I guess my main problem with this weapon is the fact that it's a simple weapon, the only simple weapons that deal 1d8 damage are 2 handed. Plus it has the thrown property albeit the second worst range, but it does deals the most damage of a one handed thrown weapon.
I wouldn't mind it if it was a Martial weapon or if it just did 1d6 damage, but having both of those just make it seem broken.
It certainly breaks the convention, but I wouldn't call it broken. It doesn't have the finesse or light property, though I agree it should be Martial based on stats alone for the one-handed d8. But thematically, it's probably Simple to anyone from Chult - and doesn't really exist elsewhere.
Mechanically, I imagine they paired it with the Spear, balancing the worse range with greater damage. I can't imagine any of my players throwing down their weapons to use one.
I can Chequers. ToA has multiple "magnet" traps that pull and destroy metal objects no mater how much metal is in it. The Yklwa is made of obsiden thus immune.
I can Chequers. To a has multiple "magnet" traps tgat pull and destroy metal objects no mater how much metal is in it. The Yklwa is made of obsiden thus immune.
... and I only know of ONE of those traps in published material :) ... and there was a save.
Yes it is probably the best one handed simple weapon in terms of damage and versatility. However, it only does ONE point of damage on average more than any other simple weapon. This is not overpowered or a big deal in way.
The niche ability to avoid metal attracting traps doesn't come up very often.
I'm going to guess that the one published magnet trap is still one more than the number of published magical yklwas. Even if not playing by published material, there are several magical properties which are linked to specific weapon types, almost none of which include the yklwa thus making it a bad choice for mid-late levels.
Edit: Ok, in ToA you can find two magical +1 yklwa, so there's that.
It's as much "essentially a spear" as a sword is essentially an axe, so just like a greatsword couldn't be a berserker axe and a warhammer can't be a mace of disruption, the yklwa can't be a javelin of lightning or any of all the things limited to swords and maces.
It's as much "essentially a spear" as a sword is essentially an axe, so just like a greatsword couldn't be a berserker axe and a warhammer can't be a mace of disruption, the yklwa can't be a javelin of lightning or any of all the things limited to swords and maces.
Agreed, as a DM I'd let it slide. Though you've made a good point.
I was looking at this for my ranger(dual wielder & two weapon fighting dex19 str15). On a regular hit the max & minimum is more defined in my offhand than my main hand. While the Yklwa has 2 more damage maximum per round, a scimitar has 2 more minimum per round. A pair of rapiers (with my dual wielder ignoring the light weapon requirement) would increase everything the Yklwa does by 2 as it's finesse and 1d8.
Scimitar (finesse, light, weapon)
1d6 +4 = (10 max) (5 mnimim)
offhand 1d6 (6 max) (1minimum)
Per round that's (16 max) (6 minimum)
Yklwa
1d8+2 (10max) (3 minimum)
offhand 1d8 (8 max) (1 minimum)
per round that's (18 max) (4 minimum)
as far as thrown, this is too large to be a spare weapon really, and would cost actions to pull out anyhow. IF players wanted to throw their main weapon at an enemy, it's the DMs job to show him how bad an idea that is. if it's an solely an offhand weapon they would lose their two weapon fighting bonus and their dual wielder +1 bonus to AC until they retrieve it.
It is not that the Yklwa can't have magic powers, it is that being rare, it is rare to FIND one. No magical treasure, no +1 Yklwa held by their opponents against them, no +1 Yklwa found in a store.
I would totally allow a player to pay 8,000gp and wait a couple of months to get one made, but they should not be found.
as far as thrown, this is too large to be a spare weapon really, and would cost actions to pull out anyhow. IF players wanted to throw their main weapon at an enemy, it's the DMs job to show him how bad an idea that is. if it's an solely an offhand weapon they would lose their two weapon fighting bonus and their dual wielder +1 bonus to AC until they retrieve it.
Agreed.
Pictured below is a Zulu warrior with iklwa, the weapon that the Chultan yklwa is based on. They were particularly not useful for throwing, and the troops of Shaka of the Zulu would throw short spears first and then charge with their iklwa. They were a notoriously effective weapon, providing an advantage in melee against troops equipped with the traditional long spear (assegai).
So, are they broken? No, they're a successful improvement on the spear that allowed a less technologically advanced people to fight against a foe with superior arms.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Simple Melee Weapon, 1d8 Piercing Damage, Thrown Property (range 10-30), 1 handed.
I guess my main problem with this weapon is the fact that it's a simple weapon, the only simple weapons that deal 1d8 damage are 2 handed. Plus it has the thrown property albeit the second worst range, but it does deals the most damage of a one handed thrown weapon.
I wouldn't mind it if it was a Martial weapon or if it just did 1d6 damage, but having both of those just make it seem broken.
It certainly breaks the convention, but I wouldn't call it broken. It doesn't have the finesse or light property, though I agree it should be Martial based on stats alone for the one-handed d8. But thematically, it's probably Simple to anyone from Chult - and doesn't really exist elsewhere.
Mechanically, I imagine they paired it with the Spear, balancing the worse range with greater damage. I can't imagine any of my players throwing down their weapons to use one.
I can Chequers. ToA has multiple "magnet" traps that pull and destroy metal objects no mater how much metal is in it. The Yklwa is made of obsiden thus immune.
... and I only know of ONE of those traps in published material :) ... and there was a save.
Yes it is probably the best one handed simple weapon in terms of damage and versatility. However, it only does ONE point of damage on average more than any other simple weapon. This is not overpowered or a big deal in way.
The niche ability to avoid metal attracting traps doesn't come up very often.
I'm going to guess that the one published magnet trap is still one more than the number of published magical yklwas. Even if not playing by published material, there are several magical properties which are linked to specific weapon types, almost none of which include the yklwa thus making it a bad choice for mid-late levels.
Edit: Ok, in ToA you can find two magical +1 yklwa, so there's that.
I am one with the Force. The Force is with me.
Yklwa is essentially a spear soooo, why can't it have more magical abilities?
It's as much "essentially a spear" as a sword is essentially an axe, so just like a greatsword couldn't be a berserker axe and a warhammer can't be a mace of disruption, the yklwa can't be a javelin of lightning or any of all the things limited to swords and maces.
I am one with the Force. The Force is with me.
Agreed, as a DM I'd let it slide. Though you've made a good point.
I was looking at this for my ranger(dual wielder & two weapon fighting dex19 str15). On a regular hit the max & minimum is more defined in my offhand than my main hand. While the Yklwa has 2 more damage maximum per round, a scimitar has 2 more minimum per round. A pair of rapiers (with my dual wielder ignoring the light weapon requirement) would increase everything the Yklwa does by 2 as it's finesse and 1d8.
Scimitar (finesse, light, weapon)
1d6 +4 = (10 max) (5 mnimim)
offhand 1d6 (6 max) (1minimum)
Per round that's (16 max) (6 minimum)
Yklwa
1d8+2 (10max) (3 minimum)
offhand 1d8 (8 max) (1 minimum)
per round that's (18 max) (4 minimum)
as far as thrown, this is too large to be a spare weapon really, and would cost actions to pull out anyhow. IF players wanted to throw their main weapon at an enemy, it's the DMs job to show him how bad an idea that is. if it's an solely an offhand weapon they would lose their two weapon fighting bonus and their dual wielder +1 bonus to AC until they retrieve it.
It is not that the Yklwa can't have magic powers, it is that being rare, it is rare to FIND one. No magical treasure, no +1 Yklwa held by their opponents against them, no +1 Yklwa found in a store.
I would totally allow a player to pay 8,000gp and wait a couple of months to get one made, but they should not be found.
Agreed.
Pictured below is a Zulu warrior with iklwa, the weapon that the Chultan yklwa is based on. They were particularly not useful for throwing, and the troops of Shaka of the Zulu would throw short spears first and then charge with their iklwa. They were a notoriously effective weapon, providing an advantage in melee against troops equipped with the traditional long spear (assegai).
So, are they broken? No, they're a successful improvement on the spear that allowed a less technologically advanced people to fight against a foe with superior arms.