Talk:Balance (3.5e Equipment)

Wording issues

Probably just a copypasta error: the enhancement is called anarchic two times instead of balance. Also: the 20% has no explicit area. --The bluez in the dungeon (talk) 14:51, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

Balance

So, let's mention like, SRD:Axiomatic first. It's a +2 enhancement. It does most of the same as Balance here (+2d6 damage against a single alignment, bypasses that kind of alignment-based DR) but grants a negative level instead of dealing HD in damage each round and potentially dazing the holder, so, Axiomatic is not as strong there since a Balance weapon can just straight kill you pretty quickly. Balance also has a scaling effect on a hit and a static one (the 20% thing), and has protection against other wielders, which are things not present on Axiomatic. It also strips away DR for other attackers for a round on a hit. But, this isn't just one alignment, it's all four extremes. Even if it were just one alignment, it would be better than the base SRD ones for each four alignment extremes. This is supposed to be a +4 enhancement, right? --Ganteka Future (talk) 19:27, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

I agree with Ganteka, though I must point out that a non-neutral creature would die by holding the weapon only if they pass the Will save (which explicitely says that those that don't pass it must drop the weapon) and decide to hold on to it while being consumed. So, it would only be a passing occurance, with no real mechanical weight.

I must say that the 2d6/4d6 extra damage is kind high, so maybe consider reducing it (1d6/2d6 or 2d4 maybe? Trading potency for versatility). The real deal is the DR nullifier effect, that is nice but maybe better suited for an upgrade to this enhancement that requires balance on the same weapon? In any case, I suggest checking out Leziad's Holy revised additional effect to consider balance on the balance enhancement (or don't, I'm not the law). --The bluez in the dungeon (talk) 22:02, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

I guess my first attempt wasn't particularly persuasive (or maybe unclear). The small change of going from 2d6 to 2d4 fell short and ignored a lot of what was brought up. Let's use lists!

Any SRD Alignment-based Enhancement:

• Bypasses corresponding damage reduction.
• +2d6 (7) damage (3 alignments, for example Holy: LE/NE/CE)
• Bestows negative level on opposed creature while held.
• +2 enhancement cost.

Balance (3.5e Equipment):

• Bypasses all alignment damage reduction.
• +2d4 (5) damage (stacks) (NG/LN/CN/NE)
• +4d4 (10) damage against both (LG/CG/LE/CE)
• +4d4 (10) damage against outsiders from extreme planes
• +8d4 (20) damage against LG/CG/LE/CE planar origin outsiders with extreme alignments? (not sure if this is intended but it is written that way currently, since the first part which stacks is about their alignment and the second part is just about their origin and type) You could end up with a +6d4 instead if there happened to be a Neutral Good outsider from a Chaotic Good plane.
• Strips away DR or regeneration for 1 round.
• Will save vs. Daze for 1 round on natural 20.
• 4 HD... is that supposed to be 4 HD or less or at least 4 HD or exactly 4 HD?
• Enemies cannot try to keep your weapon away from you without risk of getting dazed or taking damage equal to their HD every round. They get punished for using tactics.
• If you die, your allies have to leave your sword behind because it kills them. Hey, at least they might still try to grab your body for resurrection.
• +2 enhancement cost?

These things are not even remotely equal. The amount of enemies this targets is quite wide. It is basically not useful against oozes, constructs and animals. These types also aren't particularly frequent enemies (animals are frequent at very low level, like 1-4, but by the time you get a +2 enhancement, they've dropped off). Even if you wanted to do less than half of what this grants, you'd be looking at a +4 equivalent from the SRD. This affects 8 of the 9 alignments. The article also needs some corrections and clarifications anyway. A nice clean up and some reconsiderations would help a long way here, because as is, this isn't balanced for what it grants currently. --Ganteka Future (talk) 19:17, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

I'm with Ganteka for the most part: I get where you were going but this a lot for just one +2 enhancement. I'd get rid of the stacking damage, DR/regeneration thing and the 4HD debuff which is redundant with the dazing effect. Maybe apply the daze-on-crit on outsiders from extreme planes/planar origin outsiders ad not everyone, and/or apply to them only the daze+burn effect if they try to pick the weapon up. Maybe all this secondary effects could go on other enhancements that require this one to be put on weapons.--The bluez in the dungeon (talk) 21:58, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

I was about to say "what stacking damage", but apparently I did write that in there. Not sure why, might be copypasta from the other ones. That's not actually intended: Just 2d4 or 4d4 and no more. -- Eiji-kun (talk) 13:46, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

Changes Requested

This enhancement, the Anarchic enhancement and Axiomatic enhancement were all based on my Revised Holy enhancement. I also made the Revised Unholy and later the Idealistic enhancement.

After thorough playtesting, the holy enhancement proved to be too powerful, and thus alongside unholy I reduced their scope and power. However the enhancements above were not made by me, so they exist as their older version and I would request that since they are based upon my work that they are changed to match Revised Unholy. The changes made were the following:

• No more dazing or secondary effect on a Natural 20.
• No more extra damage on outsiders of the matching subtype.
• Trimming and simplification of any extra effects

Since it is based upon my work, and altogether they represent a modified version of SRD content, that they be all changed to match the original. --Leziad (talk) 18:15, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

Spoke to you on Skype, you can make some edits to bring things in line. -- Eiji-kun (talk) 03:58, 8 July 2021 (UTC)