D&D 5E (2024) +3 Vicious Weapon/Flametongue?

I would go with something similar to 3.5e pricing.

2nd enchantment is +100% more expensive.

3rd enchantment is +200% more expensive.

4th enchantment is +300% more expensive

etc....

each enchantment is separate attunement slot if there is any, so max 3 of them, unless artificer is making an item for artificers only.

so, flametongue is +4000 GP
+3 weapons is +40000 GP
vicious is +4000 GP

we now get to
40000 + 8000(+100% for 2nd enchantment) + 12000(+200% for 3rd enchantment)

for total of 60000 GP for
+3 vicious flaming sword. 1 attunement slot
 
Last edited:

log in or register to remove this ad



Pop quiz,

Let's say you're out of attunement slots and can pick one of the following as your main weapon: +3, OR Vicious (both of which are attunement-free). Which one do you take?

P.S.: Don't let the under-current of anti-white-room analysis get to you. If there ever was a question that could benefit from theory crafting, this is one! Go all hog my fellow pro/amateur statisticians :ROFLMAO: :geek:
 

Pop quiz,

Let's say you're out of attunement slots and can pick one of the following as your main weapon: +3, OR Vicious (both of which are attunement-free). Which one do you take?

P.S.: Don't let the under-current of anti-white-room analysis get to you. If there ever was a question that could benefit from theory crafting, this is one! Go all hog my fellow pro/amateur statisticians :ROFLMAO: :geek:
+3. Can't do any damage if you don't hit.
 

What you are describing is more powerful than the Sword of Answering.
Legendary, with attunement.
The sword of answering is mechanically garbage.

Most legendary weapons are mechanically garbage, with most characters being better off with a VR +3 weapon or a nonplus Vicious

Comparing the +3 Vicious to one of the few good Legendary Weapons (Ascendent Dragon's Wrath Weapon), the drawbacks of the latter (attunement, having to maintain attunement or presence in a hoard) makes the comparison competitive.
 

Pop quiz,

Let's say you're out of attunement slots and can pick one of the following as your main weapon: +3, OR Vicious (both of which are attunement-free). Which one do you take?

P.S.: Don't let the under-current of anti-white-room analysis get to you. If there ever was a question that could benefit from theory crafting, this is one! Go all hog my fellow pro/amateur statisticians :ROFLMAO: :geek:
Vicious

Additional accuracy becomes meaningless far faster than additional impact.
 

Pop quiz,

Let's say you're out of attunement slots and can pick one of the following as your main weapon: +3, OR Vicious (both of which are attunement-free). Which one do you take?

P.S.: Don't let the under-current of anti-white-room analysis get to you. If there ever was a question that could benefit from theory crafting, this is one! Go all hog my fellow pro/amateur statisticians :ROFLMAO: :geek:
well, since +3 is 10x the price of vicious, I would take +3

now, +2 or vicious is a good question.

then I would take vicious, as it looks better for my greatsword to have 4d6 damage instead of 2d6+2.


off topic, I would remove all +X weapons and replace them with scaling Vicious weapons

Common: +1 damage
Uncommon: +1d6 damage
Rare: +2d6
Very rare: +3d6
Legendary: +4d6
 

I’m currently mulling over some homebrew solutions on how to give players that satisfying feeling of finding cool, high-tier loot without completely breaking 5e’s Bounded Accuracy over a long campaign. I want items to feel impactful, but I also want to avoid the "static high AC" problem where monsters can no longer hit the PCs.

I’m currently considering some options for a hybrid setup.

1: Decoupling "+" Bonuses from the d20 Roll​

Magic bonuses affect everything except the actual d20 roll to hit or defend.
  • Weapons (+1 to +3): The bonus applies strictly to damage, not to the attack roll. A +3 Longsword doesn't alter the fundamental probability of hitting the target, but rolling 1d8 + STR + 3 on a successful hit still feels great for the player.
  • Armor and Shields (+1 to +3): Instead of granting extra AC, the bonus is converted directly into Damage Reduction (DR). A piece of +2 Chain Mail provides its standard base AC, but reduces all incoming physical damage (or all damage) by 2 points per hit. It solves the high-AC breaker. Characters still get hit at a reasonable, scalable rate, meaning lower-CR monsters can still contribute to a fight. However, the player still feels like an absolute tank because minor attacks just glance off their DR.

Option 2: No Stacking​

When keeping +1/+2/+3 bonuses to AC and attack rolls, I need a counterweight to prevent math inflation while staying within a 5e framework.
  • Strict Typing & Attunement Limits: In PF1, you had Enhancement, Deflection, and Natural Armor bonuses that didn't stack within the same category. 5e often ignores this, which is how you end up with Bracers of Defense, a Ring of Protection, and a Cloak of Protection stacking to absurd heights. I'm considering a hard rule: you can only benefit from a single magic bonus to your AC at any given time, regardless of the source. Rare cases that stack requires attunment.

Option 3: Replacing Flat Bonuses with "Spendable Currency"​

Instead of flat, permanent bonuses, magic items could offer a limited resource pool used during combat.
  • Magic Dice Pools: A +2 Shield wouldn’t grant a static +2 AC. Instead, it contains 2 "Defense Dice" (like d4s or d6s, could scale for more powerful items) per short rest. When the character is hit, they can roll a die and add the result to their AC as a Reaction. It gives the player the exact same high-impact feeling of using cool loot, but because it requires resource management (a Reaction and a limited pool), the statistical average of the system stays intact over a full adventuring day. It prevents the passive, un-hittable AC wall.

Option 4: Horizontal Progression via Pathfinder-Style Qualities​

Instead of making items vertically stronger (+1, +2, +3), make them broader. That way I could lift the weapon and armor quality systems straight from PF1 (Flaming, Keen, Fortification, Spell Resistance) but adapting them to a simpler structure.
Instead of handing out a flat +2 sword, I’d award a sword with 2 quality points:
  • 1-Point Qualities: Adds 1d6 elemental damage (Fire/Cold), emits light, or allows a free skill check with Advantage once per day.
  • 2-Point Qualities: Ignores damage resistance, scores a critical hit on a 19-20 (Keen), or grants a single use of a Battle Master Maneuver per combat.
  • For Armor: Qualities like Light Fortification (25% chance to ignore extra critical hit damage), elemental resistance, or the ability to use a Reaction to step back 5 feet when an enemy misses an attack.
I was also thinking of using the pricing system from PF1, but halve bonuses. A +1 item gives zero bonus (but is magical), a +2 gives +1 etc. Think of something to reach +3 (maybe epic pricing.) Mulling over having the qualities (flaming etc.) cost double "plusses". But I'd have a pretty robust pricing system to start from.

Beauty - all the options can be combined and mixed. Thoughts?
 

Pop quiz,

Let's say you're out of attunement slots and can pick one of the following as your main weapon: +3, OR Vicious (both of which are attunement-free). Which one do you take?

P.S.: Don't let the under-current of anti-white-room analysis get to you. If there ever was a question that could benefit from theory crafting, this is one! Go all hog my fellow pro/amateur statisticians :ROFLMAO: :geek:
For me, the answer depends on how many attacks I get. More attacks, I would go vicious for extra damage. Less attacks and accuracy becomes more important, peaking with Rogue and their single attack per turn.

PS: I play quite a few level 11-16 games, and without at least a little accuracy boost I find myself missing a frustrating percentage of my attacks. I want at least the equivalent of a +2 weapon if I get 2 or fewer attacks, unless my (sub)class has an accuracy boost built in (like Devotion Paladin sacred weapon or Barbarian reckless attack).
 

Recent & Upcoming Releases

Remove ads

Top