Blasphemous Polyhedral Weapons Table

[tbeard1999]

Originally Posted by Skarg

I noticed. It starts to bug me sometimes, especially when it's something with a high constant such as a fine enchanted small axe doing 1d+7 damage. I'd rather add 2d-7 to all weapons, than make them all flat.

Still polyhedral blasphemy, but perhaps rolling 2 or 3 polyhedrals for every weapon, with an appropriate minus, e.g.:

Rapier 3d6-7
Cutlass 3d8-9
Shortsword 3d10-11
Broadsword 3d12-13
Bastard Sword (1 hand) 3d12-12
Bastard Sword (2 hands)† 3d20-23
2-handed Sword† 3d20-22
Great Sword† 3d20-20

(Though personally, I'm with Rick that 2-handed weapons should do another +1, so I'd have:

Bastard Sword (2 hands)† 3d20-22
2-handed Sword† 3d20-21
Great Sword† 3d20-19
)

However, even I would probably find that notably slower due to the arithmetic, so while I like the numbers better, I probably wouldn't do that outside a computer game - maybe I'm just so used to d6's, but to me 5d-6 for a battleaxe is easy, but 3d20-20 sounds slightly tiresome.

Something I’d like to avoid if at all possible is a damage spread that results in weapons doing zero damage. Since we don’t have readily available 14, 16 and 18 sided dice, I had to use d20s and do a little subtraction for the 2h sword and 2h bastard sword. My suggestion of using 1d20-7 for daggers was somewhat frivolous. Anyhow, most weapons do not subtract points.

The sha-ken is an odd case - the d6-2 is tedious if you fling a bunch of them. To be mathematically correct, you have to subtract 2 from each die. So if you hit with 5 of then you can’t simply roll 5 dice and subtract 10. (An easy, though somewhat unintuitive solution is to roll 1d per sha-ken. A 5 or 6 does no damage; a 1-4 does the indicated amount of damage,) Mathematically a d4-1 would produce almost the same average damage (1 2/3 is the average damage with d6-2; -1 damage is functionally the same as 0 damage). But I just didn’t like it for some reason. And the non intuitive fix above works just fine,