D&D 3E/3.5 (3.5e) Stacking Special Abilities on Weapons

[Loren Pechtel]

There is a balance issue here--small resistances are more common than big resistances. Note the price of the versions that do give more than one die of elemental damage.

It seems to me that the problem can be eliminated by treating them separately.

Thus: A flaming flaming flaming weapon doesn't do 3d6 fire damage, but 1d6 fire damage, 1d6 fire damage, 1d6 fire damage. The target gets to apply it's fire resistance against each attack separately.

The one that bothers me is merciful. It's untyped damage.

 

[NEXxREX]

screw it go flaming, shock, corrosive, frost, screaming, psychokinetic

then you've got

1d6 fire damage
1d6 electricity damage
1d6 cold damage
1d6 acid damage
1d4 sonic
1d4 force damage

no matter what his resistance is he cant beat em all.

 

[HoboGod]

Now I admit my ignorance of Arcane Thesis, so if it somehow drops the bump from Empowered perhaps you could fit one in.

Yep, the Arcane Thesis feat reduces the cost of metamagic feats for a chosen spell by one. An Empowered Arcane Thesis Scorching Ray is a 3rd level spell slot. 5x Scorching Ray, each firing 3x rays dealing 6d6 damage. 5 times 3 times 6. 90d6.

Oh, and Lightning Bolt doesn't have a targeted creature of any kind as a "center". It's a line-effect spell.

Again, it's just a silly house rule of mine, it shouldn't be considered when arguing rules and balance. Just ignore that I even mentioned Lightning Bolt. I'm a dunce. ^_^

There is a balance issue here--small resistances are more common than big resistances. Note the price of the versions that do give more than one die of elemental damage.

It seems to me that the problem can be eliminated by treating them separately.

Thus: A flaming flaming flaming weapon doesn't do 3d6 fire damage, but 1d6 fire damage, 1d6 fire damage, 1d6 fire damage. The target gets to apply it's fire resistance against each attack separately.

Oh, very nice observation. Thank you kindly!

The one that bothers me is merciful. It's untyped damage.

Yeah, Merciful, Bane, and Vicious. Untyped and unchecked. I have problems with them in general. Especially Vicious, most players with damage reduction have no reason not to have that enchantment. So, I always rule that extra damage cannot be negated or reduced. None of my games have been broken by those special abilities yet, though. *shrugs*

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Yeah, Merciful, Bane, and Vicious. Untyped and unchecked. I have problems with them in general. Especially Vicious, most players with damage reduction have no reason not to have that enchantment. So, I always rule that extra damage cannot be negated or reduced. None of my games have been broken by those special abilities yet, though. *shrugs*

Bane is limited in it's targets, I've never seen it as a problem.

Likewise, vicious is a non-issue if you rule it can't be negated--and it certainly makes no sense to allow negation of backlash damage of any sort.

Merciful is the only one that has any real potential to be a problem.

 

[Greenfield]

One example comes to mind that throws the balance against, at least for me.

Double Keen.

My general feeling is that you can't stack like powers or abilities, regardless of rules lawyering, and I *know* that Keen effects don't stack. So my general gut feeling is that the right answer is "no", you can't stack the same effect multiple times.

 

[HoboGod]

Aye, right in the description it says, "This benefit doesn’t stack with any other effect that expands the threat range of a weapon. . . ." Pretty cut and dry. Keen is an effect that expands the threat range of a weapon, Keen can't be stacked upon itself.

Many special abilities are logically non-stackable by description.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

One example comes to mind that throws the balance against, at least for me.

Double Keen.

My general feeling is that you can't stack like powers or abilities, regardless of rules lawyering, and I *know* that Keen effects don't stack. So my general gut feeling is that the right answer is "no", you can't stack the same effect multiple times.

That one has a specific non-stacking provision in it.

 

[Androrc]

I think the effects shouldn't stack... because each effect is basically one "enchantment", with it's ritual, requirements and etc., and as such doing it twice would be like casting the same enhancement spell on yourself twice.

 

[Angrydad]

Yeah....I'd recommend just doing different energy types instead of stacking three Flamings on there, that way some beastie with immunity or high resistance can't just ignore it.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

Given that you can very easily make a Flaming Shocking Icing Longsword, I have no problem allowing a Flaming Flaming Flaming Longsword.

I'm not sure it's 100% by the rules, but it certainly isn't unbalanced (in most cases, it's weaker than the FSIL).