User talk:Luigifan18/Fläsräpper (3.5e Equipment)

Ratings

	Fluffykittens opposes this article and rated it 0 of 4.
	TLDR

	Spanambula opposes this article and rated it 0 of 4.
	This article is missing the April Fool's tag.

	Leziad opposes this article and rated it 0 of 4.
	It too fucking long, also has obnoxious abilities.

	Undead Knave opposes this article and rated it 0 of 4.
	It has a bunch of abilities that don't really make sense with either the fluff or the base material, it has a few abilities that are just stupid (such as being able to kill Immortalists and Elder Evils), and it's way longer than anyone would ever read ever. Got the fluff wrong, too. I could go on, but I really don't care to. Also, why is it an axe?

Rating Comments

While I agree with tl;dr here, that's an extremely weak reason to argue for removing an article from nav instead of just disliking it on preference. Particularly for an artifact writeup, a category that has historically had a big pile of fluff and abilities and whatever else bolted on to it. You guys want to put actual reasons in your ratings perhaps? Leziad at least suggests that there are crap abilities here, but doesn't actually say what they are. - Tarkisflux ^Talk 07:05, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

What's wrong with the abilities? Fläsräpper is the reincarnation of Soul Edge; therefore, it has the same abilities as Soul Edge. (Is nobody here familiar with the Soul Calibur series? Soul Edge f***ing eats souls.) Also, Fläsräpper is an axe because that's what it was back when it was an ordinary weapon, as the original Soul Edge (which was a sword) got destroyed a long time ago. --Luigifan18 (talk) 11:11, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

Also, to address Undead Knave's complaint, the fluff is considered to take place after the end of the entire Soul Calibur series, which is why Soul Edge has been destroyed once and for all and Soul Calibur has sealed itself away. It leaves room for Namco to make as many more games in the series as they wish without being contradicted, as it can be assumed to happen long after whichever entry is chronologically the latest. The only way this can be contradicted by canon is if Soul Edge somehow manages to permanently defeat Soul Calibur (unlikely, considering that this would completely **** humanity over) or if both spirit swords are permanently destroyed at the same time (considerably more likely, considering Talim's motivations in the more recent games). Neither of these have happened as of Soul Calibur V. --Luigifan18 (talk) 11:19, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

I think the issue at hand here is do the abilities granted allow it to be used effectively in-game and still be balanced to a certain degree. Given that it has a base enhancement bonus of +5 which then continues to scale with level, this flies in the face of the RNG by giving you a simply massive bonus to attack and damage. I get that it's an artifact, but adding in a crapton of extra numbers is less cool (to me) and potentially less appealing to a DM looking for nice items to give his group than something that grants extra abilities. This means the stuff like the essentia binding and soul-eating should be made the focus of the article at the expense of the dealing damage as a way bigger axe and having a bunch of additional numbers. Even if those things fit fluff-wise (I am not familiar with the Soul Caliber series and am not qualified to comment), it's about how it translates over to the D&D setting as well. It also has the added benefit of making it shorter.

Secondly, I am of the opinion that the general rules for intelligent weapons in the game are poorly executed. Giving the wielder gobs of SLA's with the justification that the weapon is evil and takes you over is not a great strategy to me. The SLA's also encourage taking away from actually using this as a weapon and instead becoming a spellcaster with a giant axe. Maybe if it applied those things on-hit you could synergize the two, but as is me no like (pardon the butchering of grammar). I don't feel so strongly either way that I am going to rate it, but that may cover some of the things alluded to in the ratings that exist. - TG Cid (talk) 14:45, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

Fläsräpper is meant to be overpowered - that's part of the temptation - but wielders pay for this by losing themselves to its corrupting influence. Just like Soul Edge. --Luigifan18 (talk) 13:10, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

OK, but adapting source materials to a D&D setting can't always be that direct. D&D is predicated on balance, and deliberately creating an item that disrupts that premise is just asking for something to not be used at all, ever. - TG Cid (talk) 20:42, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

I really hated to do it, but I toned the abilities down. (Though I might or might not revert that later - I'm kinda playing around with it at this point.) I'd like to change some of the spell abilities to go off on hit rather than at will, but that would require recalculating the Ego score and I'm not quite sure how to do that. --Luigifan18 (talk) 03:13, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Get it down to no more than three paragraphs. Seriously, TLDR. --Fluffykittens (talk) 06:07, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

I'm currently laughing at your "nerfs." Ooooh, you only need to make a DC 59 Will save now instead of a DC 60 will save if you touch the blade. Oh hey, and it's only a DC 69 caster level check to undo the memory loss instead of 70. Wow, let me go reverse my Oppose rating now. Look, I know you're going for an epic-level artifact, and I know your goal is to have the sword be so powerful no one can control it (seriously, there are gods who couldn't make that Will save), but COME ON. Reducing a few stats by 1 and reducing the crit multiplier from 5 to 4 isn't toning down the weapon's ridiculous abilities. Spanambula (talk) 08:08, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

(RESET INDENT) The fact that it's entirely too powerful to be useful aside (after a while the McGuffian just becomes straight DM fiat, Span is right here as the numbers are too high too matter to anyone not playing with the Immortal's Handbook), I do think the article's greatest issue is it's length. Summarize, condense, say more with less words. With the length as is, it's trying to be a campaign setting instead of being a weapon. If you need help, may I suggest making a bullet list. What is it? What does it look like? What does it do? Before any amount of other information, see if you can summarize those three questions in three sentences if you can. If you can, that's where you should begin.

I'll give an example; let's take my recent Apparatus of the Lobster article. What is it? It's a vehicle. What does it look like? A giant robot lobster made of bronze. What does it do? It lets you move in aquatic areas for exploration, collect things as per modern submersibles, and defend it with claws. By doing that, I think you might have an easier time of minimizing how much text you need to transmit those basic bits of information. -- Eiji-kun (talk) 11:49, 3 October 2014 (UTC)