D&D (2024) Is Vicious the new Bloodclaw?

How's that for a clickbait title?

Vicious adds +7 avg damage on a rare weapon with no attunement, and no limits on how often it gives the bonus or how many vicious weapons you can own. That's the same rarity as a +2 weapon, which isn't in the same league, especially since bonuses to hit are so easy now. Think about a pair of vicious weapons, one with the nick property, on a TWF with hex.

If you think it needs changing, how would you change it?

If you don't think it needs changing, no need to post - thank you!

Following the bloodclaw example, it could require attunement, act like some other magic items in that you cannot have more than one vicious weapon, and confer its bonus only once per turn. Is that still too powerful for a rare weapon? Would it also need to be very rare? Or would the bonus also need to be limited to "proficiency bonus number of times per day?"

Level 6 fighter, Fey-Touched feat at 4, Dual Wielder feat at 6, 18 Dex build, and two vicious scimitars:

Attack action: first attack 1d6 scimitar +2d6 vicious +1d6 hex = 4d6+4
Free attack from light/nick: 4d6
Bonus action attack from dual wielder: 4d6
Extra attack from Fighter 5: 4d6+4

One turn: 16d6+8 = 64 average damage, with a bonus action set-up time, at level 6.
Enemy dies: bonus action to move hex while you reposition. Don't like Fey-Touched? 1-level dip into Ranger does the same thing with Hunter's Mark (or Warlock for Hex again).

Oh but a level 6 fighter would never have two rare items? Ok: level 11, with 20 Dex, and the TWF feat at 8.
Attack action: first attack 1d6 scimitar +2d6 vicious +1d6 hex = 4d6+5
Free attack from light/nick: 4d6+5
Bonus action attack from dual wielder: 4d6+5
Extra attack from Fighter 5: 4d6+5
2nd extra attack from Fighter 11: 4d6+5
Now it's 20d6+25 per turn. That's 95 average damage. (Plus any 4d6+5 opportunity attack.) Disintegrate is a 6th level spell that does 75 average damage - except it can only be cast once by a level 11 caster, and this vicious fighter can do this all day.

evilbob said:

If you think it needs changing, how would you change it?

Click to expand...

I think it needs changing, by adding attunement.

I have added 2 vicious weapons to the game. Ones on a 2014 monk. Others on a sword and board champion.

Basically "weak" builds. The effects mostly fine but they're under priced. Very rare is probably the correct rarity. Or scale the damage down to 1d6.

Originally they did 1d6 damage to the wielder in 3E iirc.

Could also be a band aid for martials. Attunement seems to hurt them more. Designers over used attunement imho.

Same rarities with attunement a caster can have 3 +2 items buffing DCs and attack rolls.

Two vicious weapons and +1 armor or +2 shield vs +6 spell DC and attack rolls with attunement. Care factor 0.

I am careful what I put vicious on. Dagger or spear sure. Great weapon or short sword not so much.

RAW DM seems to have lost control over magic item creation.

I'm running a BG3 inspired game with more magic items. Close to 2024 magic item tables tbh.

Everyone's maxed attunement slots so more magic items players don't care to much unless it's an upgrade. Cleric for example has amulet of devotion, gauntlets of ogre power and a dagger that deals 1d4 poison damage. Light Cleric barely uses weapons so not much power creep.

Game probably needs more items not needing attunement espicially martial ones tbh. Vicious is a bit of an oops. Unless players are really aware of item creation rules its not a big deal yet.

A dual wield champion might get a pair by level 12 one will be a dagger though.

Vicious longbow could also be added. What you're adding and whe matters. Dual Wielding has sucked for 25 years so not worried about double vicious weapons

DM does control treasure/gold though of PCs insist on crafting.

BTW bloodclaw what's that?

Zardnaar said:

BTW bloodclaw what's that?

Click to expand...

Bloodclaw was an infamous 4e weapon enchantment that was wildly imbalanced and the clear best choice for any class that used a weapon to hit things. (Similarly: in 4e, RAW was that players had a large amount of control over what items they got.) You could do up to 6 damage to yourself (depending on the +X of the weapon) to do x2 that damage to an enemy, or x3 for two-handed weapons. So -6 damage to you, +12 or +18 damage on your hit. 4e HP was like 5.5: you had plenty, and healing was everywhere. The damage to you meant nothing, but the damage output of the weapons was mechanically better than anything else in the game. It eventually got "patched" by making it only work once per battle (recharge on a short rest would be the 5.5 mechanic). Even afterwards it was still a top choice.

Vicious is similar because it is a mechanically superior choice for any class that can use a weapon effectively, which is all of them. Given a choice, you should always pick a vicious weapon. Always. It outperforms legendary weapons. A quick check and it seems to be better than any legendary weapon in the 2024 DMG, all of which require attunement.

I agree with you that "attunement" seems to be the way the designers have chosen to balance magic items, and it's both a blessing (because inexperienced DMs can't get too far into trouble) and a curse (because... fewer cool items).

I don't think attunement alone solves "vicious" weapons, or making it "very rare." Even with attunement it's still better than many legendaries. Adding both attunement AND making it legendary would do the trick, IMO. It would also be nice to figure out a way to make a "rare" version.

evilbob said:

Now it's 20d6+25 per turn. That's 95 average damage. (Plus any 4d6+5 opportunity attack.) Disintegrate is a 6th level spell that does 75 average damage - except it can only be cast once by a level 11 caster, and this vicious fighter can do this all day.

Click to expand...

Clearly… we need to buff the casters so they won’t be so terribly overshadowed by martials any more.

Zardnaar said:

BTW bloodclaw what's that?

Click to expand...

4e magic weapon, any type of weapon works. 1/encounter (as a free action when you hit a target), you take damage up to its enhancement bonus, and deal 2x that damage to the target you hit (3x for a weapon wielded with both hands). The damage you take can't be reduced nor prevented in any way (but it can still be applied to THP first).

I don't think it's even remotely comparable--Vicious is hands-down better, unless you need the accuracy bump. Vicious is literally just...any time you hit, you do +2d6 damage, no cost, no limit. Bloodclaw was certainly powerful for a 4e weapon (especially for specific classes that naturally generate lots of THP, e.g. certain Barbarians or Paladins), but a 1/enc +2 to +12 damage has nothing on +7 average damage on every successful swing. In 5e, it's the equivalent of gluing a greatsword to any weapon with this enchantment.

It's certainly powerful for a Rare weapon enchantment in 5e. I'd expect it to either get bumped up one rarity category, require attunement, get reduced to only +1d6 damage rather than +2d6 damage, or some combination of those things.

Audiomancer said:

Clearly… we need to buff the casters so they won’t be so terribly overshadowed by martials any more.

Click to expand...

I mean, I don't think that's the case at all.

It is still possible for spellcasters to be in general more powerful than martials...and for a thing that only really works for martial characters to be noticeably out of line.

EzekielRaiden said:

4e magic weapon, any type of weapon works. 1/encounter (as a free action when you hit a target), you take damage up to its enhancement bonus, and deal 2x that damage to the target you hit (3x for a weapon wielded with both hands). The damage you take can't be reduced nor prevented in any way (but it can still be applied to THP first).

I don't think it's even remotely comparable--Vicious is hands-down better, unless you need the accuracy bump. Vicious is literally just...any time you hit, you do +2d6 damage, no cost, no limit. Bloodclaw was certainly powerful for a 4e weapon (especially for specific classes that naturally generate lots of THP, e.g. certain Barbarians or Paladins), but a 1/enc +2 to +12 damage has nothing on +7 average damage on every successful swing. In 5e, it's the equivalent of gluing a greatsword to any weapon with this enchantment.

It's certainly powerful for a Rare weapon enchantment in 5e. I'd expect it to either get bumped up one rarity category, require attunement, get reduced to only +1d6 damage rather than +2d6 damage, or some combination of those things.

Click to expand...

Vicious was in 3.5. Originated there. Even made it into the minis game.