Absolutely, I'm not going to base the value of a weapon on a subset of enemies though, by that logic we need to trash World's End and give Minsc the Staff of Striking.
That is why I switch weapons or send in someone else who specializes in blunt weapons for those types of enemies.
However, assuming a solo game and only using one weapon. Add up all the damage you do, not just against skeleton warriors or clay golems, but against every encounter throughout your game, and a katana +2 will out put more damage than a flail +2.
The question still remains why you would use a +3 Worlds End if you had 2 +3 katanas you could dual wield, given that they are all going to do slashing that won't come into play.
For the entire saga a flail is going to be the best proficiency because Flail of the Ages is the best weapon in the game, but that still doesn't justify putting 2 handed swords you can dual wield, which is what a katana is, at an equal level of enchantment as the actual 2 handed swords.
@moopy I suppose you are right. Still a difference of 2 damage isn't a whole lot. My point was kind of that the katana is not as good as you would think based on the ratings it gets, or in other words: its overrated. Sure if you choose to dual wield katanas you will do that much more damage but its not like if katanas had an equivilant enhancement level to other things they would leave everything else in the dust. Instead I think it would be more like winning the damage race by a nose. They would certainly win though; no question about that.
I think you are absolutely right and I prefer blunt weapons because most things aren't resistant to blunt. Also the flail of the ages is awesome.
I think katanas are over rated as well and actually prefer the long sword selection in BG2 or most other weapons, granted Celestial Fury is pretty cool. My point is mostly to people who want a +3 katana with equal special abilities alongside +3 two handed swords.
I'm going to go off subject here on the Demon Knight, do you know if there is a point to breaking the mirror? I end up fighting a copy of myself, a copy of the Demon Knight, and the Demon Knight. Instead of just the Demon Knight so not sure if I'm doing something wrong, so I just leave the mirror alone.
Your estimations are based on the existence of a non-existent +2 Katana and the fact you have failed to add damage correctly; a flail +2 is 1D6+3, not 3D2+1.
In game, there is one Katana +1, and the off-hand katana is definitively non-magical. Since the Morning Star + Flail proficiency covers two weapon types, you can wield the +2 flail in your primary hand (6.5 average damage, not 5.5) and the +1 Morning Star in your off-hand (6 average damage). In comparison, the Katana +1 (6 average damage), and the regular Katana (5.5 average damage) make it substandard compared to both, with a more commonly resisted damage type.
Add on top that the best weapon in the entire series is a toss-up between Carsomyr and the Flail of Ages, neither of which is a katana, and flails are looking far better long term, whilst two handed swords are still overrated, they gain bonuses to crit-range, damage, and weapon speed, dual wielded Katanas gain a single attack with a -2 or -4 penalty to hit.
Incidentally, considering Minsc-level strength is accounting for +5 damage, specialisation is accounting for another +2 damage, and weapon enhancements are accounting for at least +1 damage, you're sacrificing a great deal of access time for what amounts to a less than 10% bonus to damage.
Your estimations are based on the existence of a non-existent +2 Katana and the fact you have failed to add damage correctly; a flail +2 is 1D6+3, not 3D2+1.
In game, there is one Katana +1, and the off-hand katana is definitively non-magical. Since the Morning Star + Flail proficiency covers two weapon types, you can wield the +2 flail in your primary hand (6.5 average damage, not 5.5) and the +1 Morning Star in your off-hand (6 average damage). In comparison, the Katana +1 (6 average damage), and the regular Katana (5.5 average damage) make it substandard compared to both, with a more commonly resisted damage type.
Add on top that the best weapon in the entire series is a toss-up between Carsomyr and the Flail of Ages, neither of which is a katana, and flails are looking far better long term, whilst two handed swords are still overrated, they gain bonuses to crit-range, damage, and weapon speed, dual wielded Katanas gain a single attack with a -2 or -4 penalty to hit.
Incidentally, considering Minsc-level strength is accounting for +5 damage, specialisation is accounting for another +2 damage, and weapon enhancements are accounting for at least +1 damage, you're sacrificing a great deal of access time for what amounts to a less than 10% bonus to damage.
I'm personally sticking to maces in BG1 and flails in BG2 when I'm power gaming.
I don't think you understood my point from my original post here which was let us ASSUME the katana +2 existed, or to go even further let us assume you could get katana +3's. Furthermore, the person I was responding to created 2 +2 katanas... so they did exist for him.
If you assume katana +3's existed alongside a two handed sword +3 then the katana is always way better. You can dual wield them for another apr or you can single weapon style for the same crit range as a two handed sword but with an AC bonus.
My argument was given a katanas base damage we don't really need more katanas that are equal in enchantment or special abilities to other weapons, not that katanas are the best weapon in the game. They obviously aren't.
I am beginning to think that katanas are quite a bit overrated.
In comparison, the Katana +1 (6 average damage),
Isn't a katana +1 an average of 6.5 damage? Take your regular katana average of 5.5 and add 1.
As best best weapon in the series, for 99% of BG2/TOB, I think a good argument can be made that Celestial Fury is a better weapon than either Carsomyr or the Flail of Ages. It is certainly in the same discussion and opinions will vary. The downside is that it is only +3 enchanted so the others can hit opponents it can't but these are pretty rare (represented as the 1% here). The FOA actually has a similar issue since you have to give up the ability to be normally hasted or improved hasted with the free action component coming from the 5th head and Carsomyr is the only one that won't let you dual wield something with a great effect like the Defender of Easthaven, Foebane, etc. Now I think you can make good arguments for any of these but for anything that can be hit by a +3 weapon, there are people who can validly prefer the stun effect to a slow effect plus elemental damage or the dispel/MR benefits of Carsomyr.
Comments
That is why I switch weapons or send in someone else who specializes in blunt weapons for those types of enemies.
However, assuming a solo game and only using one weapon. Add up all the damage you do, not just against skeleton warriors or clay golems, but against every encounter throughout your game, and a katana +2 will out put more damage than a flail +2.
The question still remains why you would use a +3 Worlds End if you had 2 +3 katanas you could dual wield, given that they are all going to do slashing that won't come into play.
For the entire saga a flail is going to be the best proficiency because Flail of the Ages is the best weapon in the game, but that still doesn't justify putting 2 handed swords you can dual wield, which is what a katana is, at an equal level of enchantment as the actual 2 handed swords.
I think you are absolutely right and I prefer blunt weapons because most things aren't resistant to blunt. Also the flail of the ages is awesome.
I think katanas are over rated as well and actually prefer the long sword selection in BG2 or most other weapons, granted Celestial Fury is pretty cool. My point is mostly to people who want a +3 katana with equal special abilities alongside +3 two handed swords.
I'm going to go off subject here on the Demon Knight, do you know if there is a point to breaking the mirror? I end up fighting a copy of myself, a copy of the Demon Knight, and the Demon Knight. Instead of just the Demon Knight so not sure if I'm doing something wrong, so I just leave the mirror alone.
SW1H43.ITM - Katana
SW1H20.ITM - Scimitar
SW1H48.ITM - Ninja-To
SW1H46.ITM - Wakazashi
They *all* have the "Breakable" flag set, which means just that, i.e. they're breakable
@Moopy
Your estimations are based on the existence of a non-existent +2 Katana and the fact you have failed to add damage correctly; a flail +2 is 1D6+3, not 3D2+1.
In game, there is one Katana +1, and the off-hand katana is definitively non-magical. Since the Morning Star + Flail proficiency covers two weapon types, you can wield the +2 flail in your primary hand (6.5 average damage, not 5.5) and the +1 Morning Star in your off-hand (6 average damage). In comparison, the Katana +1 (6 average damage), and the regular Katana (5.5 average damage) make it substandard compared to both, with a more commonly resisted damage type.
Add on top that the best weapon in the entire series is a toss-up between Carsomyr and the Flail of Ages, neither of which is a katana, and flails are looking far better long term, whilst two handed swords are still overrated, they gain bonuses to crit-range, damage, and weapon speed, dual wielded Katanas gain a single attack with a -2 or -4 penalty to hit.
Incidentally, considering Minsc-level strength is accounting for +5 damage, specialisation is accounting for another +2 damage, and weapon enhancements are accounting for at least +1 damage, you're sacrificing a great deal of access time for what amounts to a less than 10% bonus to damage.
You are right. I don't add very well.
I'm personally sticking to maces in BG1 and flails in BG2 when I'm power gaming.
I don't think you understood my point from my original post here which was let us ASSUME the katana +2 existed, or to go even further let us assume you could get katana +3's. Furthermore, the person I was responding to created 2 +2 katanas... so they did exist for him.
If you assume katana +3's existed alongside a two handed sword +3 then the katana is always way better.
You can dual wield them for another apr or you can single weapon style for the same crit range as a two handed sword but with an AC bonus.
My argument was given a katanas base damage we don't really need more katanas that are equal in enchantment or special abilities to other weapons, not that katanas are the best weapon in the game. They obviously aren't.
As best best weapon in the series, for 99% of BG2/TOB, I think a good argument can be made that Celestial Fury is a better weapon than either Carsomyr or the Flail of Ages. It is certainly in the same discussion and opinions will vary. The downside is that it is only +3 enchanted so the others can hit opponents it can't but these are pretty rare (represented as the 1% here). The FOA actually has a similar issue since you have to give up the ability to be normally hasted or improved hasted with the free action component coming from the 5th head and Carsomyr is the only one that won't let you dual wield something with a great effect like the Defender of Easthaven, Foebane, etc. Now I think you can make good arguments for any of these but for anything that can be hit by a +3 weapon, there are people who can validly prefer the stun effect to a slow effect plus elemental damage or the dispel/MR benefits of Carsomyr.
I'm hoping they fix free action stopping haste in the EE versions. Which I consider to be a bug.