Talk:Friede's Great Scythe (5e Equipment)

It would take more than dropping the heavy tag to allow two weapon fighting (there isn't a thing called "duel [sic] wielding"). Both weapons would need to be one-handed with the light tag.

For a +3 legendary weapon, we might expect some kind of additional benefit, but this is two weapon fighting with a 2d8 and 2d4 weapon, both with +3 to attack and damage, plus an AoE. Marasmusine (talk) 16:10, 20 February 2017 (MST)

Thank you for your suggestions! I do still have a couple of questions however (not because I don't understand why the item needs to be modified, but rather just for some explanation and guidance). Firstly, what do you mean by "duel [sic] wielding?" I understand that it isn't a thing, and that something would have to change if I wanted the player to be able to duel-wield the scythes when they use the Elfriede's Stance feature, but I don't understand how "duel [sic] wielding" came to be a topic that you brought up. If it is a typo of mine that I am completely glossing over and not realizing, then I apologize for the stupid question; if that's not the case, then could you please elaborate upon what you're talking about? Secondly, what might you suggest be changed or added to the weapon? Personally, when I read "some kind of additional benefit" in your response, my first thoughts went to passive benefits, such as resistance or immunity to cold damage, or something along those lines. However, as I am not the original author of this magic item, I believe that, based off of what was already here when I came to work on the item, the previous creator, Ace of Fours, seemed to be trying to stick as close to the original item from Dark Souls III as possible. If that were the case, and I wanted to follow along those guidelines based upon what Ace previously set out to do, might it be a better idea to adjust the +3 bonus or the rarity of the item so that the characteristics of the weapon are more realistic for its rarity? These are my two main concerns that I pulled out of your suggestion/response, but that's not to say that there isn't anything else important that you were trying to get across to me (if there is anything else that I missed from your response, I apologize for my mistake, and would like to know what it is that I glossed over). Again, I appreciate your assistance on creating this weapon, and I'm still open to any other flaws and/or suggestions you might point out! --Hobogre (talk) 20:35, 25 February 2017 (MST)

I brought it up as a topic because the page says "but it is treated as if it were the off-hand weapon while duel wielding". It's not just a typo: 5e has "two weapon fighting" , which is probably what you are aiming for, but there isn't "duel fighting" or "off-hand weapons". This tells me that the author is not familiar with the rules.

For additional benefits, just look at the examples in the Dungeon Master's Guide.

Compare the Very Rare +3 sword, with the Legendary holy avenger.

Compare the Rare +2 sword, with the Very Rare nine lives stealer.

I'm going to put a bit of time in this to rewrite it. Marasmusine (talk) 19:08, 11 March 2017 (UTC)

Okay, I got the basics down. It can be given a +1 bonus to attack and damage rolls if you think it should be legendary. Marasmusine (talk) 20:43, 11 March 2017 (UTC)

I think my main problem with it is that it's just not very interesting. It's just damage and moar damage, the DMG already has plenty of weapons like that. Marasmusine (talk) 20:49, 11 March 2017 (UTC)