It's the same as the longsword you currently have; a 1d8 damage die and +3 from your Strength (Not +2). If anything it is a little heavier than the sword you're used to.
If I were you, I would try to convince Mykael with reasonable arguments why these items should be put to use rather than stored. But I think you're just trying to provoke him :) .
Maybe there are a couple of different options we have on handling the dispute between Mykael and Zork. We could do a series of opposed rolls using appropriate skills (Ie. Diplomacy, intimidate, etc.) Or if you wanted to make it short and sweat just one opposed diplomacy roll. But there would need to be the understanding that though the winner may have won the debate I don't agree with any PvP social rolls being used to dictate how another player character feels, thinks, etc. (If anyone is familiar with Burning Wheel I like the way it handles PvP social conflict and could be a good reference here)
If Zork does want to square off using intimidate checks I probably shouldn't fight that since I have +8 on intimidate and I think his is only +1 so I have a fairly significant advantage there. However I'm not sure it would be good for one player's character to to be able to roll an intimidate check and effectively scare the other character into submission (In my opinion one player should never be able to roll dice to dictate another player character's response unless you're dealing with some form of magic) Otherwise I could probably use my intimidation skill to run roughshod over the entire party and basically force them to submit my character's will and that's really not much fun for anyone.
I think we need to RP the debate out, or roll opposed diplomacy checks to see who ultimately wins the debate (And role play that out as much as possible as well), or they can have "Trial by combat" So to speak and fight it out.
Edited: Aericsteele on 16th Sep, 2015 - 12:08am
*shrug* I find the roleplaying interesting. If my character had the money he would probably just buy it from Zork in order to settle the dispute.
I agree we probably shouldn't roll to dictate each other... My Diplomacy is a +12 right now. It just wouldn't be fair :D In the end, it's ICon's call how you all handle this. I'm just grabbing some popcorn and a drink.
I think I allowed a fair and quick resolution to this. Aeric, if you truly think Mykael won't budge on this topic it's up to you to allow the debate or not. You know how devoted your character is to Iomeade, keeping in mind that currently he worships a few gods.
With these single opposed rolls, I will describe a few points of argument and you can add your own, (Like you did just before my post).
You can always resolve the argument, then say your character is really angry at the result, and attack.
It is true that he does honor pretty much the full pantheon of good aligned gods, but I was basically using the appearance of the armor and sword as a catalyst toward his more complete devotion to Iomede; from the moment he touched the armor and had the 'vision' of the goddess his faith began to focus more directly on Iomede which is why is particularly passionate about the sword and the armor.
I noticed that I forgot to roll several other damage rolls so I will include them here if that is ok (It won't let me post again in the other thread at this time). I will also include the Diplomacy roll in the event Zork does not attack and continues to debate. If Mykael loses the debate he will not be happy about it and will probably hold a bit of a grudge against Zork but ultimately he will move aside and allow Zork to have it
I should get in the habit of checking all the threads before posting.
I couldn't see your rolls here so manually rolled for you, except diplomacy. I was pretty sure Mykael wouldn't back down, but I might have misread something you wrote. You could even stop attacking and let him have it even at this point in the fight.