Clubs actually ARE better in most cases...but they're a very under represented item type, that didn't get a lot of love in BG1, +1 is the best you get (well..in EE there's a new +2 one that deals +1d4 cold damage on hit...but I haven't found where you get it yet),
There's an ordinary +2 one here, but I've not heard of the one dealing cold damage being in-game:
Might oak (Club +2) -Shadow druid leader (Amarande), cloakwood 3, inside treehouse. On the same map Laskal has a new +2 quarterstaff
though the Root of the Problem is one of the few items that can hurt greater wolfweres.
In BG2, they're a little bit better..but still lacking..only a single club can hit higher then +3 and it has an annoying habit of blowing YOU up with a fireball at a time when most tough enemies are immune to fire....which depending on class and if you're soloing or not might be a worse deal, then just using the Staff of the Ram with GWW.
Technically speaking, the FoA+5 is the best overall weapon in the game. (Blunt, 1d6+6, +2 fire, +2 cold, +2 acid, +2 electric, +2 poison, free action, 33% on hit to slow the enemy for 4 rounds, no save, and nothing is immune (-4 thac0, -4 ac, reduced movement speed, attack speed set to 10)). Tears through any magical defense except PfMW, slows every other, and deals a A LOT of damage, even vs enemies with some resistances, who are rarely immune to more then 1 or two (have to be immune to at least 3 elements for the staff of the ram to potentially be better).
If you play a Beastmaster, Dual-Clubs will be your primary melee use for most of the saga, especially in BG2 with Gnasher (1d6+2, deals 2 damage per round for 3 rounds, on hit, no save) and Blackblood (1d6+3 + 3 Acid) Both of which can be gotten basically immediately out of the prelude.
In BG2 the +2 Gnasher club is quite nice for backstabs, as does +2 damage per round for 4 rounds, so good for disrupting casters, but it's too weak later on
In BG1, you just buy 2 clubs, and you're set. Just need a magical one, or a magic quarterstaff for the few enemies you need a minimum enhancement to hit.
I just noticed...the BG:EE Root of the Problem is actually weaker then the BG2 version..the BG2 version has +1 acid, in addition to everything else.
I'm pretty sure the Root of the Problem isn't in BGEE, though there was some discussion originally that it might be put back in. It may be listed in Shadowkeep/NearInfinity, but it's not been reported in-game. If it is, could you report it here?: http://forum.baldursgate.com/discussion/comment/225347
I am going by Mean (M), Average (A), Damage (DMG) -
Two-Handed Swords:
Warblade does 10.5 MADAMAGE Gram the Sword of Grief does 11.8 Damage per attack MADMG. (1.3 of which is it's poison damage factored in as a percentage based add on) Narrowly better than Warblade even though it's a D10 based weapon. It's proc to lower the enemy's level by 1 when it hits is amazing though. Carsomyr +6 Vs a Chaotic Evil Opponent will do 18.5 Slashing Mean Average Damage (MADMG) per swing. And obviously Carsomyr can dispel magic too. Not too shabby.
Normally it does 12.5 MADMG.
Staves:
Staff of Striking does 12.5 damage...same as Carsomyr +6 without bonus damage to evil...it's charged based with no bonus to hit though. Staff of Rynn +4 / Staff of The Woodlands, BOTH do 7.5 MADMG...but Woodlands has a good bonus to AC and a chance to Charm animal. The Staff of the Ram does 18 MADMG Per swing (15.5 of which is Crushing, and 2.5 of which is Piercing)
Halberds:
Ravager +6 can do 22 MADMG per hit if the enemy fails it's save per hit. Otherwise it does 11.5 MADMG...though it always will have a 10% chance to decapitate an enemy outright. Also it's piercing damage so it's the easiest to protect against. Other good Halberds include:
Dragons Bane +3 - 8.5 MADMG + 6 against Dragons (14.5) Blackmist +4 - 9.5 MADMG Dragon's Breath +4 - 10 MADMG (5 of which are each one of each type of savable damage, Poison, Fire, Electrical, Ice, & Acid) Halberd +4 (The Wave) - 15% Chance (No Save) to drain water from victim, 2.25 MA BONUS DMG Per Swing. 7.5 MADMG, 9.75 MADMG with Proc engaged.
Spears:
The best Spears are The Impaler +3 (16.5 MADMG, 10 of which is Piercing) The Spear of Withering +4 (11.5 MADMG, 4 of which is Poison) Ixill's Spike +6 (7.5 MADMG + 8.5 A round over 3 Rounds when a proc hits...I just can't tell if Procs stack yet)
The Impaler +3 actually keeps up with Carsomyr +6 with it's bonus damage and the Staff of the Ram almost. But these are the best Two Handed Weapons for sheer damage output.
Carsomyr, Gram The Sword of Grief, Staff of Striking, The Staff of The Ram, Ravager +6, Dragon's Breath +4 and Dragon's Bane +4 (Vs Dragon's only), The Impaler and Ixills if the proc stacks are arguably among the best weapons in the game. Some do more damage than others but they all have interesting abilities or just HIGH damage output for when you acquire them.
I hear you and appreciate the well laid out explanation. To me there are 2 debates which is: Is specific X magical weapon (staff of striking let's say) better than Y magical weapon? I don't have a dog in that fight.
The more general question is a standard version of X weapon, in this instance staffs, better than a standard version of another weapon, in this instance a 2 handed sword? To that question I do have an opinion and I feel the sword is superior. An extra 0-4 of damage, every attack, is quite significant - that is the difference between a dagger hitting you each time or not. Once you start to specialize critical hits become more common and then that damage becomes an extra 0-8 pts of damage, that is more than a second attack from a staff.
I know the staff gets better to hit THACO's against some armor which is nice but I have noticed no general difference in the number of hits that a sword or staff gets when actually keeping track things in game. The attack speed is definitely a nice bonus for the staff.
As I said I can appreciate that the staff does have some things going for it. However in running a scenario with 2 equal players except one has a staff and the other has a 2 handed sword, the 2 handed sword generally does better for me, both in terms of number of kills and also total damage per battle. For instance in a recent fight my staff did 208 total damage from 12 hits and my sword did 222 from 11 hits. That is just one example but that seems to be the trend. In the black pits you face a variety of enemies which I think gives you a sampling of armor and resistances etc. So far my sword guy has killed 53 enemies I believe and the staff has killed 45, something like that.
As a side note, if staffs are awesome, why are clubs then not better? I would think the option to dual wield or use a shield would put a club above a staff given the same damage and clubs are even faster if I recall correctly?
Three things:
1. Having the "which is better, standard X or standard Y" debate is useful for PnP games, where you have somebody running your game who can thrown you a bone and let you find or purchase a useful weapon of your chosen type. That debate is much less useful in a game where the pool of available items is set in stone (unless you use a mod). That's why you're the only one putting things in terms of equivalent weapons, while the rest of us are comparing best weapons.
For example, you didn't include "dual-wielding katanas" in your review, even though they do the same d10 as a Halberd/Two Handed Sword, plus an extra attack per round. But I don't think anybody has objected to their absence because in BG:EE, katana isn't going to be an ideal choice, due to scarcity. Celestial Fury ain't walking through that door any time soon.
2. Case in point, your question about why clubs aren't better than quarterstaves. Clubs aren't better than quarterstaves because of the specific clubs available versus the specific quarterstaves available. You're still stuck on a quarterstaff+1 versus a club+1, but nobody else is having that discussion. In the game, it's a club+2 versus the staff of striking/staff mace.
Not close. And then when you factor in the availability of the staves versus the availability of the Club+2, the disparity becomes even more profound.
3. You're also missing out on a lot of the intricacies of combat. That's easy to do in The Black Pits because you level up ridiculously quickly, and you have instant healing/resurrection after every fight, plus an army of characters who all have ideal physical stats. In your tests, you set guys loose to see who can get the most kills, but you're probably not doing anything to micromanage them (because if you do, then you've influenced your data). But if you aren't micromanaging, then of course things like weapon speed, weapon range, ability to interrupt spellcasting, etc. aren't going to matter to you. But they DO matter.
The reason ZanathKariashi mentioned the range and weapon speed of a quarterstaff was in how it related to kiting. Those are legitimate concerns when your healing abilities are limited and your enemies can splat you in one hit. So creating a staff user and a sword user, throwing them at a pile of enemies, and saying "The sword user killed 10% more stuff" misses the point COMPLETELY.
2. Case in point, your question about why clubs aren't better than quarterstaves. Clubs aren't better than quarterstaves because of the specific clubs available versus the specific quarterstaves available. You're still stuck on a quarterstaff+1 versus a club+1, but nobody else is having that discussion. In the game, it's a club+2 versus the staff of striking/staff mace.
Not close. And then when you factor in the availability of the staves versus the availability of the Club+2, the disparity becomes even more profound.
Well you can get the +2 club on the same map as the first +2 staff, but there are more (and better) staves later on...
Also, though, as mentioned above, one pip in two-handed weapon style gives staves an extra +2 damage, double crit chance (19-20) and improved speed (-2), the best clubs can do is single weapon style (double crit chance (19-20), reduced AC) or dual-wield - but the latter needs 2 or 3 points to be effective, and not all classes can put more than a point into dual wield (though dual wielding clubs is a good choice for Beastsmasters)
I think doing an "equal" comparison of similar weapons makes sense and this started out because somebody claimed staffs > swords (not Staff of Striking > + 3 2 hander).
In a game where you already know what every weapon is and where it is found then I have no problem with people focusing on how to get to and maximize that specific weapon. In a more natural setting (ie playing the game for the first time) when it comes to picking proficiency spots and such it is natural to put those spots in the weapons you like and are the 'best'. But it is tough to argue about specific weapons, how exactly are you balancing 10% chance of decapitation vs slowing an opponent on hit just as an example? When you look at the standard weapons that can at least be a starting point where we agree that in most situations X is better than Y.
There are nuances to big fights that are different than normal but I disagree that the kill factor isn't a significant stat (as is total damage done per battle).
From my point of view the game, both PnP and BG, intended swords to be more powerful than staffs. There aren't very many movies being made about knights with magical sticks running around. Now it is certainly possible that in game mechanics didn't convey that properly and a staff is better than a sword, but to me that burden of proof is on the people that feel that way. I was surprised to see people feel that way, some of the reasons made sense but after testing I personally don't feel the standard staff is superior to a 2 handed sword. In the black pits all you can do is get +2 versions of both, I don't remember what the best versions are in BGEE and in BG2 I know there are ton of cool weapons lying around.
We can agree to disagree if you want, it is not a huge issue for me. My bottom line is that I would need to see overwhelming evidence that a staff was better than a sword and I haven't seen that. I will say that some of the specific staffs being mentioned do seem to be a worth a second look as I initially would not have used them
@nptitim - if you have Ravager +6 with a 10% chance of a vorpal kill (decapitation) I would want to plug in the number of attacks per round you have.
If you're Grandmaster in Halberds for example...and you're at least a level 13 Fighter class for the extra 1/2 attack that gets you up to 2 attacks per round with any weapon...you're looking at the following when all is said and done:
7 ATTACKS / 2 ROUNDS (7/2) +++++Halberd AND 13th Level Fighter and up Attacks (2 base).
1-[(1-0.1)^(7/2)]=0.308 -> 30.8% chance of vorpal effect happening per round - Your odds just went up due to the sheer amount of attacks available to a trained warrior.
But someone who's less skilled with a Halberd won't fair as well.
@nptitim - I do agree that the merit of a weapon has to do with it's stats, not it's weapon type. The Staff of the Ram out damages Carsomyr unless you're facing a Chaotic Evil opponent for example.
See my earlier post above for stats.
But most staves can't come close...Staff of Striking does without bonus to hit. In fact it's equal before factoring in bonus damage against Evil to the +6 version of Carsomyr! Again though...it's a magic staff with charges...so it's a limited use item for that damage.
The average staff (3.5 MEAN AVERAGE DAMAGE) vs the average 2 Handed Sword (5.5 MEAN AVERAGE DAMAGE) is gonna lose.
If you want a real test....duel with 2 characters...1 with a staff, one with a 2hd sword, otherwise the same stats, same profs, save the ones in their respective weapons, and then see which kills the other. With no armor used (aside from generic helms to keep crit damage from skewing results), and just letting them wail on each other, no other tactics involved, the 2hd will likely win, due a superior average damage. Tested several times, this would hold true.
Then stick both fighters in full plate and see how things fair...the quarterstaff is highly likely to win, better then half the time, due to the much greater AC bonus vs slashing the plate provides vs no extra bonus vs blunt. The extra damage in the 2hd's favor is meaningless if you can't hit in the first place.
Then remove the armors and actually control the staff user and fight...after making 1 attack run away, and repeat....as long as you keep up the rhythm the staff user will eventually kill the 2hd user without taking any damage, because the staff attacks 3x faster then the 2 hander does, not to mention the half frame delay from the hit reaction pushing the attack back further. Once you get a feel for the battle, try pulling off 2 attacks before fading (you should have just enough time to pull it off, though it's close).
Effective? Yes! A bit heavy on micromanagement? Fairly...but so is song-twisting and backstabbing, and those are equally rewarding in their own way.
Eventually hitting 0 weapon speed with any weapon is one reason Kensai are ridiculously powerful...they can often hit most enemies 3-4 times (for ridiculous damage, often fatal) before the other enemies can land their first blow..especially if they're wielding something with slow, or attacking slowed enemies (slow sets attack speed to 10 and doubles cast times)
The Staff of striking DOES have a to-hit bonus (it's considered +3, easily checked with NI), it's just unlisted in BG1 and BG2, they finally added it to the description in BG:EE.
Thanks for the heads up on The Staff of Striking, I totally agree on all counts BTW, though speed factor will mean less when you put points into Two-Weapon Style and start using better magical items.
As will bonuses from armor (though blunt/crushing will always be better off than Slashing and Piercing in this regard)
If you notice, Ravager +6 has a huge damage output, but there's more bonuses with armor against piercing than with any other weapon type. Vs. flail of the Ages which is comparable in damage if upgraded to +5...19.5 MADMG for the Flail Vs 22 MADMG for Ravager...though...you can cast Improved Haste on a Ravager user.
The main thing is proficiencies followed by magical bonuses and base number of attacks. Then tactically how you use your weapon of choice matters even MORE so, well put Zanath.
@nptitim - if you have Ravager +6 with a 10% chance of a vorpal kill (decapitation) I would want to plug in the number of attacks per round you have.
If you're Grandmaster in Halberds for example...and you're at least a level 13 Fighter class for the extra 1/2 attack that gets you up to 2 attacks per round with any weapon...you're looking at the following when all is said and done:
7 ATTACKS / 2 ROUNDS (7/2) +++++Halberd AND 13th Level Fighter and up Attacks (2 base).
Multiply 7 by 0.10, you get 0.70, divide that 2...you get a 0.35% chance to proc really. Your odds just went up due to the sheer amount of attacks available to a trained warrior.
But someone who's less skilled with a Halberd won't fair as well.
Ok, I realize this is kinda nitpicky and side-tracking of me, but your calculations are wrong. In this case the probability would be calculated as: 1-[(1-0.1)^(7/2)]=0.308 -> 30.8% chance of vorpal effect happening per round.
You can use GWW (ugh) to get around the Free-action problem with FoA+5 (or the fixpack that corrects that, since I double checked the handbook and in PnP Free Action doesn't block haste), just use it single weapon style for +5% crit chance, since no matter your off-hand it WILL do less damage then the FoA will (the off-hand eats 1 of the 10 attacks under GWW)
100 enemies split amongst 6 party members is not an appropriate sample size.
I hate to bring it up in these forums, but when you run simcraft for damage in WoW, you run at least 10,000 iterations. You can even run it up to 50,000 iterations. You will see a difference in these numbers, particularly if you only run a couple thousand iterations compared to 10k+(much more consistent numbers in this range). Granted, there are quite a few more factors to consider for that game than BG.
The "best" weapon in BG games will be determined by a number of factors, including character class, stats, the player's knowledge of the game, the availability of different magical weapons, etc. Nobody is going to be running around with unenchanted weapons for long, particularly if you consider the whole saga.
TL;DR: There is a "best" weapon(determined by math) for any one particular class, but to claim any weapon better than another in general, and citing black pits testing or 1 on 1 duels, is just pontificating.
Comments
Might oak (Club +2) -Shadow druid leader (Amarande), cloakwood 3, inside treehouse.
On the same map Laskal has a new +2 quarterstaff
http://forum.baldursgate.com/discussion/comment/225347
I am going by Mean (M), Average (A), Damage (DMG) -
Two-Handed Swords:
Warblade does 10.5 MADAMAGE
Gram the Sword of Grief does 11.8 Damage per attack MADMG. (1.3 of which is it's poison damage factored in as a percentage based add on) Narrowly better than Warblade even though it's a D10 based weapon. It's proc to lower the enemy's level by 1 when it hits is amazing though.
Carsomyr +6 Vs a Chaotic Evil Opponent will do 18.5 Slashing Mean Average Damage (MADMG) per swing.
And obviously Carsomyr can dispel magic too. Not too shabby.
Normally it does 12.5 MADMG.
Staves:
Staff of Striking does 12.5 damage...same as Carsomyr +6 without bonus damage to evil...it's charged based with no bonus to hit though.
Staff of Rynn +4 / Staff of The Woodlands, BOTH do 7.5 MADMG...but Woodlands has a good bonus to AC and a chance to Charm animal.
The Staff of the Ram does 18 MADMG Per swing (15.5 of which is Crushing, and 2.5 of which is Piercing)
Halberds:
Ravager +6 can do 22 MADMG per hit if the enemy fails it's save per hit. Otherwise it does 11.5 MADMG...though it always will have a 10% chance to decapitate an enemy outright. Also it's piercing damage so it's the easiest to protect against.
Other good Halberds include:
Dragons Bane +3 - 8.5 MADMG + 6 against Dragons (14.5)
Blackmist +4 - 9.5 MADMG
Dragon's Breath +4 - 10 MADMG (5 of which are each one of each type of savable damage, Poison, Fire, Electrical, Ice, & Acid)
Halberd +4 (The Wave) - 15% Chance (No Save) to drain water from victim, 2.25 MA BONUS DMG Per Swing. 7.5 MADMG, 9.75 MADMG with Proc engaged.
Spears:
The best Spears are The Impaler +3 (16.5 MADMG, 10 of which is Piercing)
The Spear of Withering +4 (11.5 MADMG, 4 of which is Poison)
Ixill's Spike +6 (7.5 MADMG + 8.5 A round over 3 Rounds when a proc hits...I just can't tell if Procs stack yet)
The Impaler +3 actually keeps up with Carsomyr +6 with it's bonus damage and the Staff of the Ram almost. But these are the best Two Handed Weapons for sheer damage output.
Carsomyr, Gram The Sword of Grief, Staff of Striking, The Staff of The Ram, Ravager +6, Dragon's Breath +4 and Dragon's Bane +4 (Vs Dragon's only), The Impaler and Ixills if the proc stacks are arguably among the best weapons in the game. Some do more damage than others but they all have interesting abilities or just HIGH damage output for when you acquire them.
1. Having the "which is better, standard X or standard Y" debate is useful for PnP games, where you have somebody running your game who can thrown you a bone and let you find or purchase a useful weapon of your chosen type. That debate is much less useful in a game where the pool of available items is set in stone (unless you use a mod). That's why you're the only one putting things in terms of equivalent weapons, while the rest of us are comparing best weapons.
For example, you didn't include "dual-wielding katanas" in your review, even though they do the same d10 as a Halberd/Two Handed Sword, plus an extra attack per round. But I don't think anybody has objected to their absence because in BG:EE, katana isn't going to be an ideal choice, due to scarcity. Celestial Fury ain't walking through that door any time soon.
2. Case in point, your question about why clubs aren't better than quarterstaves. Clubs aren't better than quarterstaves because of the specific clubs available versus the specific quarterstaves available. You're still stuck on a quarterstaff+1 versus a club+1, but nobody else is having that discussion. In the game, it's a club+2 versus the staff of striking/staff mace.
Club+2 = d6+2
Staff Mace = 2d4+2
Staff of Striking = d6+9!
Not close. And then when you factor in the availability of the staves versus the availability of the Club+2, the disparity becomes even more profound.
3. You're also missing out on a lot of the intricacies of combat. That's easy to do in The Black Pits because you level up ridiculously quickly, and you have instant healing/resurrection after every fight, plus an army of characters who all have ideal physical stats. In your tests, you set guys loose to see who can get the most kills, but you're probably not doing anything to micromanage them (because if you do, then you've influenced your data). But if you aren't micromanaging, then of course things like weapon speed, weapon range, ability to interrupt spellcasting, etc. aren't going to matter to you. But they DO matter.
The reason ZanathKariashi mentioned the range and weapon speed of a quarterstaff was in how it related to kiting. Those are legitimate concerns when your healing abilities are limited and your enemies can splat you in one hit. So creating a staff user and a sword user, throwing them at a pile of enemies, and saying "The sword user killed 10% more stuff" misses the point COMPLETELY.
Also, though, as mentioned above, one pip in two-handed weapon style gives staves an extra +2 damage, double crit chance (19-20) and improved speed (-2), the best clubs can do is single weapon style (double crit chance (19-20), reduced AC) or dual-wield - but the latter needs 2 or 3 points to be effective, and not all classes can put more than a point into dual wield (though dual wielding clubs is a good choice for Beastsmasters)
I think doing an "equal" comparison of similar weapons makes sense and this started out because somebody claimed staffs > swords (not Staff of Striking > + 3 2 hander).
In a game where you already know what every weapon is and where it is found then I have no problem with people focusing on how to get to and maximize that specific weapon. In a more natural setting (ie playing the game for the first time) when it comes to picking proficiency spots and such it is natural to put those spots in the weapons you like and are the 'best'. But it is tough to argue about specific weapons, how exactly are you balancing 10% chance of decapitation vs slowing an opponent on hit just as an example? When you look at the standard weapons that can at least be a starting point where we agree that in most situations X is better than Y.
There are nuances to big fights that are different than normal but I disagree that the kill factor isn't a significant stat (as is total damage done per battle).
From my point of view the game, both PnP and BG, intended swords to be more powerful than staffs. There aren't very many movies being made about knights with magical sticks running around. Now it is certainly possible that in game mechanics didn't convey that properly and a staff is better than a sword, but to me that burden of proof is on the people that feel that way. I was surprised to see people feel that way, some of the reasons made sense but after testing I personally don't feel the standard staff is superior to a 2 handed sword. In the black pits all you can do is get +2 versions of both, I don't remember what the best versions are in BGEE and in BG2 I know there are ton of cool weapons lying around.
We can agree to disagree if you want, it is not a huge issue for me. My bottom line is that I would need to see overwhelming evidence that a staff was better than a sword and I haven't seen that. I will say that some of the specific staffs being mentioned do seem to be a worth a second look as I initially would not have used them
If you're Grandmaster in Halberds for example...and you're at least a level 13 Fighter class for the extra 1/2 attack that gets you up to 2 attacks per round with any weapon...you're looking at the following when all is said and done:
7 ATTACKS / 2 ROUNDS (7/2) +++++Halberd AND 13th Level Fighter and up Attacks (2 base).
1-[(1-0.1)^(7/2)]=0.308 -> 30.8% chance of vorpal effect happening per round - Your odds just went up due to the sheer amount of attacks available to a trained warrior.
But someone who's less skilled with a Halberd won't fair as well.
See my earlier post above for stats.
But most staves can't come close...Staff of Striking does without bonus to hit. In fact it's equal before factoring in bonus damage against Evil to the +6 version of Carsomyr! Again though...it's a magic staff with charges...so it's a limited use item for that damage.
The average staff (3.5 MEAN AVERAGE DAMAGE) vs the average 2 Handed Sword (5.5 MEAN AVERAGE DAMAGE) is gonna lose.
Then stick both fighters in full plate and see how things fair...the quarterstaff is highly likely to win, better then half the time, due to the much greater AC bonus vs slashing the plate provides vs no extra bonus vs blunt. The extra damage in the 2hd's favor is meaningless if you can't hit in the first place.
Then remove the armors and actually control the staff user and fight...after making 1 attack run away, and repeat....as long as you keep up the rhythm the staff user will eventually kill the 2hd user without taking any damage, because the staff attacks 3x faster then the 2 hander does, not to mention the half frame delay from the hit reaction pushing the attack back further. Once you get a feel for the battle, try pulling off 2 attacks before fading (you should have just enough time to pull it off, though it's close).
Effective? Yes! A bit heavy on micromanagement? Fairly...but so is song-twisting and backstabbing, and those are equally rewarding in their own way.
Eventually hitting 0 weapon speed with any weapon is one reason Kensai are ridiculously powerful...they can often hit most enemies 3-4 times (for ridiculous damage, often fatal) before the other enemies can land their first blow..especially if they're wielding something with slow, or attacking slowed enemies (slow sets attack speed to 10 and doubles cast times)
The Staff of striking DOES have a to-hit bonus (it's considered +3, easily checked with NI), it's just unlisted in BG1 and BG2, they finally added it to the description in BG:EE.
Thanks for the heads up on The Staff of Striking, I totally agree on all counts BTW, though speed factor will mean less when you put points into Two-Weapon Style and start using better magical items.
As will bonuses from armor (though blunt/crushing will always be better off than Slashing and Piercing in this regard)
If you notice, Ravager +6 has a huge damage output, but there's more bonuses with armor against piercing than with any other weapon type. Vs. flail of the Ages which is comparable in damage if upgraded to +5...19.5 MADMG for the Flail Vs 22 MADMG for Ravager...though...you can cast Improved Haste on a Ravager user.
The main thing is proficiencies followed by magical bonuses and base number of attacks. Then tactically how you use your weapon of choice matters even MORE so, well put Zanath.
1-[(1-0.1)^(7/2)]=0.308 -> 30.8% chance of vorpal effect happening per round.
100 enemies split amongst 6 party members is not an appropriate sample size.
I hate to bring it up in these forums, but when you run simcraft for damage in WoW, you run at least 10,000 iterations. You can even run it up to 50,000 iterations. You will see a difference in these numbers, particularly if you only run a couple thousand iterations compared to 10k+(much more consistent numbers in this range). Granted, there are quite a few more factors to consider for that game than BG.
The "best" weapon in BG games will be determined by a number of factors, including character class, stats, the player's knowledge of the game, the availability of different magical weapons, etc. Nobody is going to be running around with unenchanted weapons for long, particularly if you consider the whole saga.
TL;DR: There is a "best" weapon(determined by math) for any one particular class, but to claim any weapon better than another in general, and citing black pits testing or 1 on 1 duels, is just pontificating.
Edit: Nevermind, I just put it together