Ironwood sword, Market price ?

[Drawmack]

I believe the use freely portion of the spell 'Ironwood' is in reference to the removal of a druids abilities if they carry too much metal. Ironwood essentially creates a bastard sword that a druid -could- use and still keep their ability to shift and cast spells, provided, of course, they are proficient in the item created.

You logic that a bastard sword shaped club is a club is a bit faulty. A piece of wood shaped and weighted like a bastard sword is a bastard sword, not a club. The techniques for using a bastard sword vary from the techniques for using a club. The way each is held and swung are quite different. These differences are why the various proficiency feats are required.

Okay, so what does it become in an anti-magic field? What happens when it's hit with dispel magic? This is why I classify it as an enchanted club as opposed to a special bastard sword. Also I believe the rules do support that. Another point, while the tacticts may be different if you swing a bastard sword the way you would swing a club it will still do the damage of a bastard sword, correct and if you really analys it there isn't much difference between swinging a club and swinging a large sword.

I will say this is the best argument I've heard so far, but do you need any special proficiencies to use the lightening bolts shot from a magical sword. Isn't that a vastly different use of the weapon? By this logic that would require an exotic weapon prof.(sword that shoots lightening) feat. If you play your game this way then more power to you. If, as I suspect you do not, again we have an invalid argument against my assertion that an ironwood sword is simply a club.

 

[MarcoDelVespuchi]

"Okay, so what does it become in an anti-magic field? What happens when it's hit with dispel magic? This is why I classify it as an enchanted club as opposed to a special bastard sword. Also I believe the rules do support that. Another point, while the tacticts may be different if you swing a bastard sword the way you would swing a club it will still do the damage of a bastard sword, correct and if you really analys it there isn't much difference between swinging a club and swinging a large sword."

If it were hit with Dispel Magic or is placed in an Antimagic field, it would become a wooden bastard sword. I know there are rules for replica weapons. I'm fairly certain there are 'practice weapons' (Though I have been wrong before and it wouldn't surprise me if I were wrong again)

As for the differences between swinging the two weapons: You are right. You could, in theory, use the same swing for each. However, the bastard sword is optimized for a different type of swing. More of a slashing swing as opposed to the smash/crush swing of a club. An example of the differences: Swinging a baseball bat to hit the ball vs swinging an axe to chop wood. Yes, you can swing them both the same way, with the same power behind each swing, but you won't get the optimal effect from one of those. (depending on which type of swing you choose)This difference is reflected in the negative modifier applied to the attack roll. You can still swing the wooden bastard sword, but you aren't swinging it optimally.

As for the lightning bolts from a sword bit: This is not something I've ever encountered. However, it does sound as though that portion of the sword would cause said sword to be treated as a wand for purposes of that special ability alone.

Thanks
Dick

(Yes, my name is Dick. No, I'm not trying to piss anyone off.)

 

[Drawmack]

Originally posted by If it were hit with Dispel Magic or is placed in an Antimagic field, it would become a wooden bastard sword. I know there are rules for replica weapons. I'm fairly certain there are 'practice weapons' (Though I have been wrong before and it wouldn't surprise me if I were wrong again)

I have never seen this rules, could you provide a source and page number for these rules. I assume you're talking core rules as I am.

As for the differences between swinging the two weapons: You are right. You could, in theory, use the same swing for each. However, the bastard sword is optimized for a different type of swing. More of a slashing swing as opposed to the smash/crush swing of a club. An example of the differences: Swinging a baseball bat to hit the ball vs swinging an axe to chop wood. Yes, you can swing them both the same way, with the same power behind each swing, but you won't get the optimal effect from one of those. (depending on which type of swing you choose)This difference is reflected in the negative modifier applied to the attack roll. You can still swing the wooden bastard sword, but you aren't swinging it optimally.

That's not a fair comparison. The reason is your targets are changing size which throws another variable into the equation. A more fair comparison would be attacking an intruder with a baseball bat as opposed to using a bastard sword (sorry couldn't think of an improvised weapon that would really work like a sword). However this doesn't even hold up because the baseball bad has to be as hard and heavy as a bastard sword. I would say that if you take a professional baseball player, a fair comparison with a professional adventurer, and stick a wooden bastard sword in their hands and tell them to hit the attacker they will do a really good job of it. They'd probably be smart enough to use the blade edge too. However if you did the samething with someone trained with a bastard sword they would have trouble.

As for the lightning bolts from a sword bit: This is not something I've ever encountered. However, it does sound as though that portion of the sword would cause said sword to be treated as a wand for purposes of that special ability alone.

Where in the core rules does it state that. I refer you to the magic items section of your DMG.
Thanks
Dick

(Yes, my name is Dick. No, I'm not trying to piss anyone off.) [/B][/QUOTE]

 

[AGGEMAM]

Call me a nut, but I always took that sentance to mean that if the spell is used during the wooden item's creation process, that the finished item is permanently Ironwood.

Yup, me too!

 

[Deset Gled]

Okay let's follow your logic through. The material used to create a weapon does not control what type of weapon it is. So if I have a master woodworker create me a bastard sword from wood and then I use it in battle it will do the damage of a bastard sword? If this is the case I'll take 30 of em and you can keep the ironwood spell. If, as I suspect, it is not then you cannot use this chain of logic.

According to the PHB, p 266, weapons normally made of metal constructed out of wood are the same as normal weapons, except they give a -2 to all attack and damage rolls. Also, the wooden weapon will shatter and break on a roll of natural 1 or 2.

 

[Sejs]

So you're saying if I have a weapon that's the same length, balance, weight, and edge as a bastard sword, due to the application of the ironwood spell, that it would use the club prof instead of the bastard sword prof. I disagree. I'd say it would use the bastard sword prof - someone would be free to swing it like a club if they wished, but the normal -4 penalty would apply.


I agree with MarcoDelVespuchi in that I also believe that the "free use" assertation is in refrence to druids not losing their supernatural abilities thru use Ironwooded items.

Okay, so what does it become in an anti-magic field? What happens when it's hit with dispel magic?

The item would revert to normal wood. Using the bastard sword example, the weapon would become lighter (but not much), and would lose it's ability to keep an edge after repeated beating. The balance wouldn't change, as that's a function of the shape rather than the material. At a guess I'd probably give the weapon a -2 circumstance penalty to hit and damage unless the wielder had spend time training with the weapon both while and while not Ironwooded. If they had trained that way, I'd remove the penalty to hit, but not to damage. If the item was perminantly ironwood, via whatever means I'd say the ironwood property was suppressed ala a permenant magic item, rather than dispelled.

...do you need any special proficiencies to use the lightening bolts shot from a magical sword. Isn't that a vastly different use of the weapon? By this logic that would require an exotic weapon prof.(sword that shoots lightening) feat.

Lightning Bolts don't require an attack roll reguardless of their source - you pick an area and the lightning manifests in that area. If there was a sword that had the ability to project some missle that you had to hit with, I'd say it would require a ranged touch attack.

When you enchant a weapon giving it the power to fire, i.e. a sword that can shoot lightening bolts, you do not change the weapon type from melee to ranged. Additionally one type of sword does not become a nother type of sword due to an enchantment. Enchantments do not change the weaon in anyway other then to enhance it.

the Throwing enchantment would allow an otherwise melee-only weapon to be imbued with other enchantments that are restricted to throwing weapons. Distance and Returning for example.

This is the rules forum and the rules support the assertion that the bastard sword shaped club embued with the Ironwood enchantment remains a club, but it becomes a +1 club with different damage and criticals then a standard club

No, the rules support neither argument, heh, their rather ambiguous on the matter, which is why we have to discuss it amongst ourselves. ^_^



Edit: minor cleanup - spacing made a wierd line break

 

[Sejs]

According to the PHB, p 266, weapons normally made of metal constructed out of wood are the same as normal weapons, except they give a -2 to all attack and damage rolls. Also, the wooden weapon will shatter and break on a roll of natural 1 or 2.

I knew I was missing something. I totally forgot about the break chance. Thank you, Gled.

 

[Kae'Yoss]

I agree with Sejs.

Not the material of the weapon determines what proficiency you have to use it, but the shape. A club will always remain a medium-size weapon with 1d6 damage and x2 crit, which can be thrown with a range increment of 10 ft. You can have a large club with more damage, but then it's a large club.

If you now have something that does 1d10 damage as medium-size weapon, and has a 19-20/x2 crit, and cannot be effectively thrown, you don't have a club anymore, and you can't use your proficiency with the club. You fight differently with such a weapon.

Now the ironwood spell gives an wooden object the consistency of steel, but a bastardsword-shaped item still requires bastard sword proficiency.

There is a magic weapon that's a bastardsword but can be used like a short sword (the sunblade, as kreynolds mentioned), but that is not due to any ability out of the lists, like frost, but a special ability that only that single weapon (the sunblade) has. You could create other specific weapons that are one type but can be used with another proficiency, but I wouldn't make a standard +x weapon ability out of it. Before long, even wizards would have marcurial greatswords as a backup weapon, and had no problems wielding it, because it's a +1 mercurial greatsword of dagger (or a +1 dagger of mercurial greatsword, depending on how you do the ability), and wizards are proficient with daggers. If you do such a thing, the price should be more than +1, for it doesn't only allow druids to use weapons they normaly shouldn't, it also eliminates the need to get exotic weapon proficiencies. Feats should be worth more than a +1 enhancement.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Although isn't the "Proficient" weapon quality from A&EG a +1 modifier?

IDHTBIFOM.

-Hyp.

 

[Shard O'Glase]

Although this ridiculous price is due to 3rd ed's ridiculous habit of not distinguishing between spells which last 1 round per level (meaning that an item of permanent tenser's transformation would cost the same), and spells which last longer.

Just to pimp out the system I want more than any other this year. Arcana Unearthed is adding a line to the spell descriptors saying how an items cost should be modified if this spell were made into an item.