The Crusher (oversized) attack modifier penalty ?

[Paehrin]

Hi. I stumbled upon a weapon, the Crusher, which is an Oversized greatclub. As an Oversized weapon, you usually take a -2 to attack rolls. So far, so good. The description of the weapon tough notes that it feels surprisingly light in hand, "reducing" its penalty to -2... which was already the penalty to begin with. Sooo, what's up with that ? should it reduce it further, or should the penalty be higher to begin with ?

Screenshot of said weapon :
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2004383926

[Swordman_Red]

Originally posted by Paehrin:

Hi. I stumbled upon a weapon, the Crusher, which is an Oversized greatclub. As an Oversized weapon, you usually take a -2 to attack rolls. So far, so good. The description of the weapon tough notes that it feels surprisingly light in hand, "reducing" its penalty to -2... which was already the penalty to begin with. Sooo, what's up with that ? should it reduce it further, or should the penalty be higher to begin with ?

Screenshot of said weapon :
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2004383926

You could try it in some random combat, and check what the actual combat attack roll shows.

[Paehrin]

I just tested it in combat, malus still applies :/ https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2004710760
Either this is a bug, or I'm missing something

[Citronvand]

Originally posted by Paehrin:

I just tested it in combat, malus still applies :/ https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2004710760
Either this is a bug, or I'm missing something

I think that is intended. The +2 / -2 negate each other. Same thing happens with the feat Valerie gets which "removes" the -2 Tower Shield attack penalty, ie: it doesn't remove the penalty, it adds a +2 bonus instead.

[Aria Athena]

Originally posted by Citronvand:

I think that is intended. The +2 / -2 negate each other. Same thing happens with the feat Valerie gets which "removes" the -2 Tower Shield attack penalty, ie: it doesn't remove the penalty, it adds a +2 bonus instead.

That +2 is from the enhancement bonus because it's a +2 weapon. Perhaps they overlap and that's where the bug comes from.

[Citronvand]

Originally posted by Aria Athena:

Originally posted by Citronvand:

I think that is intended. The +2 / -2 negate each other. Same thing happens with the feat Valerie gets which "removes" the -2 Tower Shield attack penalty, ie: it doesn't remove the penalty, it adds a +2 bonus instead.

That +2 is from the enhancement bonus because it's a +2 weapon. Perhaps they overlap and that's where the bug comes from.

Hmm, yes. I looked up the official pnp rules:
"Inappropriately Sized Weapons: A creature can’t make optimum use of a weapon that isn’t properly sized for it. A cumulative –2 penalty applies on attack rolls for each size category of difference between the size of its intended wielder and the size of its actual wielder."

So if it is not bugged, that would mean the club is 2 size categories bigger which would have netted a -4 penalty. What's the damage roll on the club? A normal greatclub deals 1d10, no? Then a huge greatclub should deal 3d8. If it only deals 2d8 then it is indeed bugged since that is only 1 size larger than medium.

[Aria Athena]

I checked earlier and it's only 2d8. I don't think there are any weapons in-game that are 2 sizes larger.

[Morgian]

It's simply an error in the fluff text that wasn't caught when proofreading.

[Paehrin]

This text isn't fluff text. The fluff text is the one in italic. I also thought it could be 2 size category larger, but a 1d10 medium become 3d8 if huge, so that's not it either. I'm guessing this is probably a bug then...