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

[Loren Pechtel]

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).

It's weaker if you treat it as 1d6 fire + 1d6 fire + 1d6 fire. If you let it do 3d6 fire it's stronger because it's a lot more likely to get through the resistance.

Personally, I wouldn't allow a flaming/icing weapon anyway--how can a sword be both hot and cold at the same time? (You could make one but you couldn't have both turned on at once.) This isn't a balance issue, it just feels wrong.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

It's weaker if you treat it as 1d6 fire + 1d6 fire + 1d6 fire. If you let it do 3d6 fire it's stronger because it's a lot more likely to get through the resistance.

But if you'd just made it a Flaming Shocking sword instead, then 1d6 would be subject to the target's Fire resistance, and 1d6 wouldn't be subject to it at all.

Or, in other words:

(1d6-5, min 0) + 1d6 >> (2d6-5, min 0)

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

I'd have no problem with a flaming x3 sword.

I have no problem with a flaming icy sword and the rules absolutely without question do not, either.

I have no problem with Merciful weapons. Lots of stuff is immune to nonlethal, even when it does work, 1d6 isn't really any better than +1 attack and damage normal enhancement would give, and unless the entire party is doing nonlethal it also has a hidden drawback -- magical healing of any kind heals an equal amount of lethal and nonlethal damage. Case A: You do 20 nonlethal over 2 rounds, the rest of the party does 30 lethal. Guy heals for 15, he erases 30 damage. Case B: Identical, but you do lethal. Guy erases 15 damage.

 

[Wyvernhand]

Screw +1 Flaming Flaming Flaming, I want +1 Wounding Wounding Wounding Wounding. Every time I hit you, you lose 4 Con. An average of 4-6 hits will kill all but the most hardy before other things like HP damage are even rolled.

Also, WRT Merciful...as Streams said, a few things are immune to non-lethal. Undead, Constructs, etc. That requires the user of the weapon to spend a standard action to turn the weapon "off" in order to actually deal real damage. Thats an action penalty in about 1 in 4 combats or so, depending on the game.

 

[HoboGod]

Wounding adds a +2 bonus. The max bonus you can add in special abilities is +5. So the most you can put of wounding into any magic weapon is two. That'd be only 2 Con damage from every hit.
Edit: Whoops, I was misreading, that +5 is for enchantment bonus, not special abilities. Disregard this post

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

You can have up to +9 in special abilities.

[Pre-Epic, of course.]

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Screw +1 Flaming Flaming Flaming, I want +1 Wounding Wounding Wounding Wounding. Every time I hit you, you lose 4 Con. An average of 4-6 hits will kill all but the most hardy before other things like HP damage are even rolled.

Also, WRT Merciful...as Streams said, a few things are immune to non-lethal. Undead, Constructs, etc. That requires the user of the weapon to spend a standard action to turn the weapon "off" in order to actually deal real damage. Thats an action penalty in about 1 in 4 combats or so, depending on the game.

Dual-wield two +2 wounding wounding wounding wounding weapons. OUCH!

 

[HoboGod]

I'm not quite convinced whether wounding stacks or overlaps, though. If Wounding causes constitution damage from blood loss, what makes multiple Wounding abilities cause greater blood loss from the same number of strikes? Even the wording of the text makes implications to that kind of thinking, it just states that it deals 1 point of Constitution damage, not +1 Constitution damage. On the other hand, it's an unnamed source and logically stacks, not overlaps. So conflicting! I tend to agree that the rules as intended would say Special Abilities weren't meant to stack. It adds some fun hypothetical stuff, though. ^_^

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I'm not quite convinced whether wounding stacks or overlaps, though. If Wounding causes constitution damage from blood loss, what makes multiple Wounding abilities cause greater blood loss from the same number of strikes? Even the wording of the text makes implications to that kind of thinking, it just states that it deals 1 point of Constitution damage, not +1 Constitution damage. On the other hand, it's an unnamed source and logically stacks, not overlaps. So conflicting! I tend to agree that the rules as intended would say Special Abilities weren't meant to stack. It adds some fun hypothetical stuff, though. ^_^

Multiple hits with wounding weapons will stack.

 

[Xakk]

Flaming sword of fiery flame made me think of the likely answer to this question:
If you use prices as a guideline, beyond single-bonus weapons you get into specific and then unique territory. That is to say, if you want a sword that does more than a single die of damage, it's going to have a name like fire shard or something. A lot of the specific weapons have crafting requirements listed, but there aren't ones for all the kinds of combinations required. So What I am guessing they want you to do is hand your DM a card with the desired effects of the weapon (3d6 fire damage, +4 init, etc.) and he works out what it would cost in gold and xp, what spells are needed, etc. I think there are guidelines for this in the DMG. I think they built it that way to make it easier for the DM to rule 0 anything that's too ridiculous. (4 con per hit? I think not, sir. Or invoking what I like to call rule one-half: "That much negative energy in one weapon invokes 2 negative levels on anyone wielding the weapon, until they get a mile from the weapon. Go for it.")