Hexblade, Pact of the Blade, Improved Pact Weapon and Elemental Weapon

[Stalker0]

Normal stacking rules aside, pact weapon mentions that the bonus it provides doesn’t stack with a magic weapon bonus

 

[jgsugden]

Normal stacking rules aside, pact weapon mentions that the bonus it provides doesn’t stack with a magic weapon bonus

Improved Pact Weapon's bonus does not - Pact Weapon by itself - doesn't have any language about this as it gives no bonuses by itself. Improved Pact Weapon's restriction only applies if it is a Magic Weapon. Elemental Weapon does make the weapon a magic weapon, so thre improved stack does not apply...

But I still question the rules about whether a weapon's bonuses apply when it is used as an implement. The language under improved pact weapon and elemental damage is different... whle elemental weapon seems like a non-starter, improved pact weapon's language (is a spell cast using the weapon as an implement an attack roll/damage roll of the implement/weapon? What specific language in the books determines this?) has more amiguity.

 

[CleverNickName]

Recall that this is NOT A MAGIC WEAPON, but counts as one for several purposes. It is clear that it is not a magic weapon.

I look at it from the other side of the coin.

Recall that this is not a magic weapon, BUT COUNTS AS ONE. It's clear that it counts as a magic weapon.

 

[jgsugden]

I look at it from the other side of the coin.

Recall that this is not a magic weapon, BUT COUNTS AS ONE. It's clear that it counts as a magic weapon.

Except it specifies the exact limited purposes for which it counts as a magic weapon. There is a reason they do not just call it a magic weapon... it is to limit treating it as a magic weapon to just the specified limitations.

 

[CleverNickName]

Except it specifies the exact limited purposes for which it counts as a magic weapon. There is a reason they do not just call it a magic weapon... it is to limit treating it as a magic weapon to just the specified limitations.

But it can't specify every possible purpose, can it? That rule could also have been written to limit the weapon from every other non-specified situation in the game.

(shrug) This is all just game theory and speculation, though; things get weird when weapons, magic(ish) items, and spells start getting layered on top of each other. There are just too many possible combinations to consider. I think that's why it's ultimately up to the DM to describe the nature of magic in the game world, along with its limitations.

 

[jgsugden]

But it can't specify every possible purpose, can it? That rule could also have been written to limit the weapon from every other non-specified situation in the game.

Their options were to say one of the following:

1.) It is a magic weapon or counts as a magic weapon for all purposes,
2.) It is a magic weapon, but does not count as one for specified purposes,
3.) It is not a magic weapon, but specifies as one for specified purposes, or
4.) It is not a magic weapon and does not count as one.

They selected option 3. It was intentional and they reworked all of this language in errata/revisions for specific reasons to be exactly what it is today.

We can shrug at a lot of things - but here we know that specific language was intentionally implemented and that they were careful about what language they used.

 

[Sword of Spirit]

I would probably interpret the rule as effectively meaning the pact blade is a magic weapon. I don't see any strong reason to favor the other interpretation. I think the reason it is phrased as it is it that it is merely a conjuration of magical force, not a true item.

On the other hand, I'd just house rule Elemental Weapon to work on magic weapons because there is no balance reason it shouldn't, and I despise rules that require your weapon to be nonmagical to get an enhancement for no reason. The pluses won't stack though.

 

[BluejayJunior]

But I still question the rules about whether a weapon's bonuses apply when it is used as an implement. The language under improved pact weapon and elemental damage is different... whle elemental weapon seems like a non-starter, improved pact weapon's language (is a spell cast using the weapon as an implement an attack roll/damage roll of the implement/weapon? What specific language in the books determines this?) has more amiguity.

There is no ambiguity. The text does exactly what is says. Your attacks with the weapon get a +1 to hit and damage. There are no rules that say that using it as a focus lets you add that to your spell rolls. If that is what it meant, that is what would be said. Look at the Staff of the Magi. That item specifically says that it gives +2 to attack and damage rolls with the weapon and then further specifies that spells cast using it also get a +2 to hit.

 

[Dausuul]

So, your summoned/created weapon counts as magical for specifi purposes, but is not magical. You can use it as a focus and it gets +1 to hit and damage generally - but nothing makes it a magic weapon and the language specifies speifically that it is only sometimes a magic weapon (as in when you used your Pact abilities with an existing magic weapon). When you cast Elemental weapon, it is not a magic weapon and gets +2 to hit and +2d4 elemental (you choose) damage.

Is all of that right?

That is how I read it, yes.

If so, does the +2/2d4 damage go on top of the Improved Pact Weapon +1/+1 for to hit/damage?

No. While Improved Pact Weapon does not make the weapon magical per se, elemental weapon explicitly does. The weapon becomes a magic weapon that has a bonus to attack and damage rolls; thus, Improved Pact Weapon's bonus will shut off for the duration.

Now, we can also use the weapon as an implement. Does the Improved Pact Weapon and Elemental Weapon damage bonus to hit and damage apply to damage from an Eldritch Blast cast while using the weapon as an implement? The Improved Pact Weapon applies the bonus to the weapon/implement's attack and damage rolls ... are the spell attack rolls and damage rolls onsidered to be the weapon and damage rolls of the implement if the implement was used?

Nope. When you cast a spell using a focus, the attack and damage rolls belong to the spell. The focus is merely one of the components of that spell, replacing the material component.

The rod of the pact keeper is an example of a focus that does modify your spell attacks, and the language is written quite differently from magic weapons.

 

[Immoralkickass]

Recall that this is NOT A MAGIC WEAPON, but counts as one for several purposes. It is clear that it is not a magic weapon.

Your logic is wrong. The entire purpose of magic weapons is to overcome resistance or immunity to non-magical damage. So if Pact of the Blade states that your weapon counts as magical for that purpose, then it is a magic weapon.

Plus, you cant convince anyone that a weapon you can summon/dismiss with magic is not a magic weapon.

Gosh, rules lawyers these days.