. Especially when I had my trusty great axe or spear in hand because I knew I had just as much chance to end the fight with a good blow as they did.

Anyway it seems like the decision has been made and while I strongly disagree with it for the reasons above. I get the feeling it's not up for debate. So it's probably best to lock this thread before it gets out of hand.

[Paha]

I look war maces from players perspective. I tested and played them a long time before I implemented these weapons into efu. I have plenty of experience and understanding of them.

And you are right, certain factors here are not really up to debate, I am afraid. While I can understand opposing opinions, there are decisions that we have made because we feel they are better served as we have deemed them. Design or just what we want.