Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="rushlight" data-source="post: 903095" data-attributes="member: 3801">Ok, this arose during our last session.&nbsp; Basically, it's a question of abilities constructed into a magic sword, versus similar (or duplicate) abilities temporarily placed onto the same sword.So, here's the situation.&nbsp; You've got a magic sword: a +1 defending, Brilliant Energy, Dancing Sword.&nbsp; Once constructed, no further magic abilities can be placed into the sword (barring Epic things) because it's at +10 - the maximum limit defined by the DMG.&nbsp; Then you cast Greater Magic Weapon on it. to give it an enhancement bonus of +5.&nbsp; So, what happens?&nbsp; If the spell exactly duplicates (and replaces) the enhancement bonus built into the sword, then you've got a +14 sword, and can use the full +5 for the Defending ability.&nbsp; But that's not legal, since you can't have a +14 sword.&nbsp; Another way to look at it would be that the Greater Magic Weapon spell would just fail, and no bonus would be gained.&nbsp; This also seems wrong, since the rules state that though identical named bonuses (in this case, an enhancement bonus) do not stack, and only the highest would be effective (the +5).&nbsp; Last, comes my decision.&nbsp; I ruled that while the spell was on the sword, it was a +5 to hit, +5 to damage sword.&nbsp; At the same time, only +1 could be used for the Defending ability, since that's the maximum bonus constructed into the sword.&nbsp; There's a reason that a +5 Defending sword would cost 72,000 gp.&nbsp; If you could duplicate that exactly for just 8,000 gp (a +1 Defender) and a fairly low level spell, then why would anyone ever spend the money for the actual sword?Essentially, I ruled that the two effects were seperate entities, and functioned differently.&nbsp; What to you folks think?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="rushlight, post: 903095, member: 3801"] Ok, this arose during our last session. Basically, it's a question of abilities constructed into a magic sword, versus similar (or duplicate) abilities temporarily placed onto the same sword. So, here's the situation. You've got a magic sword: a +1 defending, Brilliant Energy, Dancing Sword. Once constructed, no further magic abilities can be placed into the sword (barring Epic things) because it's at +10 - the maximum limit defined by the DMG. Then you cast Greater Magic Weapon on it. to give it an enhancement bonus of +5. So, what happens? If the spell exactly duplicates (and replaces) the enhancement bonus built into the sword, then you've got a +14 sword, and can use the full +5 for the Defending ability. But that's not legal, since you can't have a +14 sword. Another way to look at it would be that the Greater Magic Weapon spell would just fail, and no bonus would be gained. This also seems wrong, since the rules state that though identical named bonuses (in this case, an enhancement bonus) do not stack, and only the highest would be effective (the +5). Last, comes my decision. I ruled that while the spell was on the sword, it was a +5 to hit, +5 to damage sword. At the same time, only +1 could be used for the Defending ability, since that's the maximum bonus constructed into the sword. There's a reason that a +5 Defending sword would cost 72,000 gp. If you could duplicate that exactly for just 8,000 gp (a +1 Defender) and a fairly low level spell, then why would anyone ever spend the money for the actual sword? Essentially, I ruled that the two effects were seperate entities, and functioned differently. What to you folks think? [/QUOTE]

Verification