Non-Magical Flail or Morning Star? Which is better?
Pibaro
Member, Translator (NDA) Posts: 2,989
As you know, Flail and Morning Star are two different weapons, but they share the same proficiency.
I wonder why you should choose the Flail over the Morning Star.
- In every shop a Flail is more expensive than a Morning Star.
- A Flail deals 1d6 +1 damages, with an average of 4,5.
A Morning Star deals 2d4 damages, with an average of 5.
- They both have the same speed factor (7).
- A Flail requires 13 strenght, while a Morning Star requires only 11 strenght.
Everything says that a Morning Star is better and cheaper than a Flail.
Do I miss something? Why a better weapon is more expensive than a worse weapon?
I wonder why you should choose the Flail over the Morning Star.
- In every shop a Flail is more expensive than a Morning Star.
- A Flail deals 1d6 +1 damages, with an average of 4,5.
A Morning Star deals 2d4 damages, with an average of 5.
- They both have the same speed factor (7).
- A Flail requires 13 strenght, while a Morning Star requires only 11 strenght.
Everything says that a Morning Star is better and cheaper than a Flail.
Do I miss something? Why a better weapon is more expensive than a worse weapon?
2
Comments
Of course, keep in mind that comparing non-magical versions is irrelevant for the most part, it all comes down to what magical versions there are of a given weapon type.
And as things are, Flails are superior to Morning Stars there :P In fact, the arguably best 1h weapon in the entire (unmodded) BG series is a Flail.
But yeah, the price difference is a bit strange.
And none of the components is worth much really, only the belt is a great item. And pretty much by the time you can make Crom, you're in ToB. And you get a better belt there. Ofc, it depends on the team you are running. I can still only imagine bards or F/M's to benefit from GoOP rather than any of the strength-belts. There are 4 of them after all.
The katana lacks the elemental damages that are super-useful against buffed mages. Besides the blade loses much of its effectiveness: it "only" has a +3 enchantment, and the stun effect grants a save vs spell that enemies will increasingly make (the FoA's Slow effect is much more reliable in that respect). The FoA only gets better as the game progresses.
The hammer is better than the katana, but its main perk - the massive STR bonus - can be obtained or at least approximated through other means (STR items and spells). The FoA's amazing Slow effect otoh is unique, and its late-game Free Action is valuable as well. Both weapons inflict elemental damage so they're similar in that respect although I'd say the FoA has the advantage there of inflicting different types of elemental damage making the weapon slightly more versatile. That same Cleric will have more DUHMs than he will ever need to raise their strength.
OT: Wouldn't it make more sense for Clubs, Maces and Morningstars to form one weapon category?
And you don't even need DUHM when u have Crom. Pre-combat buffing is tedious at best.