Do all enchanted weapons have an innate +1 to hit/damage bonus?

[Tome]

I recall reading that in order to place any magical effects upon a weapon that the weapon in question must have at least a +1 enchantment bonus first in order to receive any further magical properties.

That being said, can I assume that if I found a magical arrow of Charming (Cupid's Arrow) has to have an implied att/dam bonus of +1? Additionally, we also found another odd arrow. This one transforms from one arrow when shot to 10 arrows in flight. I have two questions about this:

1) Would all 10 arrows be considered to have the +1 att/dam bonus since the original would have to in order to contain the other enchantment and since the arrow transforms in mid flight (already benefiting from the att bonus)?

2) Is this arrow my Rogue's dream come true for a massive sneak attack? Would it require 1 roll to hit or 10 rolls to hit? Would he get sneak attack damage on all 10 arrows? If all of these are answered yes look at the possibilities:

10 +1 Arrows = 20-70HP Dam.
10 sneak attacks (2D6) = 20-120 Dam.
Critical = 40-140Dam + Sneak Attack.

Ouch!!!

 

[mmu1]

All weapons enchanted using the DMG guidelines have to be at least +1 before any other enchantment is placed on them. Naturally, there is no real reason a DM can't break the rules to do something interesting... this is in place largely to keep people from creating things like arrows of shock that do 1d8+1d6 damage for a pittance.

As for the other stuff...

1. I don't think the rules actually cover anything like this... IMC, it would depend largely on the cost of the original arrow - something like this would have to be extremely expensive, since it allows you to effectively make 10 attacks at once - if it's priced accordingly, the +1 to hit and damage are hardly going to be a problem.

2. Not a chance in hell. This has been argued over many times, and the official rule is that in cases like this, the sneak attack damage only applies to one of them. It was officially answered in reference to someone wanting to do the same thing with shuriken, which you can throw three at a time with a single attack.

 

[WizarDru]

Not quite.

To quote the SRD:
A magic weapon must have at least a +1 enhancement bonus to have any of the abilities listed on Table: Weapon Special Abilities.

Or to put in another way, a weapon can't have something like, say, the Thundering or Flaming properties unless it's a minimum of a +1 weapon. You couldn't make a +0 Frost Brand.

You could, however, make a wondrous magical weapon that possess a feature or quality not on the list...though that's at the DM's discretion, as always.

At least, if I understand it correctly.

 

[Crothian]

Ya, by the DMG all magical arrows and armor have to have a +1 bonus before anything else. However, I think in some instances it's okay to not have the +1. Just remember that it won't get through any DR without a +.

AS for the one arrow becoming 10, I'd have him roll seprate to hits with each of the ten. Also, sneak attack applies only to one arrow of that group. I think you realized the reason for that one on your own.

 

[dcollins]

2) Is this arrow my Rogue's dream come true for a massive sneak attack? Would it require 1 roll to hit or 10 rolls to hit? Would he get sneak attack damage on all 10 arrows?

No. Following the Sage's ruling for other similar weapons which allow multiple-hits-from-one-attack-action (i.e., shuriken), would not allow this. Roll separately to-hit for each of the 10 arrows, but allow sneak attack damage for only a single hit in the bunch.

(The Sage's in-game rationale being that only a single such missile weapon in a bunch is directed accurately enough to score a sneak attack.)

 

[WizarDru]

Which is what I was trying to state, albeit badly.


In other words, a Screamer Arrow is not necessarily +1 just because it has an enchantment on it. The +1 requirement is to get one of the specific enhancement attributes, but it is not needed for specific 'trick' weapons, so to speak.

 

[Hypersmurf]

An example of an enchanted weapon not requiring an enhancement bonus is the DMG is the Javelin of Lightning.

Market price 751 gp. 301 of that is for a masterwork javelin, leaving only 450 for the Lightning Bolt.

Which is twice the price of a single charge from a 5th level Wand of Lightning Bolt, but less than the benchmark cost of a single use, use activated item with the same spell from table 8-40 (750gp).

That might give you an idea of the sort of prices to assign one-off spell effects like charming arrows.

-Hyp.

 

[Hawkshere]

The quote from the SRD is the key here. The +1 enchancement bonus is required only for those enchanments listed on the Weapon Special Abilities table. If you examine the costs on that table, and imagine shifting everything down one level in cost, you can see why this rule exists - the upper end powers in particular would be absurdly cheap, as the cost increments are huge at the top end.

Nothing prevents you from enchanting a weapon with "wondrous" type effects. That kind of enchantment falls under the Craft Wondrous Item rules, and so the +1 enchancement is not required. In this case, the fact that the item's physical form is that of a weapon is irrelevant. For the purposes of the item creation rules, if it doesn't have an enchancement bonus, it's not a "magic weapon".

 

[dcollins]

Nothing prevents you from enchanting a weapon with "wondrous" type effects.

Except for the fact that they're not in the core rules unless the DM specifically decides to allow them (DMG, p. 178).

 

[Hypersmurf]

Nothing prevents you from enchanting a weapon with "wondrous" type effects. That kind of enchantment falls under the Craft Wondrous Item rules, and so the +1 enchancement is not required. In this case, the fact that the item's physical form is that of a weapon is irrelevant. For the purposes of the item creation rules, if it doesn't have an enchancement bonus, it's not a "magic weapon".

Except that the Javelin of Lightning requires Craft Arms and Armor, not Wondrous, or even something like Wand or Scroll which might suit a one-shot Lightning Bolt better.

-Hyp.