Cost to add +1 ability to Specific Weapon

[pawsplay]

If it's a magical ability then it can be added to other magic items with virtually no restrictions. A flat "no" hardly counts as "virtually no restrictions." And once it is added to another magic item, then it would exist outside the Crystal Echoblade.

That's abuse of English. It doesn't say "you can add anything to anything." It says only that you won't be prevented from adding something. It still has to be something you can add. You cannot, for instance, add a property to a longsword that gives +4D6 RKA AP, because that's a Hero System game statistic.

I have yet to see a specific cite IN THE RULES (not really horrible examples) that states you can ignore the cost of OTHER WEAPON QUALITIES when you upgrade a weapon.

By the logic that has been presented so far, I should be able to upgrade a +1 flaming keen longsword as though it were a +1 flaming longsword, and treat the keen property as an add on cost.

The echoblade's bonus is not a SLA, not an ability score bonus, not a bonus to something else... it's a weapon quality.

 

[hong]

That's abuse of English. It doesn't say "you can add anything to anything." It says only that you won't be prevented from adding something. It still has to be something you can add. You cannot, for instance, add a property to a longsword that gives +4D6 RKA AP, because that's a Hero System game statistic.

Are we having fun yet?

I have yet to see a specific cite IN THE RULES (not really horrible examples)

Point me to anybody who has come up with an example as horrible as using a statistic from ANOTHER GAME SYSTEM. Oh, whoops, that was you.

By the logic that has been presented so far, I should be able to upgrade a +1 flaming keen longsword as though it were a +1 flaming longsword, and treat the keen property as an add on cost.

No, silly, because the keen property already has a listed cost, as a plus. Try again.

 

[hong]

Seeking is a magical ability. If you attempt to apply it to a melee weapon, you get a flat 'no'.

Heavy Fortification is a magical ability. If you attempt to apply it to... well, any weapon at all, you get a flat 'no'.

Thankfully, noone has yet made mention of adding armour enchantments to a weapon.

Can all magical abilities be added to other magic items with virtually no restrictions? Or can magical abilities appropriate to the item in question be added to other magic items with virtually no restrictions?

Why is it inappropriate to make a +1 crystal echoblade +2?

 

[pawsplay]

Point me to anybody who has come up with an example as horrible as using a statistic from ANOTHER GAME SYSTEM. Oh, whoops, that was you.

Why do I have to do that? The fact that I can come up with something more ridiculous doesn't make it any less ridiculous to use a relic as an example of a straightforward power up, especially one that jukes a number of guidelines suggested in the DMG that AFAIK have not been explicitly deprecated by the MIC, such as items being restricted to certain characters or abilities as being discounted.

No, silly, because the keen property already has a listed cost, as a plus. Try again.

So because a property does not have a listed cost, it is not relevant? That's your refutation?

This whole thing started with "what is the cost of a flaming crystal echoblade," which is really another form of the question "what is the cost of the echoblade property?"

Saying the echoblade property has no listed cost and therefore can be ignored in the calculation really begs the question, doesn't it?

 

[hong]

Why do I have to do that? The fact that I can come up with something more ridiculous doesn't make it any less ridiculous to use a relic as an example of a straightforward power up, especially one that jukes a number of guidelines suggested in the DMG that AFAIK have not been explicitly deprecated by the MIC, such as items being restricted to certain characters or abilities as being discounted.

That makes no sense at all.

So because a property does not have a listed cost, it is not relevant? That's your refutation?

Well, someone's confused here....

This whole thing started with "what is the cost of a flaming crystal echoblade," which is really another form of the question "what is the cost of the echoblade property?"

Saying the echoblade property has no listed cost and therefore can be ignored in the calculation really begs the question, doesn't it?

No, silly, I'm saying that the basic principle is "add the plusses and then add the special stuff". You are claiming that this basic principle falls down because you could apply it to the process of upgrading a +1 sword to a +1 keen sword and treat the keen bit as "special stuff". However, your claim is dumb because the keen property already has a pre-existing rule for calculating cost, and that rule says to treat it as a plus. There is no similar rule for the echoblade property, and so nothing is contradicted by treating it as "special stuff".

Further, the basic principle of "add the plusses and then add the special stuff" is recommended in MIC for all other types of plusses, whether saves, skills, stats, or whatnot. And hence the claim that it's inconsistent to apply it also to weapons (and armour) is also silly. It may not be to your taste, but it's certainly consistent.

Is that clearer?

 

[Mistwell]

 

[Cheiromancer]

Can all magical abilities be added to other magic items with virtually no restrictions? Or can magical abilities appropriate to the item in question be added to other magic items with virtually no restrictions?

Why is it inappropriate to make a +1 crystal echoblade +2?

If I understand Hypersmurf correctly, the question was whether it was appropriate to make a +1 katana into a +1 crystal echokatana. That is, whether crystal echo could be added to other items. He accepts that you can add special abilities to an item that already has the crystal echo property. Similarly a Dwarven Thrower can get extra abilities, but only a +2 warhammer can get the dwarven thrower ability (which increases its enhancement bonus, adds the returning ability and more damage against giants). Not a dagger or a sword or a mace; only a +2 warhammer. And only a +3 frost greatsword can get the frost brand ability, and so on.

 

[Mistwell]

If I understand Hypersmurf correctly, the question was whether it was appropriate to make a +1 katana into a +1 crystal echokatana. That is, whether crystal echo could be added to other items. He accepts that you can add special abilities to an item that already has the crystal echo property. Similarly a Dwarven Thrower can get extra abilities, but only a +2 warhammer can get the dwarven thrower ability (which increases its enhancement bonus, adds the returning ability and more damage against giants). Not a dagger or a sword or a mace; only a +2 warhammer. And only a +3 frost greatsword can get the frost brand ability, and so on.

There are a lot of sources for the rule we are talking about. The paragraph above the specific armor section in the MIC. The paragraph above the specific weapon section in the MIC. The paragraph about relics in the MIC. The paragraph about imrproving magic items int he MIC. And the paragraph in the DMG about improvements.

All seem to be saying the same thing: you can improve a specific item. So far, I have seen nothing that says you can remove a specific item ability and apply it to a different item. There may be strong flavor reasons for this (we went to all the trouble of making a lovely picture of an echoblade, and it's a BLADE darnit, not a club, and when we someday make a novel mentioning this item or a miniature or a comic book or movie or TV show, we want it recognizable as an echoBLADE, not an echoCLUB), or it may just be an aspect they have not thought about. But so far, the rule seems to favor improving existing listed specific items and not adapting their special abilities to other items.

 

[Hypersmurf]

The first. (Note that upgrading it to +3 or adding keen doesn't change what a paladin gets, a +5 holy weapon).

But the Axe of Ancestral Virtue functions as a non-magical weapon except under special circumnstances, doesn't it?

So surely upgrading it to a Flaming weapon doesn't change what the lawful good, lawful neutral, or neutral good character gets - +1 keen adamantine weapon?

If the Holy Avenger is treated as a +2 weapon (which is cooler in certain hands) for pricing purposes, why isn't the Axe of Ancestral Virtue treated as a non-magical weapon (which is cooler in certain hands) for pricing purposes?

-Hyp.

 

[Mistwell]

But the Axe of Ancestral Virtue functions as a non-magical weapon except under special circumnstances, doesn't it?

So surely upgrading it to a Flaming weapon doesn't change what the lawful good, lawful neutral, or neutral good character gets - +1 keen adamantine weapon?

If the Holy Avenger is treated as a +2 weapon (which is cooler in certain hands) for pricing purposes, why isn't the Axe of Ancestral Virtue treated as a non-magical weapon (which is cooler in certain hands) for pricing purposes?

-Hyp.

Smurf, I just gotta ask. What does this have to do with the actual Axe of Ancestral Virtue? The paragraph says it's a rule for all magic items, and then it just is giving an example of some item to show how the cost works. It really literally could have been any item at all in the example. That's why it's an EXAMPLE. If it happened to be a unique example, there would be no reason to use it for a general example like that (in fact there would be lots of reasons to not use it). So we know for sure it's NOT about that friggen axe! Why do you keep bringing up the axe itself? You gotta know you're using a strawman every time, right?