Lost Homeland OOC

[Charberus]

Well, I agree flavor has to make sense. But, a javlin of lightning brings up a picture of actually throwing a lightning bolt. Although it doesn't sound that great, the visual image is there.

I do think some abilites should stick with certain types of weapons though. Unless modified, certain bludgeoning weapons do (like mace of Smiting) should not be changed into other weapons. Of course, if you keep the flavor of the weapon the same, and have a sword bludgeoning too like the mace...then i would say it is still good to do.

 

[Dog Moon]

Okay, consensus: good HR.

Next! [May take a while, but I like that we all know exactly what we think about the rules]

Specific weapons and armor can have bonuses added to them. The specific items are the basic items and one specific item cannot be added to another. If a weapon costs 7,000gp, it is an equivalent to a +2 weapon (7k rounds up to 8k) and +8 worth of weapon bonuses can be applied to it. Often, prices include the price of the weapon. This is not included in the rounding.

Thoughts: Honestly, I would prefer to take the properties that are found only on specific weapons/armor and turn them into bonuses or cash modifiers, but the method I have above is easier to deal with and doesn't force me to change so many abilities. However, the main reason I created this was because [at least in 3.0] it sucked to find a cool weapon like Flametongue, but since it's only +1 with abilities and can never be modded, it sucks as you level and fight creatures with DR +2/x. Not so much a problem anymore, but I still like this rule cause it adds more customability/flexibility.

 

[Charberus]

I like that rule too. I am annoyed at not being able to mod the already made items.

Now, how do you go about adding interesting spells from spell compendium to an already existing special weapon?

 

[Dog Moon]

Now, how do you go about adding interesting spells from spell compendium to an already existing special weapon?

Case by case basis, I'm sure. Depends completely on the spell. Wouldn't make sense for a lot of them.

 

[Aereas]

This is another rule I have put into test on 2 pbp games. So far I am the only one who has made use of it. Of those times I've used it I haven't found it to be abusable as the cost sets a good balancing factor already. In some cases you end up with a weapon thats inferior to what one could do with full customization of the standard abilities.

All in all, I say this is a good one to add. As you both said it adds a nice mix of customization/flexibility (not to mention giving it a use in higher leveled games) without the worry of breaking the rules in a bad way.

 

[Dog Moon]

Okay, short version without all the math:

Just as magical energies can be added to a weapon or armor, they can be stripped from it. Bonuses can be removed from weapons at 10% the cost it takes to add them. They can also be transferred to other weapons. This costs 10% of what it that ability cost to add it to the weapon [the enhancement is always considered as the last ability placed on the weapon] as well as 50% the cost of what it would normally be to add the enhancement to the second weapon.

You know, I'm not entirely sure I like this one or not.

Why I do: You find a +3 sword. You already have a +2 flaming sword. Instead of just selling the +3 sword and then deciding whether to increase your own, you can just transfer some of the bonus from that sword to yours. [although this would be cooler without just the basic +'s, i admit]. This has the benefit that even weapons you don't want [finding a Long sword when no one uses it] can become useful to you anyway.

Why I don't: Specific weapons [both in books and from my head] don't become truly unique or special anymore. "Oh, that has a cool ability, I'll take it." Flametongue without any flames is just kind of...blah, if you know what I mean.

Thoughts: Maybe these should be named weapons and that name binds the magical energies and prevents them from being removed or transferred. Although I think that simply calling a sword by a name shouldn't do anything. It should somehow mean something...

 

[Aereas]

This idea doesn't really appealed to me. It seems like a way to reduce the cost of enchanting an existing item and all you need is the ability. Using this idea you could buy a +1 flaming weapon and pay to have flaming transfered to your +3 holy thundering lance for much less than it would to actualy enchant it.

I agree that naming a sowrd shouldn't bind the items powers but perhaps utilizing a true name could. Then if you want to unbind the powers you need to discover the true name.

 

[Charberus]

I always try and name my weapons if i have them. Even if they are nonmagical. I do this mostly because I like the idea of having weapon 'extend' the concept of my character.

The way I see named magical items are 'birthed' are by: 1) soul of the user so loved the item that they formed a 'bond.' 2) As character uses items for a specific purpose that the enchantment are enchanted in a way that it fits the name (Like the frost sword "Iceing Death" Drizzt had). 3) Cult/Guild special weapons as status symbol. Like a Wounding weapon for a fighters guild might have a 'lore' from the townfolks. This lore is usually brings fright or recognizeablity to people seeing it.

When you mentioned 'truenames' being as a way to unbind the magic and stuff, I sort of disagree on that. A named weapon should NOT have magic stripped away. A named item like a flametonge is unique because of flavor. If you stip off the fire resist it gives because you don't 'want' it, then the weapon really ceases to be a flametongue.

 

[Dog Moon]

I always try and name my weapons if i have them. Even if they are nonmagical. I do this mostly because I like the idea of having weapon 'extend' the concept of my character.

The way I see named magical items are 'birthed' are by: 1) soul of the user so loved the item that they formed a 'bond.' 2) As character uses items for a specific purpose that the enchantment are enchanted in a way that it fits the name (Like the frost sword "Iceing Death" Drizzt had). 3) Cult/Guild special weapons as status symbol. Like a Wounding weapon for a fighters guild might have a 'lore' from the townfolks. This lore is usually brings fright or recognizeablity to people seeing it.

When you mentioned 'truenames' being as a way to unbind the magic and stuff, I sort of disagree on that. A named weapon should NOT have magic stripped away. A named item like a flametonge is unique because of flavor. If you stip off the fire resist it gives because you don't 'want' it, then the weapon really ceases to be a flametongue.

The naming thing was just an idea I had to prevent some items from having some misc. magical property from being removed from them. I'm going to assume that truenames were mentioned because against real people, truenames were very powerful [such as the end of NWN, the 2nd expansion]. Having knowledge of the truename would have the same power over an item.

However, since you both also seem to be against it and I was leaning in that direction, I'm going to remove that House Rule.

 

[Dog Moon]

Next!

There is no 'cost to create' on specific weapons and armor. The cost is based off the price like everything else.

I'm removing this rule, but because I realized that it is a totally useless rule. I guess having totally misread the item creation rules would lead me to create a meaningless rule.