D&D 5E Should the +1 Sword Exist in 5E?

[SkidAce]

I don't see a problem with +3 to +5 weapons existing as long as they are rare and very difficult and very costly for PCs to make. In the campaign that I played in the longest, which was 1e, +3 weapons were rare for characters to posses until the high teens. +4 weapons were highly prized and even rarer. I think there was only one or two +5 weapons in several years of gaming.

Good thoughts, I think there is maybe three +6 swords in my entire campaign setting.


Oriflamme, Sword of Eternal Fire
Dragotha, (yup...made from parts of the lich dragon)
Fragarach, the Final Word.

So if the players end up making one, then it's a big deal.

 

[Invisible Stalker]

Yes

The +5 Holy Avenger with a boatload of goodies for Paladins should exist too

 

[Pandathese]

I was excited to see this thread on the board, and had to come out of lurking to see how people felt about how the +x has been handled across the series.

To me the quality of the weapon should be reflected over the +anything and have started to implement a system in my own home brew that I feel works well for me or for any one that's wanting to tone down on the saturation of magic tools in game.

I've implemented a Craftsmanship/Quality/Material system that gives a nice randomness i feel with out being distracting.

Craftsmanship is your to hit mod that gets better as you go through the list. this reflects the smiths skills. poor -2, standard, balanced +1, perfect balance +2
Quality is your damage dice that improves as the quality of the material improves. A poor quality sword will not be as effective as a superb quality sword. weak -1 hit die, standard, superb +1 hit die(Rare)
Material if they can find it will be what adds any non magical damage or effects IE silver/iron.
Masterwork should be just the only way to get a +3 non magical to hit, A masterpiece would have been an artists submission of skill to his peers and teachers to be worthy of the master title.

So using a 3.5 short sword as a template you could have;
poor/weak/steel = -2/1d4/steel | balanced/standard/iron = +1/1d6/bonus against fae | Masterwork short sword = +3/superb(1d8)/steel

So using this you could very well have a poor or worse sword of superb materials -4/1d8/steel, or a well balanced weak quality sword +1/1d4/iron. It's made my players really appreciate what they have.

 

[Janaxstrus]

If this is supposed to be the edition to unite them, then I want my +1 through +5 weapons.

I want my Belt of Hill Giant Strength, my Gauntlets of Ogre Power, my Rod of Lordly Might, my WAND of Wonder and all of the other iconic items.

Based on the performance of 4e, I think they are better served fixing what needed to be fixed in 1, 2 and 3 rather than roll in a bunch of things that lost so many customers to Paizo.

 

[Zustiur]

Like others here, I feel the +1 to +5 thing is a sacred cow.
However, I'd be happy to see the +X bonus on OTHER swords removed.
That'd make +X swords special straight away.

Sure, your flametongue does fire damage, but my +3 sword hits more often, and harder.

 

[gloomhound]

The game has got to have it's magic swords.

 

[Incenjucar]

Like others here, I feel the +1 to +5 thing is a sacred cow.
However, I'd be happy to see the +X bonus on OTHER swords removed.
That'd make +X swords special straight away.

Sure, your flametongue does fire damage, but my +3 sword hits more often, and harder.

Then nobody would ever use the fun items because they'd be horribly underpowered.

To-hit became king the moment that weapon-using classes weren't jokes.

 

[Mengu]

If I have a flaming sword, I have a flaming sword. I don't care if it's +1 or +6000. All that invokes my imagination is that the sword is engulfed in flames, and that flames leap from it as I swing it around, searing my enemies. +X is just a number that does nothing for me in the grand scheme of things. If it's absolutely necessary for some game elements to be defined around it, fine, it can exist. But I'd prefer if it didn't.

I also feel the +X weapons have a negative impact on the magic item selection front, the way 4e is laid out for instance. I feel disinclined to pick a level 9 weapon despite the fact that I might like the weapon properties, because the additional +1 I will get from a level 11 weapon is just better. So that's another reason I don't prefer to have +'s on weapons. Of course there may be other fixes to that particular issue in 4e, but they would have to be well thought out.

 

[Incenjucar]

If equipment is to advance at all, I'd like to see it advance with flat math the way characters are said to.

Rather than a +1 flaming sword being traded up for a +3 flaming sword, why not upgrade from a common flaming sword to an uncommon flaming sword by unlocking that sword's potential, and maybe, with the right quest, turning it into a rare flaming sword?

Even better, also include rules allowing characters to never bother with upgrading weapons, and instead to obtain ki-focus-like boons that allow them to modify any weapon they use to common/uncommon/rare quality of a certain type. Then no matter what the character is swinging, the true source of their might is themselves.

You can still have masterwork weapons and so forth - they can have utility functions outside of combat, special material functions, and extreme durability. Perhaps a masterwork adamantine sword, in addition to being nigh-unbreakable, also makes a fantastic crowbar, or mithral might be highly reflective, allowing it to be used like a mirror to peek around corners.

 

[Zustiur]

Then nobody would ever use the fun items because they'd be horribly underpowered.

To-hit became king the moment that weapon-using classes weren't jokes.

True, but that was sort of the point. Flaming swords would still be better against creatures which are vulnerable to fire...

I think my goal here is to avoid the comparisons between Sword +1 and Flaming Sword +1.
I want the rider effects to cost plusses, like they did in 3rd Ed, but with the cap at +5, not +10. What I mean is, you can chose between a flaming sword, or a +2 sword. A flaming sword +1 or a +3 sword. You can get a +5 sword, but not a flaming +5, because the flaming would cost 2 plusses. The best you could get would be Flaming +3.

I want characters/players to weigh up the options between a higher plus weapon with a lower plus weapon that has bonus effects. Often that will mean carrying more than one weapon.