D&D 5E Karakan

[Caliban]

Are you claiming that the sword can affect any person it has been attuned to, even after they are no longer attuned to it? So this Bloodthirsty trait is now a "totally not a curse" effect that permanently changes anyone who has ever attuned to the blade. Yeah, that seems reasonable.

I say the bloodthirsty effect itself is nearly meaningless if it's a curse, and even more meaningless if it's not a curse because either way it's easy to sidestep. That is why it's broken. And you just now implied that the effect is in force regardless of attunement - which makes it broken in a completely different way.

And it's simple (under my original assumption that losing attunement removes any effect the weapon has on you - like every other similar item in the game...). "We are going to a dungeon or other very dangerous area tomorrow. I attune to the weapon after we wake up in the morning. I unattune to it before we sleep if we don't actually encounter anything that day."

I don't consider it an insult, but a statement of fact. That weapon is totally munchkin.

And far better people than you have called me a "lesser person" with far greater cause.

Besides, why is it so important that it be classified as Rare instead of Legendary anyway? Are you the DM giving this out to a PC? If so, the rarity isn't a big deal one way or the other.

Or are you going to be playing in a game where the DM has agreed to give you a Rare weapon of your choice? In which case, I stand by everything I said.

 

[Yunru]

Are you claiming that the sword can affect any person it has been attuned to, even after they are no longer attuned to it? So this Bloodthirsty trait is now a "totally not a curse" effect that permanently changes anyone who has ever attuned to the blade. Yeah, that seems reasonable.

I'm going to assume you're joking. But if you're not, I'll spell it out for you. Each day the sword doesn't feed, the DC increases. Whenever you wield or attune, you have to make a saving throw against that DC whatever it may be.

It doesn't effect you if you're not attuned. It effects itself, increasing it's DC.

Besides, why is it so important that it be classified as Rare instead of Legendary anyway? Are you the DM giving this out to a PC? If so, the rarity isn't a big deal one way or the other.

For balance, so it slots into tables and charts where it mathematically should.

 

[Caliban]

I'm going to assume you're joking. But if you're not, I'll spell it out for you. Each day the sword doesn't feed, the DC increases. Whenever you wield or attune, you have to make a saving throw against that DC whatever it may be.

It doesn't effect you if you're not attuned. It effects itself, increasing it's DC.

Really need to spell that out better, because it's not at all obvious from the original writeup or even your clarification. Almost like it wasn't the original intent.

For balance, so it slots into tables and charts where it mathematically should.

It's nowhere near where it "mathematically should be" because you don't value any of its properties properly.

I've shared my opinion of it, take it or leave it.

But, if you can talk a DM into actually giving it to you, have fun with it.

 

[Yunru]

Really need to spell that out better, because it's not at all obvious from the original writeup or even your clarification. Almost like it wasn't the original intent.

And yet, only you get the weird reading.

It's nowhere near where it "mathematically should be" because you don't value any of its properties properly.

"That's like, your opinion man."
I've walked you exactly through how I determined the rarity. All you've done is go "Nuh-uh."

"When accounting for the +3/+3, Vorpal only adds one degree of rarity." "Nuh-uh, it should be legendary."
(Because apparently adding approximately 1.8 damage per attack/5% instakill is, by itself, Legendary. And totally not the whole "+3/+3" part which by itself is Very Rare.)

"Heavy adds as much as finesse at a maximum, and finesse is considered a non-noteworthy property." "Nuh-uh."

etc.

I've shared my opinion of it, take it or leave it.

You've also been highly confrontational and insulting.

But, if you can talk a DM into actually giving it to you, have fun with it.

Good luck with that, I intend to be the DM handing them out

 

[Caliban]

And yet, only you get the weird reading.

Of the three people who have responded.

"That's like, your opinion man."
I've walked you exactly through how I determined the rarity. All you've done is go "Nuh-uh."

I've done a bit more than that, but whatever. Most of your "step by step' was "I don't think it changes anything".

"When accounting for the +3/+3, Vorpal only adds one degree of rarity." "Nuh-uh, it should be legendary."
(Because apparently adding approximately 1.8 damage per attack/5% instakill is, by itself, Legendary. And totally not the whole "+3/+3" part which by itself is Very Rare.)

I think the +3/+3 is part of the Vorpal quality. You are the one trying to min/max by separating the attack/damage out. That's not an insult - that is exactly what you are doing.

"Heavy adds as much as finesse at a maximum, and finesse is considered a non-noteworthy property." "Nuh-uh."

Heavy adds so much more than finesse. Your reasoning is nonsensical. It allows the use of the GWM feat with a one-handed weapon.

You've also been highly confrontational and insulting.

Yes, yes, I'm a horrible person.

Good luck with that, I intend to be the DM handing them out

Hey, if you think a sword that insta-kills on a crit, whose wounds cannot be healed by any means, and forces its wielder to bathe it in blood, and allows the use of the GWM feat while also using a shield isn't a legendary item, more power to you.

 

[cbwjm]

Man, I would not want to find this sword in a hoard. As soon as I picked it up, I'd probably attack the nearest party member. Does the DC cap out at a certain DC?

I'd probably make this legendary only because it sounds like it should be a one of a kind weapon although I guess there could be multiples of them given out to a company of reavers. As it is, the legendary tag doesn't really mean much anyway. It can be a singular item with no other sword like it and the PCs are still going to find it because the DM wants them to. Love the weapon, it has some cool ideas and is far more interesting than a +3 longsword.

 

[Yunru]

I think the +3/+3 is part of the Vorpal quality. You are the one trying to min/max by separating the attack/damage out. That's not an insult - that is exactly what you are doing.

No, I'm getting the value of Vorpal, by removing the parts that aren't unique to Vorpal.

Heavy adds so much more than finesse. Your reasoning is nonsensical. It allows the use of the GWM feat with a one-handed weapon.

And Finesse allows the use of Sneak Attack and dexterity.

Yes, yes, I'm a horrible person.

Well good, as long as we're on the same page

Hey, if you think a sword that insta-kills on a crit, whose wounds cannot be healed by any means, and forces its wielder to bathe it in blood, and allows the use of the GWM feat while also using a shield isn't a legendary item, more power to you.

Nope, that just sounds like exactly what I want most magic items to be, rather than boring ass +1/+1.

Legendary means there might only be one in the world. Rarity starts off at Common, and even then only the wealthy have them. There's two more degrees of rarity to Rare.

What I'm saying is I think we disagree because we disagree on what constitutes "Legendary".

 

[Yunru]

Man, I would not want to find this sword in a hoard. As soon as I picked it up, I'd probably attack the nearest party member. Does the DC cap out at a certain DC?

I'd probably make this legendary only because it sounds like it should be a one of a kind weapon although I guess there could be multiples of them given out to a company of reavers. As it is, the legendary tag doesn't really mean much anyway. It can be a singular item with no other sword like it and the PCs are still going to find it because the DM wants them to. Love the weapon, it has some cool ideas and is far more interesting than a +3 longsword.

You'd have to attune to it for it to affect you but no, theoretically it has an infinitely high DC cap. As a DM I'd recommend bathing the sword in blood the first time a character takes damage (or encourage greater use of Identify ).

 

[Istbor]

When you become attuned to or wield Karakan, you must make a Charisma saving throw against a DC of 12. If you fail, you become overcome by bloodlust, and must attack the nearest creature each turn. You can end the bloodlust by bathing the blade in blood as an action.
For each day that Karakan goes unfed, the saving throw DC increases by 1, until it is next fed.

I didn't read it as the DC counting up while unattuned either. I think the way it is written then may be a bit confusing as it starts out referencing attunement. Or I just read it too fast. Don't know.

To me it just feels like it has more going on that a rare weapon. And I agree, it being heavy may allow for usage of the Great Weapon Master feat for a pile of damage when this thing is swung. I don't know if that was the intention or not, but it just seems it would be very rare at least.

Aside from that, I like the blade. It is mean, and will be hard to resist using, if any characters are power hungry. I would be more inclined to hand it out at a determined time though, rather than as random loot from a roll. Something like this screams story, and it should be found around a pile of dead that all strove to possess it or fell victim to its thirst (such as both parties mortally wounding each other to a stale mate). Or something different, don't know, that was just off the tippy top of my head.

 

[Yunru]

When you become attuned to or wield Karakan, you must make a Charisma saving throw against a DC of 12. If you fail, you become overcome by bloodlust, and must attack the nearest creature each turn. You can end the bloodlust by bathing the blade in blood as an action.
For each day that Karakan goes unfed, the saving throw DC increases by 1, until it is next fed.

I didn't read it as the DC counting up while unattuned either. I think the way it is written then may be a bit confusing as it starts out referencing attunement. Or I just read it too fast. Don't know.

To me it just feels like it has more going on that a rare weapon. And I agree, it being heavy may allow for usage of the Great Weapon Master feat for a pile of damage when this thing is swung. I don't know if that was the intention or not, but it just seems it would be very rare at least.

I think the clutter is mostly because Sentient Magical Items aren't well laid out, although I could see it being bumped up to very rare (depending on how much being Sentient (but not Sapient) counts).

For the ability, I may (read: will) rework the wording then.

Would this suffice?
"When you become attuned to or wield Karakan, you must make a Charisma saving throw against a DC of 12 + the number of days it has gone unfed. If you fail, you become overcome by bloodlust, and must attack the nearest creature each turn. You can end the bloodlust by bathing the blade in blood as an action."