Double Weapons - one item or two?

[Hypersmurf]

A non-magical quarterstaff and a Shatter spell. Is the staff "a single solid object" for purposes of the spell?

A quarterstaff and a Sunder attempt. Must the attack be declared against a particular end, or just against the weapon? If one head has a +1 enhancement bonus, does the increase in hardness and hit points apply to the whole item, or just to that end?

A quarterstaff and a 1 on a failed save. Randomly determined: Item held in hand is damaged. Does the staff as a whole take damage? One end? Both ends calculated separately, given that they might have different hardness and hit points based on differing enhancement bonuses?

If only one end has an enhancement bonus, can the other end be affected by a spell that affects "one non-magical object"?

If a staff with two magic heads is Sundered, do the repair costs only take into account the market value of the end that was involved in the opposed roll, or of both ends?

-Hyp.

 

[Creamsteak]

Huh... at first I though the answer to this was really simple. I just thought that "it's one weapon"... but isn't that penalizing the user a second time, since they pay for the weapon twice?

For the non-magic quarterstaff, I'd always use the assumption that the entire weapon is destroyed. But given the other situation, would it be more accurate to say that one end is destroyed and the remaining end acts as a club? Just awkward... good question...

 

[Saeviomagy]

A non-magical quarterstaff and a Shatter spell. Is the staff "a single solid object" for purposes of the spell?

Definately

A quarterstaff and a Sunder attempt. Must the attack be declared against a particular end, or just against the weapon? If one head has a +1 enhancement bonus, does the increase in hardness and hit points apply to the whole item, or just to that end?

I'd say the half that was sundered. Mainly because it fits your final question.

A quarterstaff and a 1 on a failed save. Randomly determined: Item held in hand is damaged. Does the staff as a whole take damage? One end? Both ends calculated separately, given that they might have different hardness and hit points based on differing enhancement bonuses?

One item. Use the WORST hardness and hitpoints on the weapon (take a look at the standard table - that's how it's done for non-magical stuff). Which means that you can probably repair it for a lesser cost.

If only one end has an enhancement bonus, can the other end be affected by a spell that affects "one non-magical object"?

No. Just for simplicities sake.

If a staff with two magic heads is Sundered, do the repair costs only take into account the market value of the end that was involved in the opposed roll, or of both ends?
-Hyp.

I'd say the end that was involved.

 

[Li Shenron]

If I am going to try and answer your questions, I am sure I will easily make mistakes. I'd rather just let you know that I'd try to treat the weapon as a single item for most purposes, but that would probably lead to adjudicating rather than really going by the rules, which must be definitely difficult to apply since you are asking these questions... and I am sure you have already checked the rules far and wide before asking.

For simplicity I would like therefore to treat the Quarterstaff as a single "wholly magical" item. Which would mean:
- as a single item for the Shatter spell
- use the BEST enhancement to resist being sundered
- on a failed save, if the spell deals damage it deals it to the whole weapon hp (or does it have 2 different hps?) as when sundered; if the spell does something else then depends
- I would consider the whole QStaff being magical, and treat it as such (and not treat half of it as nonmagical)
- not sure but... isn't the damage counted as a whole?

As you see I don't know the rules enough. If a weapon is sundered, do you have to pay a cost equal to the % of Hp lost? If so, I would count the total weapon cost, not a single end's cost. Not that I think about it, do you actually have to pay the cost of the magic enhancement? Isn't it that to repair an item you have to pay the cost only of the non-magical (eventually MWork) "part" of it?

Some magic items take damage over the course of an adventure. It costs no more to repair a magic item with the Craft skill than it does to repair its nonmagical counterpart. The make whole spell also repairs a damaged—but not completely broken—magic item.

 

[Kodam]

Hi!

I completely agree with Li Shenron. Its one magic Item and the highest magical Bonus counts for purposes of Sunder or other HP damage.

Kodam

 

[The Souljourner]

This is exactly why I've always thought it was stupid for double weapons to be treated as two weapons. I understand that it's an attempt to make it so the double weapon guys aren't outstripping the two weapon guys because they only have to get one expensive weapon instead of two... but here's the thing - two +3 weapons are just barely more expensive than one +4... so it's really not that big of a deal... plus the guy with two weapons will be able to have different enchantments on each weapon, so if he wants a twinkle and an icingdeath, he can do that.

Especially with the new damage reduction rules... being able to have two weapons with different abilities would be a great boon, probably well worth the money.

If it were up to me, I'd throw out the stupid "two heads" rule and simply make double weapons into a single item. It has some benefits and some drawbacks, which is just fine. Plus, it fits all the rest of the rules a lot more nicely.



-The Souljourner

 

[MadScientist]

I think that allowing double weapons, for the purpose of enchantment would be a balance issue. What you could do though is simply make enchating double weapons cost 2x the XP and gp and then consider a single weapon in all other respects.

 

[dcollins]

I would also think that the double weapon counts as one item for all purposes. The idea of granting saves, hp, & hardness by the higher bonus seems like a very good idea, although clearly there's nothing in the rules about that way one way or another.

 

[oromancer]

...the guy with two weapons will be able to have different enchantments on each weapon, so if he wants a twinkle and an icingdeath, he can do that.

Especially with the new damage reduction rules... being able to have two weapons with different abilities would be a great boon, probably well worth the money.

You can already do this with a double weapon, since each head is enhanced as if it were a separate weapon.

 

[DreamChaser]

In order to simplify this issue and in keeping with the fact that 2 +3 weapons are very nearly the same cost (just a bit more) than a +4 weapon, I think it would work to create a house rule something like this:

The two ends of a double weapon must always remain in balance. You cannot enchant one end to be a +1 and another to be +2. When enchanting the weapon, you determine the qualities of both ends (which must be numerically equal) but instead of paying for two weapons you pay for 1 weapon with a plus 1 greater than the actual plus of the two ends.

So a double-bladed sword being enchanted to be +1 and freezing on one end and +1 and shocking on the other would be constructed as though it were a +3 weapon (rather than 2 +2 weapons).

And aside from that, I think this would be a fair interpretation of the damage/object/ends issue.

A double weapon is always considered one object. It is always considered two weapons. If one end of a double weapon is damaged, the other end can only be used with a -4 penalty until the weapon is repared.

What do you think?

DC