Bane weapon = +7???

[jontherev]

Really? In my experience, clerics tend to go for the "sexier", more interesting, non-alignment domains, because they tend to reflect the aspects of their deities more than the alignment domains do.

J

Well, assuming I'm wrong about that, it's still beside the point unless you never allow pc's to buy magic items in large towns. They are both +2 enchantments, and in 99% of all campaigns, the Holy enchantment will be overbearingly more useful than Bane. IMO, Bane should either be lowered in power (slightly) and made a +1 enchantment, OR powered up a bit more for the +2 enchantment (or even make it a higher enchantment). Note, that I'm not suggesting Bane should be as good as a Slaying Arrow. As it stands, it's just way too weak in MOST campaigns to be a +2 enchantment.

However, something I just thought of may change this: it depends on what Bane the weapon is I think. A Bane weapon vs. humans or elves would most likely be MUCH more useful than, say, bane vs. oozes or constructs. Again, it depends on the campaign, but I doubt many campaigns have more oozes or constructs than humanoids. Given this, I suppose there should be a different enchantment for different banes to balance it out. But, this makes it quite complicated and would be campaign-specific. Still though, I'd be willing to bet that ANY bane weapon would be less useful than a Holy/Unholy weapon, some less than others.

 

[Mal Malenkirk]

What do you mean when you say "a neutral character can't wield" a holy sword? If he isn't losing the level, what's to stop him picking it up and swinging it?

Man, are you are a stickler for words!

I meant that they get a negative level like an evil character would. They are not pure enough.

So, yeah, they can wield it in theory but never do in practice. A negative level is harsh.

Happy now?

*sigh* I already edit my post often enough as it is in an effort to maintain clarity, but with you on my case I'll end up having to run them through a professional editor!

 

[kreynolds]

I meant that they get a negative level like an evil character would. They are not pure enough.

What are you smokin'? Just kidding, buddy. Only evil creatures/characters receive the negative level. Never do neutral. Besides, show me where in the description of the holy enhancement does it say neutral. Nowhere, just evil people. Maybe you forgot to mention "In my campaign" or "With my house rule"?

 

[Mal Malenkirk]

Maybe you forgot to mention "In my campaign" or "With my house rule"?

And maybe you forgot to read the whole thread?

I did say it was an houserule in a previous post.

 

[Victim]

Really? In my experience, clerics tend to go for the "sexier", more interesting, non-alignment domains, because they tend to reflect the aspects of their deities more than the alignment domains do.

J

I think that's generally true. However, certain prestige classes grant extra domains, so a character can start with the cool domains and then pick up a PrC such as Divine Disciple to get an alignment based domain. One of my characters has taken this route, primary to just to be able to make Holy weapons.

However, the Good domain is pretty solid. I'm getting much more use out of it than I thought I would.

One of the issues with Bane weapons is part of the way item pricing works. On average, a +1 Holy weapon is better than a bane weapon. Even though Holy kicks in only some of the time, we'll say that that's included in the price of 18k. Bane definitely isn't going to work most of the time, so a +1 Bane weapon will be worth 2k. However, when it does work, it rules, becoming the equivalent of a +5 weapon worth 50k. If the bane kicks in 1/4 of the time (or at least 1/4 of the time Holy does) then the average value is about 14k. That's not too good for a +2 enchantment on Bane. However, Bane weapons are the only way to get an enchantment bonus of more than +5. They also serve as a complement to a character that's probably already specialized in hunting a certain enemy, and thus are a little weaker to keep that character from completely dominating that enemy. Also, Bane weapons are very good against themed adventures. In those cases, the character is getting a +5 weapon for the price of a +3.

 

[jontherev]

I think that's generally true. However, certain prestige classes grant extra domains, so a character can start with the cool domains and then pick up a PrC such as Divine Disciple to get an alignment based domain. One of my characters has taken this route, primary to just to be able to make Holy weapons.

However, the Good domain is pretty solid. I'm getting much more use out of it than I thought I would.

One of the issues with Bane weapons is part of the way item pricing works. On average, a +1 Holy weapon is better than a bane weapon. Even though Holy kicks in only some of the time, we'll say that that's included in the price of 18k. Bane definitely isn't going to work most of the time, so a +1 Bane weapon will be worth 2k. However, when it does work, it rules, becoming the equivalent of a +5 weapon worth 50k. If the bane kicks in 1/4 of the time (or at least 1/4 of the time Holy does) then the average value is about 14k. That's not too good for a +2 enchantment on Bane. However, Bane weapons are the only way to get an enchantment bonus of more than +5. They also serve as a complement to a character that's probably already specialized in hunting a certain enemy, and thus are a little weaker to keep that character from completely dominating that enemy. Also, Bane weapons are very good against themed adventures. In those cases, the character is getting a +5 weapon for the price of a +3.

Some good points here, but I still think the average good party will fight MANY times over more evil enemies than one specific monster type. Also, many of the bane choices ARE evil, so the only advantage you would get here over holy is +2 to hit/damage/DR-overcoming. I think the assumption that you would meet your bane once out of every 4 evil enemies is way off. For example, how many dragons will your pc fight in his life? I think it would closer to 1% than 25%. I think Bane weapons are delegated to be back-up weapons with current rules. Of course, I'm speaking of an average campaign with a good mixture of different monster types.

 

[Victim]

Sure a dragon bane weapon won't be all that useful except in a rare few encounters, unless your high level game is like uber guild EQ. However, quite a creature types will come up much more freqeuntly. Undead, evil outsiders, any humanoid type, aberrations, and magical beasts all have a fair number of enemies and come up frequently enough. Giants can show up alot too. This smacks of metagaming, but most DMs have favorite monster types and a bane weapon against those can go a long way. Of course, if the characters keep running into the same monster type repeatedly, having a Bane weapon might be a smart thing IC too.

Also, a bane weapon can change player intentions. If a character found a Drowbane sword, he'd probably think of looking for some drow to slay. Of course, this effect depends quite a bit on motivations and current plot threads.

 

[Hypersmurf]

I meant that they get a negative level like an evil character would. They are not pure enough.

Ah, ah. I misunderstood what you meant by "immune to the effects of both".

I thought that was referring to the negative level - which was why I didn't understand why they couldn't wield it.

I take it by "immune to the effects" you mean when somebody hits them, they don't take the extra damage?

Now your rule makes sense to me My mistake.

-Hyp.

 

[Palskane]

Question

Let's say that I have a +3 longsword that is a bane weapon. Versus its bane creature type it is +5. Right? Well, what if the party cleric casts GMW upon it, making it a +5? Does the bane property then rise as well, going to a +7? Or does the GMW not affect the bane property?

That would seem pretty powerful. Thanks in advance for your answers.

 

[CRGreathouse]

It would be +7, just as if it was created as a +5 bane weapon.