Spell on a weapon

[Korgan26]

Posted this at gleemax but recieved no thoughts

I have a high level long running campaign and a player asked me if he could have a weapon made with inflict critical wounds in it so when he attacked it would do extra damage.
This brought up 2 main questions:
1. Unless then spell was quickened the he would only be able to make one attack and it would become a standard action just like the spell. Correct?

2. If it was quickend he could make one attack with that weapon and than attack normally with the off hand or just a 2nd time with that weapon, But he could not make more than two attacks with the weapon in question. Correct?
Thank you for any insight that you can offer

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

Would he be willing to settle for Inflict Serious Wounds? Spell Storing weapons only allow up to level 3 spells.

Duskblade class from PHB2 also lets you channel a spell into your weapon and unleash it when you hit with the weapon. That's an arcane class with a limited class spell list, though.

There is the Spellsword prestige class in C.Warrior (or C.Arcane, I forget) to channel spells into a weapon, too. That might be an arcane caster class, though.


As far as quickened...if it was a quickened spell, he could cast it and still full attack. He'd still need some way of putting the spell into his weapon when he casts it. Note if it's not explicitly allowed in the rules, many DMs would allow a character to deliver a melee touch spell chained to an unarmed strike, against full AC instead of touch AC. If he doesn't allow it, the monk/sorcerer multiclass feat from C.Adventure (Aesthetic Mage?) explicitly allows you to. That would be attacking with a weapon and unleashing the spell, just in a more unorthodox manner. Along that route is the Enlightened Fist prestige class, and/or the Sacred Fist prestige class.

In any case, you would only deal the spell's damage on the first hit with the weapon, after which it'd discharge and the rest of your full attacks would deal regular damage. At level 13 in Duskblade, that class gains the ability to tack a single melee touch spell onto an entire full attack sequence, but that's a unique class feature. I know of no other way of accomplishing that.

 

[aboyd]

Stream of the Sky, isn't it true that you can get magical weapons with properties that are constant? They cost a huge, huge amount of money, though. Going from memory, the DMG lists the price multiplier for these items at x2000. If I'm remembering correctly, then you could have a sword imbued with an Inflict spell, and it would constantly dish out the damage even if you hit 5x in a round.

It just costs more than a castle to own it.

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

Yeah, I was wondering if that's what he meant. By the pricing guidelines, for a CL 7, level 4 spell, it'd cost 4 x 7 x 2000 x2 (for non-body slot) = 112,000 gp or something like that. Crazy expensive. But also pretty potent. Inflict Critical for 4d8+7 damage every attack. If i were to ad hoc price that as a weapon property instead, I'd go with a +4 bonus.maybe for a +4 bonus allow it to be at a higher CL for more damage and greater difficulty to suppress with dispel magic. I think the DMG pricing guidelines are a tad too painful on the wallet, though it is a potent enhancement.

 

[czak808]

The cost is actually even worse...

The sub-note on crafting spell effects (DMG 285) has multiples on the cost based on the duration of the spell effect. There being no modifier for instantaneous effects could mean that they cannot be placed as continuous.

-or-
The multiplier for an effect with a duration measured in rounds has a multiplier of 4. Following the linear costs in the book, instantaneous would have a x8 cost.

By the pricing guidelines, for a CL 7, level 4 spell, it'd cost 4 x 7 x 2000 x2 (for non-body slot) = 112,000 gp or something like that.

So for ~900k gp (the cost of ~7 liches...) you can have a weapon that does a bonus 4d8+7 damage on each hit.

Fools are made to suffer, not to be suffered

 

[Dross]

Don't forget that there will be a will save for half damage if it is a strait spell discharge.

I'm not sure what the rules say regarding something like this made permanent.

And: Undead disguised undead (which would be healed on each hit).

 

[Korgan26]

I did not even think of the cost of duration modification.
Way to expensive (obviously)

Thanks for all the thoughts



Z

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

I don't think it's necessarily fair to apply a duration multiplier to an instanteous spell, and even if it were, I definitely think it'd be widely debatable to just abstract it to a x8 cost. x8 is just obscene. I think it's worth less than 100k, especially since it does in fact have a save for half damage. I'm sticking with my gut assessment. +4 weapon special ability, put it at about CL 15. Why? It's about halfway between the min and max (7 and 20) CL for the spell and a fairly "nice number" for calculations.

 

[aboyd]

The cost is actually even worse...

The sub-note on crafting spell effects (DMG 285) has multiples on the cost based on the duration of the spell effect. There being no modifier for instantaneous effects could mean that they cannot be placed as continuous.

-or-
The multiplier for an effect with a duration measured in rounds has a multiplier of 4. Following the linear costs in the book, instantaneous would have a x8 cost.

Hmm. I wouldn't go so far as to start extrapolating things that aren't in the book. I would say that if instantaneous effects are not listed with a multiplier, then no multiplier applies. Following that thinking also brings the weapon in line with other similar weapons.

For example, consider a weapon with Inflict Serious Wounds -- 3d8 +5 extra damage. That's a range of 8 to 29 points of bonus damage. Now consider a weapon with 5 of the coveted d6 damage bonuses -- frost, flaming, shock, etcetera. Each of those damage bonuses would confer a +1d6, for a total of 5d6. That's a range of 5 to 30 points of bonus damage. That's pretty close to what a weapon with Inflict Serious Wounds would convey. I would think they ought to be similar in price, though not perfectly the same.

Well, a weapon with 5 damage bonuses such as the shock property would cost 72,000 gp (a base +1 bonus, with 5 extra bonus costs due to the properties). Therefore, I would not place a weapon with an Inflict spell in the 900,000 range -- not while we have another weapon doing similar damage for a tenth of the price. If a cleric & blacksmith collaborated to make such an overpriced item, the economy would dictate that the cleric & blacksmith be laughed at, while high-level adventurers went off to get other more economic items.

Does that make sense?

Still, pricing the item around 100,000 or 150,000 is still high enough to ensure that only the uber-powerful have it. That's probably enough.

 

[Theroc]

Aboyd, would the Inflict Serious(or critical w/e) WOunds on weapon have a small mitigation to their price, due to it having the "Save for 1/2 damage" property as well? If I recall correctly, the flaming/icy/shocking weapons don't have such a clause.