# Mercurial Greatsword



## Carceri (Jul 22, 2003)

Ok, this is a rant. I am here to bitch about one of the cheesiest weapons ever developed for D&D. First off, I'd like to know where the idea for this weapon even spawned. Can anyone tell me? I've read my fair share of fantasy novels, and I do not recall a particular hero or villain using a mercurial weapon.

Secondly, what were the developers THINKING when they made this weapon? It is easily one of the biggest if not THE biggest min/max weapons in the game. Did they think players would NOT abuse it?

I need some feedback here. Exactly how popular is this weapon amongst other players? I am curious. I only play with a couple of different groups and only one particular person from the groups I play with uses one, but just that is enough to drive me nuts, especially as a DM.


----------



## Mark (Jul 22, 2003)

Carceri said:
			
		

> *I need some feedback here. Exactly how popular is this weapon amongst other players?*




More importantly, _how popular is it with DMs...?_


----------



## Carceri (Jul 22, 2003)

> More importantly, how popular is it with DMs...?




That's a good question. In this particular campaign, I did not start off as the DM, somebody else did. Had I began the campaign as the main DM, I think I would have discouraged the player from using such a weapon, but then again, maybe not. Some min/maxers just need to have their way and will not be happy unless they get it.

I'll tell you this much, I will have no qualms of handing the campaign back over to original DM when the time comes. A min/maxed Weapon Master with a Merc Greatsword is just a nightmare. Every encounter that I create has to take into account that stupid weapon and what happens when he lands a crit with his 23 STR, specialization, and oh, for some insane reason the DM before me decided that the thing needed to be a Mercurial Greatsword of the Planes; and the adventure I just happen to be running deals mainly with fiends as the major adversaries. Sweet, hunh?

I'm all for the players getting their glory and such, but when lack of challenges become redundant, something is wrong. Seems the only way I can effectively challenge the group is to pit them against opponents who's CR's are 4, sometimes 5 more than their levels. 

Please, if there's any other DM's out there, share your horror stories with me. Please tell me I am not alone.


----------



## Teflon Billy (Jul 22, 2003)

I disallowed it from the get-go.

I disallowed most everything from Sword and Fist. It was WotC's first kick at the "power-up splatbook" can and I didn't care for, well, any of it really.

When asked in an organized chat about the obvious "Power Creep"  in the supplement, the Author gave a quip about 'Well, something has to be the most powerful weapon...this is it". After months of the 3E Author's claims that "Game Balance" was their holy grail during development. Baffling.

He also claimed to have _intentionally_ left out the BAB for the Halfling Outrider (it was fixed--meaning added-- in the errata). 

The guy was just full of  pretty much from the get-go in that chat; both in the "not telling the truth" version of the phrase and in the "Was an Idiot" version.

Anyway, *Mercurial Greatsword*: it is unbalanced.

None of my players ever asked for it though (Bless them).


----------



## BiggusGeekus (Jul 22, 2003)

First, welcome to the forums Carceri!

While I agree that a weapon filled with an apparently inexauhstable supply of mercury is a silly idea, I don't think the weapon is crazy unbalanced.  It requries a seperate feat to learn how to use and the damage 2d6/x4 isn't much better than a scythe 2d4/x4.  Basically, you're paying an extra 582gp and a feat for an average of 1hp/attack.    Weapon Specialization will give you a flat +2hp/attack and scythes are a lot more common than weapons with mystery goo inside.

If it's unbalancing your game, tell your players that they can not have an infinite ammount of mercury stored inside their weapon.  Exotic weapons are unusual, not trans-dimensional.  I'd suggest 50 "charges" (a silly ammount, but they did pay a feat for the thing) before they have to "re-load" it with 500gp of mercury.  Using that much mercury should be treated as poison use and must be done by a specialist (10gp) or some one who simply knows how to use poison.

Just my two cents.



> More importantly, _how popular is it with DMs...?_




OHHHH!  A Zen riddle!  I shall meditate on this.


----------



## Teflon Billy (Jul 22, 2003)

BG where do you think the Mercury is going? It's not fuel man, (as I understand it) it's movable weight.

Think of the Mercurial Greatsword as having a hollow tube running the length of the blade filled halfway with mercury (bloody dense liquid).

Now when you swing the sword, the mercury slides to the end of the sword, adding more weight at the tip and increaseing the weight of the hit.

I have no idea if the physics on this are correct (or need to be), but I think that's how the description in S&F goes.


----------



## BiggusGeekus (Jul 22, 2003)

Teflon Billy said:
			
		

> *BG where do you think the Mercury is going? It's not fuel man, (as I understand it) it's movable weight.
> *




Ah.

My bad.  I thought it was some kind of inject-o-matic dealie-wacker.   I didn't read S&F very carefully.  I got up to the part where the weapon had mercury inside and my brain's circut breakers fired off.

Anyway, I'll stand by my assessment: silly but not any more broken than a scythe.


----------



## Mark (Jul 22, 2003)

Teflon Billy said:
			
		

> *...(as I understand it) it's movable weight.*




That's my understanding, as well.  There are a number of sports games that have tried to incorporate the use of mercury in their "tools" as a way to increase power.  Everything from softball bats to golf clubs.  I think that might be where the idea may have been spawned, but don't quote me on that.

As to "what to do", has anyone ever tried to fix a thermometer?  Unwise considering the dangers of mercury.  I'd sunder the damned thing and make a replacement as scarce as fits the campaign...possibly impossible.  If he goes looking for another and describes it to people, allow for the chance to pick up a regular magic sword of the planes for cheap, as a way of mollifying the player, but only if you think it is fair.

Anyhoo, forget to welcome you to the boards.  Have fun and good luck!


----------



## A2Z (Jul 22, 2003)

Carceri said:
			
		

> *First off, I'd like to know where the idea for this weapon even spawned. Can anyone tell me? I've read my fair share of fantasy novels, and I do not recall a particular hero or villain using a mercurial weapon.*



The Mecurial Greatsword comes from Gene Wolfe's _Book of the New Sun_. It was an executioners sword in the book and doesn't see much, if any, action outside of chopping off the heads of felons. In fact in the story I think it's mentioned that it would be too unwieldy to use in a fight. Of course this is D&D, if someone likes it they'll find a way to work it in and explain it. If they don't like it they won't use it.


----------



## EricNoah (Jul 22, 2003)

The idea, I believe, comes from Gene Wolfe's "Shadow of the Torturer" and the rest of that series.  It's been a long time since I read it but I think the weapon was designed as a headsman's tool?


----------



## Richards (Jul 22, 2003)

> First off, I'd like to know where the idea for this weapon even spawned. Can anyone tell me? I've read my fair share of fantasy novels, and I do not recall a particular hero or villain using a mercurial weapon.



I believe the mercurial greatsword is the D&D equivalent of Terminus Est ("This is the line of division") , the sword used by Severian in Gene Wolfe's "Torturer" series (let me see if I can remember them all..._Shadow of the Torturer_, _Claw of the Conciliator_, _Sword of the Lictor_, _Citidel of the Autarch_, _Urth of the New Sun_ - I think that's right).  It's a fantastic series (in every sense of the word), taking place on an Earth some million years in the future, when civilization has fallen and risen several times over again.  Severian is an apprentice torturer in the Guild of the Seekers for Truth and Penitence, ends up getting himself in trouble by feeling compassion for one of his "clients" (torture victims), and ends up becoming a journeyman, traveling the world.  Highly recommended.

Johnathan


----------



## Richards (Jul 22, 2003)

Gah!  Beaten to the punch by Eric Noah himself!

Johnathan


----------



## A2Z (Jul 22, 2003)

Richards said:
			
		

> *Gah!  Beaten to the punch by Eric Noah himself!
> 
> Johnathan *



Hey!


----------



## Mark (Jul 22, 2003)

Not sure when Wolfe wrote his books, but this has been a sports-tech trick for quite some time...


----------



## Yeoman (Jul 22, 2003)

I've seen it in use a few times, as someone else mentioned it's not a great deal better than the scythe. Never seemed out of line for an exotic weapon to my group.


----------



## Brekki (Jul 22, 2003)

BiggusGeekus said:
			
		

> *It requries a seperate feat to learn how to use and the damage 2d6/x4 isn't much better than a scythe 2d4/x4.  Basically, you're paying an extra 582gp and a feat for an average of 1hp/attack.    Weapon Specialization will give you a flat +2hp/attack and scythes are a lot more common than weapons with mystery goo inside. *




Actually it's a +2 to damage ... 2d6=7 average, 2d4=5 average ... a +2 to damage should be more expensive as 582 gp and a feat available for everyone.


----------



## Richards (Jul 22, 2003)

Hmm, on further observation, I think I'm entitled to a second "Gah!"

Gah!  Beaten to the punch by A2Z as well!  (After posting my original response, I scrolled up and saw that Eric Noah had posted while I was typing up my response.  I failed to scroll up further and see that A2Z had posted one as well.)

I guess I'm going to have to learn to type faster!

Johnathan


----------



## ColonelHardisson (Jul 22, 2003)

EricNoah said:
			
		

> *The idea, I believe, comes from Gene Wolfe's "Shadow of the Torturer" and the rest of that series.  It's been a long time since I read it but I think the weapon was designed as a headsman's tool? *




Yes, exactly. Wolfe's "Book of the New Sun" series is, indeed, where it's from. It was the tool of trade of a guild of executioners. The one we see a lot in the book belongs to the main character, Severian. The sword is named _Terminus Est_. It wasn't meant for combat, but Severian found it necessary to use it for combat many times. 

I think it's an exotic idea for a weapon, and I enjoy using them in my campaign. They're very rare, and are artifacts of a long-lost empire, the "badge of office" of certain imperial representatives. The secret of their making is now forgotten. 

Out of all the strange, exotic, magical things found in D&D, I don't see this type of sword as being all that strange.


----------



## ColonelHardisson (Jul 22, 2003)

Richards said:
			
		

> *Hmm, on further observation, I think I'm entitled to a second "Gah!"
> 
> Gah!  Beaten to the punch by A2Z as well!  (After posting my original response, I scrolled up and saw that Eric Noah had posted while I was typing up my response.  I failed to scroll up further and see that A2Z had posted one as well.)
> 
> ...




It's alright; I think we all provided some info about them, and affirmed that they were from those books for sure.


----------



## BVB (Jul 22, 2003)

Even though the mercury is allegedly sealed within the sword, it's still possible for the darned thing to break and spill its precious cargo. 
Mercury is an incredibly fine liquid, is it not? If there's even a smidgeon of a crack or crease in the construct, that metal is going to find its way out.

A year or so ago this weapon was discussed thoroughly on these boards, and those among us who had some engineering tech geek skills explained how hollowing a sword could be done -- and whether a few ounces of mercury would make much of a difference one way or another in the swinging momentum of a sword. At the very least, the smithing process would (realistically) make the sword more fragile and likely to break than a common sword design.

It's a silly concept anyway.

If the DM really wants to get rid of the thing, I'd suggest secretly planning a list of reasonable events that could be snuck into the adventure without triggering suspicion of malice. Don't push them into the situation obviously; blunt manipulation of characters is bound to backfire. But if you've got a list ready, the chance will present itself.

Someone already mentioned sundering, for example. So make sure they run into a really nasty villain who can put that action to best use. Have him break a few other weapons, too.

Sliding stone trap doors? Put the character(s) in a room or dead-end hallway with a panel slowly moving to close them in. They've got to stay in the room for some reason, but they want the opportunity to leave later (you work out the details). Would the fighter be willing to prop open the door with his special sword? ... Crack! Problem solved.

Robbery in the city? Take a bunch of stuff and fence it immediately. The sword will never turn up again. (Or maybe it will, in the hands of someone else.) Theft during the night at the inn? Same thing.

Toss 'em into a sea passage or over a waterfall -- belongings are forever lost into the murky depths. Even if they go diving later, some other creature has picked up the sword already.

Have a dragon sit on the darned thing. Whatever.

And when the original sword is gone and the guy wants to buy a new one, make it very, very difficult to find the materials, skills and time to forge a replacement. ...

(If you want to be really nasty about it, give the character mercury poisoning from the unnoticed contact with his skin over time.)


----------



## Rashak Mani (Jul 22, 2003)

Scythes also only critical on 20... Merc Swords on 19-20... so much for any similarity there.

   I think its a useful weapon to have in the list insofar as it gives away munchkin players. When a new player asks for this weapon you know immediately he is not a serious gamer and you can proceed to excluding him from your gaming group !  Treat as a Detect Munchking Item.

   Since this silly weapon has shown up... not even some die hard min maxers have had the courage to ask a DM to use it.


----------



## dagger (Jul 22, 2003)

Its not so bad with the errata


----------



## Yeoman (Jul 22, 2003)

Rashak Mani said:
			
		

> *Scythes also only critical on 20... Merc Swords on 19-20... so much for any similarity there.*



Post Errata it only crits on a 20.


----------



## redhawk (Jul 22, 2003)

Carceri said:
			
		

> *Ok, this is a rant. I am here to bitch about one of the cheesiest weapons ever developed for D&D. First off, I'd like to know where the idea for this weapon even spawned. Can anyone tell me? I've read my fair share of fantasy novels, and I do not recall a particular hero or villain using a mercurial weapon.
> 
> Apparently, you've never read Gene Wolfe. Severius, the torturer, carried <i>Terminus Est</I>, a mercurial greatsword.
> 
> ...


----------



## EricNoah (Jul 22, 2003)

*Re: Re: Mercurial Greatsword*



			
				redhawk said:
			
		

> *
> Apparently, you've never read Gene Wolfe. Severius, the torturer, carried <i>Terminus Est</I>, a mercurial greatsword.
> 
> Redhawk
> *




And apparently YOU've never read perhaps the greatest work of literature known to man -- a little something called "The Rest of This Thread"!  



(Sorry, man, couldn't help it.    You're like the 4th person to point this out.  I was the second!)


----------



## LGodamus (Jul 22, 2003)

*Re: Re: Re: Mercurial Greatsword*



			
				EricNoah said:
			
		

> *
> 
> And apparently YOU've never read perhaps the greatest work of literature known to man -- a little something called "The Rest of This Thread"!
> 
> ...





Kettle this is pot, Pot this is kettle..be nice to each other....



lol, sorry eric....I had to.


----------



## Apok (Jul 22, 2003)

Richards said:
			
		

> *I believe the mercurial greatsword is the D&D equivalent of Terminus Est ("This is the line of division")  *




Coolest.  Sword Name.  Evah.


----------



## Staffan (Jul 22, 2003)

Teflon Billy said:
			
		

> *I have no idea if the physics on this are correct (or need to be), but I think that's how the description in S&F goes. *



It doesn't work, at least not in the real world. You might try a somewhat safer experiment to see how it (doesn't) work: take a big bottle (2 liters or so). Fill it about one third to one half with water, and put on the stopper. Try swinging it around and see if you get any additional accelleration from the water sloshing around in it.


----------



## ColonelHardisson (Jul 22, 2003)

Well, I guess "silly" is subjective, especially in a game about elves and dragons and wizards, so I'll not try to explain why I don't think they're all that silly 

Anyway, in the books from which the sword sprang, these swords were absolutely not very common at all. They were, in fact, very rare, and only seemed to be available to members of the torturer's guild. They also seemed to have been made in the distant past, presumably using forgotten techniques, which made them work exactly as described in the books - the mercury drained into the handle when the sword was raised, and flowed out when the sword was swung down, giving the blow greater impact - without shattering, or without the mercury easily escaping. I'm sure this could be done _now_, of course, but given that the story is set millions of years hence, one might assume that metallurgical techniques would be vastly improved, or at least different, from what we have today. Or maybe they used magic, or technology sufficiently advanced to be indistinguishable from magic (to borrow from Clarke).

Anyway, in my own campaign, they are not easy to come by. They certainly aren't available for sale. They would only be found by PCs after a grueling series of adventures, in the hands of enemies that will use them against the PCs. 

Oh, and I'll address another point, but it involves a 


SPOILER BELOW


Severian's sword, _Terminus Est_, does, indeed, shatter during use at one point in the story, destroying it irreparably.


----------



## totoro (Jul 22, 2003)

Rashak Mani said:
			
		

> *Scythes also only critical on 20... Merc Swords on 19-20... so much for any similarity there.
> 
> I think its a useful weapon to have in the list insofar as it gives away munchkin players. When a new player asks for this weapon you know immediately he is not a serious gamer and you can proceed to excluding him from your gaming group !  Treat as a Detect Munchking Item.
> 
> Since this silly weapon has shown up... not even some die hard min maxers have had the courage to ask a DM to use it.   *




Christ!  2d6, crit x4 and you have to spend a feat (and the weapon weighs more and is more rare).  Or 2d6, crit 19-20/x2 and you don't have to spend a feat.  Duh.  

The two most over-used words on these message boards are munchkin and munchkin.  Is a person now a munchkin if they choose and unusual weapon?  Will everyone be happy if we all go back to using longswords (2e)?

The unfixed version may have been over-powered (average 2 more damage and x4 crit instead of 19-20/x2), but now it is not.  In fact, I doubt that many people would select it as their weapon of choice unless they really wanted something unusual.  A power gamer would take the greatsword and select the improved crit (17-20/x2 is as good as x4 crit) feat instead of wasting an exotic weapon proficiency on a weapon that you will never find.


----------



## Joseph Elric Smith (Jul 22, 2003)

New sun by gene wolfe
ken


----------



## Joseph Elric Smith (Jul 22, 2003)

*Re: Re: Mercurial Greatsword*



			
				Mark said:
			
		

> *
> 
> More importantly, how popular is it with DMs...? *



I tend to give out at least one variation of it in almost every campaign I run,but then again I am a huge new sun fan. Of course it also tend to be a magical weapon too, and one of those that goes up in power as the party progresses. so that when they find it it is liek plus 1 but it gain in power as the owner levels. before they came out with the mercurial sword. I used to make it +1 +2 damage to start, then +2 +4 damage etc as it's power progressed, but I liek the right up for it so know I use it pretty much as written in the book.
ken


----------



## Joseph Elric Smith (Jul 22, 2003)

*Re: Re: Re: Mercurial Greatsword*



			
				EricNoah said:
			
		

> *
> 
> And apparently YOU've never read perhaps the greatest work of literature known to man -- a little something called "The Rest of This Thread"!
> 
> ...



And I am about number 10 
ken


----------



## SpikeyFreak (Jul 22, 2003)

Staffan said:
			
		

> *
> It doesn't work, at least not in the real world. You might try a somewhat safer experiment to see how it (doesn't) work: take a big bottle (2 liters or so). Fill it about one third to one half with water, and put on the stopper. Try swinging it around and see if you get any additional accelleration from the water sloshing around in it. *



It has nothing to do with acceleration.

--Pointy Spikey

Edit: Yes, do a little experiment.  Take an empty 2-liter bottle and hit your computer with it as hard as you can.  Now take one half-full and do it.  See which one does more damage.

Edit2: The idea is from Gene Wolfe's works. Severius, the torturer, carried Terminus Est, a mercurial greatsword.


----------



## Olgar Shiverstone (Jul 22, 2003)

Carceri said:
			
		

> *Ok, this is a rant. I am here to bitch about one of the cheesiest weapons ever developed for D&D. First off, I'd like to know where the idea for this weapon even spawned. Can anyone tell me? I've read my fair share of fantasy novels, and I do not recall a particular hero or villain using a mercurial weapon.
> 
> Secondly, what were the developers THINKING when they made this weapon? It is easily one of the biggest if not THE biggest min/max weapons in the game. Did they think players would NOT abuse it?
> 
> I need some feedback here. Exactly how popular is this weapon amongst other players? I am curious. I only play with a couple of different groups and only one particular person from the groups I play with uses one, but just that is enough to drive me nuts, especially as a DM. *




Mercurial Greatsword?  I thought you were describing the spiked chain!


----------



## Negative Zero (Jul 22, 2003)

y'know, the so called "game balance" argment is just the ultimate GMs tool for telling a player "nyah-nyah you ca-an't haaave it!" 

seriously tho, DnD *IS* a min-maxer's game. always has been. (at least 3.0 which is the bulk of my DnD experience always has been.) the DnD system assumes that the characters will specialise. and that different specialties will come together to make a great fighting whole. heck there was even min-maxing _advice_ in the back oh my PHB.

the idea that somehow you were a "munchkin" if you were specialised in combat simply came about when some of us got older and started getting tired/bored with simply killing things. there is nothing wrong with powerful weapons. unless of course you've "graduated" to more social games. in which case, just don't use 'em.

~NegZ


----------



## (Psi)SeveredHead (Jul 22, 2003)

> y'know, the so called "game balance" argment is just the ultimate GMs tool for telling a player "nyah-nyah you ca-an't haaave it!"



I'd like to know why a player thinks they're entitled to something found in an _optional_ book.

They know it's too good to be true.


----------



## Joseph Elric Smith (Jul 22, 2003)

(Psi)SeveredHead said:
			
		

> *
> I'd like to know why a player thinks they're entitled to something found in an optional book.
> 
> They know it's too good to be true. *



If a player want an item then it is up to the player and the Gm to come to terms. Game balance it ultimately in the DM hand. if the party is tough then you just add a few more mobs . If the game master feels some how a weapon is unbalancing there are lots of ways to bring the game in balance, .The game is about both the players and the game master creating a good game right?
Ken


----------



## Carceri (Jul 22, 2003)

Thank you all for your responses and your input, and thanks for welcoming me to the forum. So the mercurial greatsword is from a story that is basically more of a sci-fi/fantasy genre than a straight up fantasy genre? I always did get the impression of 'Final Fantasy' when I considered the merc greatsword.

Anyway, I suppose some of us can agree to disagree, but I feel the mercurial greatsword is the most broken weapon I've ever seen. Drawing comparisons to a scythe...hmmm... ok, I see your point somewhat, but I think I'd rather see someone trying to abuse a scythe (as silly as it may look) than a merc greatsword. It isn't so much JUST the mercurial greatsword as it is the character wielding it. Ok, let me give you an example of what the character wielding one of these in the campaign I am running. He's a half-orc fighter/weapon master; with feats that are geared towards getting the most he possibly can out the particular weapon he uses (improved crit, power critical, specialization). I don't think some of you are taking into account such things when seriously weighing the differences between a standard greatsword wielder and a mercurial greatsword wielder.

Yes, the threat range is lower on a merc greatsword, but a merc greatsword crit has more potential to kill a foe in one blow than a standard greatsword does. I don't even think a greataxe is as deadly.

I thank you for some of your suggestions, but I do not know as though I can bring myself to sunder a character's favorite weapon. That isn't normally what I like to do and I don't think I've ever used the Sunder ability on a player yet. Sundering is not as easy as it sounds to begin with anyway. As I stated previously, this particular merc greatsword is magical; a mercurial greatsword of the planes. It just so happens that the creatures that they are fighting most of the time are outsiders, and none of them wield +4 or better weapons.


----------



## Negative Zero (Jul 22, 2003)

(Psi)SeveredHead said:
			
		

> *I'd like to know why a player thinks they're entitled to something found in an optional book. ...*




bah! everything in DnD is "optional." unless you use *only* the 3 core books and *nothing* else, you're in no position to talk about "optional" books. if you use even one house rule, you' you're using "optional" stuff. 

(for the record i am using the collective "you" here.)

in addition, no one said anything about being "entitled" to anything. at least, i didn't. i see no reason why players and GMs can't discuss things.

also, i hope you realise that you quoted the joking part of my post (minus the smilie) and seemingly ignored the rest of it.

~NegZ


----------



## BVB (Jul 22, 2003)

So where did the idea for a mercurial sword come from, anyway? Was it originally an element in a fantasy novel? I'd love to read more about it, if only I knew where to look ...


----------



## A2Z (Jul 22, 2003)

BVB said:
			
		

> *So where did the idea for a mercurial sword come from, anyway? Was it originally an element in a fantasy novel? I'd love to read more about it, if only I knew where to look ... *



Right, I'm going home. Why I even try...


----------



## (Psi)SeveredHead (Jul 22, 2003)

Negative Zero said:
			
		

> *y'know, the so called "game balance" argment is just the ultimate GMs tool for telling a player "nyah-nyah you ca-an't haaave it!"
> 
> seriously tho, DnD IS a min-maxer's game. always has been. (at least 3.0 which is the bulk of my DnD experience always has been.) the DnD system assumes that the characters will specialise. and that different specialties will come together to make a great fighting whole. heck there was even min-maxing advice in the back oh my PHB.
> 
> ...




Sorry, I'm not good at deciphering jokes, sarcasm, etc.

Yes, DnD is a "munchkin's paradise" since the game designers can't possibly fix every abuse. I'm pretty sure they never dreamt of slaad farming.

I don't think there's a problem with players wanting to be powerful. However, I think players themselves know when something is balanced or not. They had to know the pre-errata'd mercurial greatsword and the  3.0 Archmage was broken.

Ken


> If a player want an item then it is up to the player and the Gm to come to terms. Game balance it ultimately in the DM hand. if the party is tough then you just add a few more mobs . If the game master feels some how a weapon is unbalancing there are lots of ways to bring the game in balance, .The game is about both the players and the game master creating a good game right?
> Ken



Correct. Personally I think the errata'd mercurial greatsword is kind of silly, but if a player wanted one I'd be happy to let them. (Indeed, I might say the same pre-errata, if I got to errata it myself.  ) I think DMs should still be able to say "no" sometimes, however.


----------



## Chun-tzu (Jul 22, 2003)

Carceri said:
			
		

> *It isn't so much JUST the mercurial greatsword as it is the character wielding it. Ok, let me give you an example of what the character wielding one of these in the campaign I am running. He's a half-orc fighter/weapon master; with feats that are geared towards getting the most he possibly can out the particular weapon he uses (improved crit, power critical, specialization). I don't think some of you are taking into account such things when seriously weighing the differences between a standard greatsword wielder and a mercurial greatsword wielder.*




The Mercurial Greatsword has been discussed a few times before on these boards, and the general consensus has been that the errata'd version is very balanced. Somone even did the math to prove it. Most people who object to it object to the concept, not to the numbers.

The maxed-out weapon master concept has been done, many times. It's not overpowered. Critical hits have their share of limitations, so a character based on maxing crits is going to be effective, but not super-effective.

If you're running a 3.5 game, then it's even less of an issue, because of how they nerfed crit maxing (keen effects don't stack with improved critical).


----------



## DiFier (Jul 22, 2003)

My problem with the Mecurial great sword is definitally concept.  The idea works great for chopping off heads that are on a chopping block.  but I think that there would be a problem with overextention.  you don't have to worry about overextention when you are chopping off a head as an executioner.  but when you are using it in a fight it would be all wacky.  most swords ballance very close to the hilt.  I think that they should have left the Mecurial great sword as it was originally but added that when you use it against an apponint who treatens you,  they get an attack of opertunity.  if you attack someone, hit or miss, you open yourself up to an AoO.  makes sence to me.  I don't think too many people would take it with that stipulation.


----------



## totoro (Jul 22, 2003)

DiFier said:
			
		

> *My problem with the Mecurial great sword is definitally concept.  The idea works great for chopping off heads that are on a chopping block.  but I think that there would be a problem with overextention.  you don't have to worry about overextention when you are chopping off a head as an executioner.  but when you are using it in a fight it would be all wacky.  most swords ballance very close to the hilt.  I think that they should have left the Mecurial great sword as it was originally but added that when you use it against an apponint who treatens you,  they get an attack of opertunity.  if you attack someone, hit or miss, you open yourself up to an AoO.  makes sence to me.  I don't think too many people would take it with that stipulation. *




Perhaps you better fix the orcish double axe, dwarven urgrosh, battle axe, and flail while you are at it.


----------



## JoeGKushner (Jul 22, 2003)

If a player came up to me and wanted to play a character like Guts from the Berserk anime, I'd let him take this type of sword as long as he paid the proficiency for it.


----------



## Negative Zero (Jul 23, 2003)

(Psi)SeveredHead said:
			
		

> *... Yes, DnD is a "munchkin's paradise" since the game designers can't possibly fix every abuse. ...*




now i disagree. DnD isn't a "munchkin's paradise" because of the ability of people to find loopholes, it's that way because that's what is fun. and as a game, it's supposed to be fun. 

seriously, how many movies/stories do you see out there written about mundane things? not a whole lot. the really fun ones are about the excepeional characters and/or the exceptional circumstances/situations they find themselves in.

RPGs in general, i think, try mostly to recreate that sort of cinematic/dramatic atmosphere. and you really can't do that with Joe Average. at least, _*I*_ don't think so.

now i'm not saying that this is the only way to play the game, not at all, there are a very many ways to play, and as long as everyone playing is having fun, then all is good.

the point of my aimless and possibly pointless rambling, is that DnD is at its heart a min-maxer's game, coz that's the way heroes are built. each hero in myth/literature has a niche and fills it well, howver, often they are inadequate in other areas. DnD tries to recreate that.

~NegZ


----------



## DiFier (Jul 23, 2003)

totoro said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Perhaps you better fix the orcish double axe, dwarven urgrosh, battle axe, and flail while you are at it. *




Why do their center of balances shift too?


----------



## ColonelHardisson (Jul 23, 2003)

Carceri said:
			
		

> *I feel the mercurial greatsword is the most broken weapon I've ever seen. *




Even with the errata? Many felt that the errata for the weapon made it balanced. This is the official errata for it from Wizards of the Coast:

"p. 70, Weapons Table: Mercurial longsword-Change damage from 1d10 to 1d8. Change crit from x3 to x4."

"p. 70, Weapons Table: Mercurial greatsword-Change damage from 2d8 to 2d6."

Get the full Sword and Fist errata document here:

http://www.wizards.com/dnd/article.asp?x=dnd/er/er20011228a


----------



## Caspian (Jul 23, 2003)

*Erm, if I may.*

While I'm not sure about the fictional origins of the weapon the idea (of having a moving weight in your sword) comes from the middle east, not entirely sure when but when they could afford to experiment and do really fancy inlay work.  Typically it was a ball bearing set into a hollow in the sword somewhere near the base I believe.  Whether it worked or not, I don't know, it may have been a weapon like the flamberge, a show thing.



Jonathan


----------



## totoro (Jul 23, 2003)

DiFier said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Why do their center of balances shift too? *




The orcish double axe would be less efficient used as a double weapon than just swinging a single weapon, since the entire purpose of an axe is to gather momentum for your swing.  

The battle axe would have the same problem as the mercurial sword because it has a much heavier head than haft.  The flail is even more off-balancing.

My point was simply if you start giving AoO against combatants with mercurial swords, you may as well start giving AoO against combatants with other arguably unweildy weapons.


----------



## NoOneofConsequence (Jul 23, 2003)

Carceri said:
			
		

> *Thank you all for your responses and your input, and thanks for welcoming me to the forum. So the mercurial greatsword is from a story that is basically more of a sci-fi/fantasy genre than a straight up fantasy genre? I always did get the impression of 'Final Fantasy' when I considered the merc greatsword.
> 
> Anyway, I suppose some of us can agree to disagree, but I feel the mercurial greatsword is the most broken weapon I've ever seen. Drawing comparisons to a scythe...hmmm... ok, I see your point somewhat, but I think I'd rather see someone trying to abuse a scythe (as silly as it may look) than a merc greatsword. It isn't so much JUST the mercurial greatsword as it is the character wielding it. Ok, let me give you an example of what the character wielding one of these in the campaign I am running. He's a half-orc fighter/weapon master; with feats that are geared towards getting the most he possibly can out the particular weapon he uses (improved crit, power critical, specialization). I don't think some of you are taking into account such things when seriously weighing the differences between a standard greatsword wielder and a mercurial greatsword wielder.
> 
> ...




Sunder is unnecessary, simply have them try to disarm him. In our campaigns, if you're fool enough to be a one-weapon-wonder, then you get what you deserve. Specialisation is one thuing, making yourself only useful with the right weapon is a serious strategic error. 

Remember, outsiders aren't dummies, they'll talk to each other, word'll get around about this deadly half-orc with the massive sword;

Pit Fiend 1: Hey were's Badaxe Blooddrinker

Pit Fiend 2: Didn't ya hear, that bloody half-orc with the big sword took him out.

PF1: that's the seventh one this year. That half-orc's a menace.

PF2: Yeah! He wouldn't be so tough without his damn sword!

PF1: hey, that's given me an idea....

A campaign setting is supposed to be a fun challenge, not the pc's private slaughterhouse with monsters just lining up to die like cattle.

My 2c


----------



## reapersaurus (Jul 23, 2003)

I don't think Carceri has been listening to the nuts-and-bolts of the errated Mercurial Greatsword as mentioned by Chun-tzu, ColonelHardisson, and the first guy (sorry).

It was statistically proven (as I remember) that the MG was not unbalanced in comparison to a boring old greatsword, especially when having to burn a feat to use it properly.

But that thread was at least 2 years ago - it'd be great if someone had it archived, to prove the point again.


----------



## Staffan (Jul 23, 2003)

SpikeyFreak said:
			
		

> *Edit: Yes, do a little experiment.  Take an empty 2-liter bottle and hit your computer with it as hard as you can.  Now take one half-full and do it.  See which one does more damage.
> *



And take one that's entirely full of water and hit something, and you'll do even more damage. The idea behind the mercurial sword is that when you hold it point-up, the mercury is in the handle, putting the center of gravity there. When you swing it, the mercury flows toward the point moving the CoG along with it, providing "free" momentum. The half-full bottle experiment shows that you do not gain this free momentum, because of pesky things like the first law of thermodynamics (aka "There is no such thing as a free lunch").


----------



## Carceri (Jul 23, 2003)

> I don't think Carceri has been listening to the nuts-and-bolts of the errated Mercurial Greatsword as mentioned by Chun-tzu, ColonelHardisson, and the first guy (sorry). I don't think Carceri has been listening to the nuts-and-bolts of the errated Mercurial Greatsword as mentioned by Chun-tzu, ColonelHardisson, and the first guy (sorry).
> 
> It was statistically proven (as I remember) that the MG was not unbalanced in comparison to a boring old greatsword, especially when having to burn a feat to use it properly.




Actually, I am quite aware of the eratta on the mercurial greatsword and that is the version of the weapon that is being used in this campaign. I'm telling you how I see it from my perspective as a DM, week to week. The weapon is unbalanced. On it's own, it is not so unbalancing, but in the hands of the right character it is. 

Statstically proven... LOL. By who? Just because someone's experiences differ from anothers doesn't necessarily proove anything; and that as I why I say we can agree to disagree. I'm sure for every gamer that feels the munchkin greatsword is a balanced weapon, there is another gamer who feels just the opposite.

And don't give me that crap about paying the extra feat. You gotta be kidding me. Enough levels in Fighter will get you enough bonus feats to make up the difference. What's one feat to an 8th or 10th level Fighter?


----------



## Tallok (Jul 23, 2003)

My DM was a bit annoyed when his little brother was so obsessed with getting a mercurial great sword, but had no clue what it did


----------



## ColonelHardisson (Jul 23, 2003)

I don't think the point about using an entire feat in order to use one weapon is crap. It's rather harsh to put it that way. That's why fighters get so many feats, in order to spend them on things like this. I'm actually not sure what constitutes "unbalanced" if one takes away the statistical aspect of it.


----------



## Carceri (Jul 23, 2003)

> The maxed-out weapon master concept has been done, many times. It's not overpowered. Critical hits have their share of limitations, so a character based on maxing crits is going to be effective, but not super-effective.




I never implied that the Weapon Master prestige class was overpowered. Where did you see me say that? I offered the Weapon Master as an example of how the merc greatsword can be abused. Get it? It isn't so much the merc greatsword itself, it's combinations that exist to be used by players to fully abuse it. 

Yes, critical hits have their fair share of limitations...against undead, oozes and constructs? While those types of creatures can be fun to pit againts a party now and then, I don't necessarily enjoy running whole adventures setup that way.


----------



## Carceri (Jul 23, 2003)

> Even with the errata? Many felt that the errata for the weapon made it balanced. This is the official errata for it from Wizards of the Coast:




Yes, EVEN with the eratta version. The munchkin greatsword is a ridiculous weapon, IMHO. And I think the idea to incorporate it in D&D was a mistake to begin with because of the opportunities that exist to abuse it.


----------



## reapersaurus (Jul 23, 2003)

Carceri said:
			
		

> * Statstically proven... LOL. By who?
> 
> And don't give me that crap about paying the extra feat. You gotta be kidding me. *



It doesn;t matter by who - the numbers were crunched, and statistically, it was fairly well shown (e.g. proven) that the benefit of a 2d6, 20x4 weapon was not much better than a 2d6, 19-20, x2 weapon. Certainly not worth a feat. I think they even compared it with Weapon Focus, and saw that that was better than MG.

And I can't believe you're dismissing the palpable cost of a feat to use it properly.
Just because you're using the one PC in your campaign as a comparison, doesn't mean that's how the feat should be defined by.

And what's abusive about this PC of yours, anyway?
He's got a 18-20 crit weapon, after taking Improved Crit:MG, and he can have an almost-guaranteed x4 crit, once per day with Power Critical, right?
You should see a Lance-wielding, Spiritied-Charge-using, Rhino-Hide-wearing horse-rider - he'd terrify your group, apparently, and send you curling up in fetal throes of "broken!" "Munchkin!" "he can do that on EVERY charge attack?"


----------



## ColonelHardisson (Jul 23, 2003)

Carceri said:
			
		

> *
> 
> I never implied that the Weapon Master prestige class was overpowered. Where did you see me say that? I offered the Weapon Master as an example of how the merc greatsword can be abused. Get it? It isn't so much the merc greatsword itself, it's combinations that exist to be used by players to fully abuse it.
> 
> Yes, critical hits have their fair share of limitations...against undead, oozes and constructs? While those types of creatures can be fun to pit againts a party now and then, I don't necessarily enjoy running whole adventures setup that way. *




I believe what was meant is that the weapon in not unbalanced, which was in answer to your assertion that it was. The poster in question was saying that the Weapon Master concept has been used to try to assert that the class can make any weapon appear unbalanced. Over the past couple of years, we've seen this method used for a number of different weapons.


----------



## reapersaurus (Jul 23, 2003)

ahh..  I just looked up the Weapon Master closer - I see what your problem is.

The problem is not the MG.


----------



## Iced Tea (Jul 23, 2003)

the Mecurial Greatsword comes from Gene Wolfe's Book of the New Sun, just thought i would let you know since im sure no one else knows that.


----------



## Iced Tea (Jul 23, 2003)

BTW, i have never read the series and just wanted to be the tenth or so person to point out where it was from . the merc. sword has been reduced in the errata, if you want to know just ask incase these people have posted all of the aspects about it already, im to lazy to fnish the thread.


----------



## genshou (Jul 23, 2003)

*Well... it can be a munchkin sword...*

I'm afraid I must agree with the people who say it IS balanced.  Six months ago, I did about 90 notebook pgs. of fighter analysis, purely mathematical, and do you know what I learned?  That only a fighter who uses TWO weapons is truly powerful, and the fact that they cannot use a shield (EXCEPTION: Animated) helps balance somewhat.  Still, Monkey Grip: MG to use one in the main hand, and a mercurial longsword in the other.  Now THAT creates a munchkin.  I created Galahad just to test this concept.  When he got his MG enchanted fully, this is what it was: +1 keen with all four bursts (acidic burst is either in FRCS or some supplemental book).  His AVERAGE damage when wielding the MG two-handed was 244 on a crit (when he used the Weapon Master's increased multiplier) and rougly 215-220 one-handed.  He was a tempest first, though, so instead of increased multiplier he got an excessive amounts of off-hand damage.  Of course, I would never let a player use a character like Galahad in the first place.  I would be paying enough attention to see the early warning signs.

So what is my point?  Well, to illustrate a little better, using my latest fighter.  I decided I wanted a so-called "maxer" instead of my usual Lasher, who can kick the crap out of a maxer due to strategy and clever feat choices most of the time, by the way.  So, I made Gralck, a half-orc Fighter/Weapon Master.  Only instead of using an "overpowered," exotic weapon, I used a falchion, essentially an extra-long scimitar.  And Gralck is deadly with it.  Once, I created Legaraviel Meliamne, a gray elf Ranger/Tempest who used TWF with a heavy pick/light pick.  After using him, all I have to say is that rangers CAN kick ass.  I could have done the same thing with a fighter, but... fighters don't get Hide as a class skill, and let's just say he also used sniping occasionally with his MC longbow (18 Str), and the poor NPCs suffered once they found him and closed into melee range.

So, the point is, I can make a weapon master (or tempest) deadly with any decent weapon, not just the so-called "overpowered" ones.  So don't think someone is a munchkin just because they want to use an exotic weapon.  Some munchkins (such as my friend Calvin) can make a killing machine out of a DAGGER.  Don't just criticize everything powerful.  I tell my players they can use the harm spell as many times as they want, but villains tend to spread the word about PC tactics, and I as DM will use their favorite tactics against them.  If they want to use mercurial greatswords or harm, show them the other side of it by making an evil fighter who uses one, too.  Or use Sunder and Improved Sunder at long range, with a duom-wielding weapon master.

As for the MG of the planes, would you punish the players for buying bane (abberation) weapons in a beholder war campaign?  Well, you might make the beholders tougher somehow, or perhaps slightly lower the experience awards.  If not all PCs have these weapons, however, that can make the others feel like they're being punished for someone else's actions.  My best advice to you is this: send them against an ogre mage monk or whatnot.  Why is the ogre mage exploring the planes - and most importantly - working with their foes?  That question could be the source of many adventures for the PCs - adventures in which perhaps a big outsider-slaying sword might not be so useful.

My thanks to everyone in here for not turning this place into a huge insult-fling.  The "Japanese Sword Corrections and Additions" board didn't do such a good job.  In other words, kudos to all of you for being civil, and keep it up.  We're getting some good opposition in here without the dirty fighting.


----------



## Carceri (Jul 23, 2003)

> It doesn;t matter by who - the numbers were crunched, and statistically, it was fairly well shown (e.g. proven) that the benefit of a 2d6, 20x4 weapon was not much better than a 2d6, 19-20, x2 weapon. Certainly not worth a feat. I think they even compared it with Weapon Focus, and saw that that was better than MG.




You're right, it doesn't matter because obviously whoever crunched those numbers is baked. Let's make a fighter, he's 9th level, has a 20 STR, is specialized, has improved crit and has a +2 mercurial greatsword. Then we make another fighter - this fighter is identical in every way to the munchkin greatsword wielder except that he uses a standard greatsword. 

At minimum, the critical hit by the munchkin greatsword user will be 52 points (initiating a Fort Save 15 of die if you're using the death by massive damage rules) - this is not accounting for things like power attack being stacked on. The standard greatsword wielder does a minimum of 26 (half of what the munchkin does). Even a maxed out crit by the standard greatsword wielder only does 46 points, and an average crit  by the standard greatsword wielder, backed by 5 points of power attack is only 44 points unless you're playing 3.5 rules, I guess.

The difference in crit damage, is, IMO, unbalanced. Where does the great axe figure into all of this? What's the point of even using a great axe when you can just use a munchkin greatsword? Oh, that's right! That one measley feat! LOL.



> You should see a Lance-wielding, Spiritied-Charge-using, Rhino-Hide-wearing horse-rider - he'd terrify your group, apparently, and send you curling up in fetal throes of "broken!" "Munchkin!" "he can do that on EVERY charge attack?"




Not quite, snapperhead. First of all, mounted combat through dungeons and certain types of terrain doesn't always work, secondly, it takes three feats to make some sort Spirited Charge specialist. LOL. Not only that, a heavy lance does what, 1d8? PFFFTT!! So we take the same 9th level fighter as I mentioned above, set him up with feats, specialize him in lance, etc.. His minimal crits do 16 pts. more than the munchkin greatsword guy, sure, but on average the munchkin sword wielder is doing more damage because he's getting more attacks instead of a single charge attack each round. So how is this more of a nightmare than the munchkin great sword wielder? Puleeeze. Get a clue.


----------



## Carceri (Jul 23, 2003)

I started this thread as a rant. This wasn't a thread asking "Help! What do I do about min/maxers?" I've been playing this game since 1984. Yes, I am an old school game geek. Not trying to be rude here, but it seems some people are starting to get just a little condescending with me. I don't need advice on how to deal with rules abusers, how to spot a munchkin, or even how to effectively challenge my players. It's a drag that I have to go to certain lengths to challenge my players based on one certain individual at times, but I can deal with it.

I can feel a flame war ensuing so I guess it's best I just shut up now before some feathers get ruffled. 

Peace

Out


----------



## Seule (Jul 23, 2003)

I think the correct rant (and one that I use occasionally) is against Power Critical.  Particularly with any high multiplier weapon, it's a killer.  A game I play in has a half-orc Paladin with a Great Axe.  When she declares her Smite-Power Critical combo, things die.  Similarly, a Mercurial Weapon or Scythe would be very deadly.
Basically, I have no intention of allowing Power Critical in any game I run.  It's just not right.  The character described above (MG wielder, Weaponmaster) would probably not be nearly as nasty without the ability to cause crits at will.

   --Seule


----------



## reapersaurus (Jul 23, 2003)

wow.
It's amazing how some people almost point out their errors by themselves, without us having to.  

Before I point ouit what you're not understanding about D&D, Carceri - I'd like to state that you don't feel a flame war going on, because this board doesn't tolerate flame wars.

But you're new, so you wouldn't know that.

You also wouldn't know that in the rules forum, if you're going to claim something is broken or unbalanced, to be taken seriously, you'd better back up your claim with some numbers, and not just your experience, opinion, or testimonials.

So get some rest, lurk a bit more to understand where you are, and then enage in civil conversation about the rules issue at hand, please. I'll let your insulting words go, this time.
(note: I thought it quite illuminating how you thought you actually left before ruffling feathers)

About your oversight:
You seem to be under the impression that we are comparing crit damage.
We aren't.
We're comparing average damage.
When comparing average damage, you need to factor in the probabilities involved. And while this may be news to you, a 19-20 weapon crits *more often *than a x20 weapon.
Therefore, you need to calculate the average damage per weapon is, factoring in the % likelihood for a crit on any given roll (leave Power Crit out of these comparisons - it's a one-trick pony).

And guess what - these calculations HAVE been done, and the results by much better and able mathmeticians than me concluded that the MG is not out of balance with a greatsword, or other high-crit weapons.

But I don't see how you're going to understand this approach, since it is based on a non-biased, objective analysis of your statement, and not based on supposition, personal experience, and ignoring statistics.

It also doesn't matter how many people tell you this information, or how we tell it - you KNOW the MG is unbalanced, so don't listen to reason.

I'd suggest listening to your elders.


----------



## genshou (Jul 23, 2003)

*Thank you, reapersaurus*

Great screen name, btw.  And of course it's more powerful.  A quarterstaff in the right (usually ranger or fighter) hands is more powerful than a greataxe (10 attacks per round for a 10th-level tempest with both heads enchanted with speed), dealing 10d6 damage from all the attacks if they all hit.  Then add 1.5 Str mod x5, as well as any other modifiers that apply, and it comes out far better as magic and other bonuses are added.  I've done 90 pgs. of number-crunching with weapon attack rolls and damage, and found that TWF is more powerful than anything else unless you are stupid and use two daggers compared to a scythe.  And most of those attacks except for perhaps the lowest attack with each weapon will almost always hit, if you are a more attack-oriented char not constantly fighting dragons.  The only real time the scythe is better is against a foe with DR you can't overcome with your weapon's enhancement bonus.  Now think of using, say, two scimitars, or a falchion with monkey grip and a scimitar.  Certain equipment and spells are more powerful than others.  That's why they cost more, or in the case of "good" spells other than harm, allow saving throws AND SR.  The 15th-level wizard shouldn't be chastised for using admixed fireballs to deal 30d6 pts. of damage with a 7th-level spell.  The fact that it's more powerful than other 7th-level spells is insignificant to me.  I don't force all my players to be pansies hiding behind their mothers' skirts, and yet I still keep game balance.  It's not as hard as certain people on this board (who I cannot name for both their honor and mine) make it seem.


----------



## Eridanis (Jul 23, 2003)

Moved to Rules forum.

Carceri, welcome to the ENworld boards. Please note that while you are welcome, even encouraged to state your opinions, please respect the opinions of others. Please read the FAQ, or email myself or any of the mods, with any questions.


----------



## SweeneyTodd (Jul 23, 2003)

The issue here is synergy. Any one effect that increases critical threat range or damage multiplier isn't that bad, but stacking several together to do the same thing is unbalancing. 

A fighter that has spent their feats maximizing their threat range with a given weapon is going to be *brutal* with it,when one might argue the real intent of all those bonus feats is for that fighter to be well-rounded.

The obvious balance response is to occasionally take away that specialized weapon, but then the overspecialized character feels frustrated. It's almost like superhero games where the powered armor character is captured and temporarily loses his armor. Hey, there has to be some penalty for that kind of thing, but the player feels useless until they get it back.


----------



## CrimsonTemplar (Jul 23, 2003)

*Two Words for you:*

*Sunder it. * 

If the guy's being a real pain for you with his uber-twink weapon of doom, take it away and don't let him get another (at the very least don't allow him to get another MGS of the Planes).  

If that's not a viable option then you're only real option, IMHO, is to crank up the EL's.  Or, do the Living Greyhawk thing and template the living hell out of the critters you throw at them.  Change the creature's type to something other than Outsider.  Maybe the bad guys they're fighting against call in some outside help...nothing like some high powered mercs that are as nasty as the PC's (remember to make them Neutral too, just because they're working for the bad guys doesn't make the evil).

Remember, the game's supposed to be fun for you as well as them.


----------



## ColonelHardisson (Jul 23, 2003)

Carceri said:
			
		

> *I started this thread as a rant. This wasn't a thread asking "Help! What do I do about min/maxers?" I've been playing this game since 1984. Yes, I am an old school game geek. Not trying to be rude here, but it seems some people are starting to get just a little condescending with me. *




I was trying to help, and I think almost everyone else was, too.

By the way, I've been playing since 1979. I graduated high school in 1984. I guess I'm old school also.


----------



## Weiley31 (Jan 7, 2021)

I'd be lying if I didn't say that I like the concept of the item in a thematic sort of way.


----------

