User talk:Zarathustra21

Rating Articles

Rating your own articles isn't something that is allowed on this wiki. If you have any questions about this, you can go check out: Dungeons and Dragons Wiki:Rating Articles or I or another admin can probably answer any questions you have. --Ganteka Future (talk) 19:58, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

A greeting

Hey! You are somewhat active on the wiki, but there's not been much interaction with you so I just wanted to ask: why are you interested in historically accurate weapons for d&d? I'm curious to know. Have a nice day! --The bluez in the dungeon (talk) 10:23, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

Hey there

Hey Zarathustra, I and others have been wondering if you would consider moving your historical weapons to a dedicated page (whether a sandbox, sourcebook or a variant rule page). Most of such articles have clunky or unconventional mechanics, and some are admittedly not very well written with copypasta mistakes and whatnot, but they might be of value or interest, but maybe it's better not to clutter the weapons' page. We could also make a separate category for them. What do you think? --The bluez in the dungeon (talk) 20:29, 11 October 2023 (UTC)

Weapons

The administration has decided that articles that use non-standard rules for their type should be reserved for their space (such as the variant rule page) rather than being in the mainspace. This isn't to say that any alteration to the rules are disallowed, we allow classes with less than 20 levels by example. However a class that uses a completely new BAB or saving throw progression should not be with all the other standard-adherent classes. The material should follow the system's basics.

Your weapons often don't use any existing dice type, are often straight upgrades or downgrades of existing material (and even themselves). As a result, your mundane weapons should be moved to its own space, and I am more than willing to discuss the specifics on what that means. --Leziad (talk) 18:23, 16 October 2023 (UTC)

Sistem's basics: where is the line?

Hi folks,

I appreciate your interest and your observation. Since expanding existing material and adding new elements is the aim of this homebrew, I would like to expand the number of weapons, even by finding new approaches (like odd dices, for example). I would be more happy if you explain to me: where is exactly the line between sistem'sbasic and variant rule?

I know odd dices may create some technical problems (although you can use computer dice generators or buy odds dices... ), but you can substitute them with equivalent solution with "standard" dices: for example 1d9 could be 1d10-1 (minimum value 1);

What do you think: is it unbalanced or unfair to create a new weapon (e.g. my Haumesser or my Hanger) with 2d2 or 2d3 on damage or with a basic 17-20x2 or 20x5 crit, just because these values are not included in the materials published so far (at least by standard D&D; since Pathfinder has "Falcata", throwing 1d8 with the debatable 19/20 x3 crit.)?

I would like to know what do you think, for example, of a martial two handed piercing weapon whose stats are 1d8 20x5, or a slashing exotic weapon with 1d6 17-20 x3 crit. Is it good, since its somehow balanced, or its just unrealistic and nonsense to image a crit range of 20x5 or 17-20x2, or just 19-20x3 like Pathfinder's Falcata?

I really would like to know what do you think about this topics.

Please let me know guys!

20/x5 and 17-20/x2 are probably not great ideas. You can however do whatever you want, but if you want to play outside of acceptable standard your own variant rule page would be highly preferable than having non-standard material in the section reserved for standard material. --Leziad (talk) 20:10, 19 October 2023 (UTC)

I am not sure that making more weapons without first resolving this issue was the best idea. I would like to ask you what would your preference be for your articles? We can easily make a page and a category for them. --Leziad (talk) 20:35, 23 October 2023 (UTC)