"Mageslaying" weapon ability - this looks freaky..

[uzagi_akimbo]

Among a lot of great and some not so great stuff, "Complete Arcane" lists two new weapon enchanments which make me rather nervous..
" Magebane " - this adds the normal "bane" ability onto the weapon with a twist - instead of a specific race, now anyone "with arcane spell's currently prepared or spell slots available to cast arcane spells without preparation, or against creatrues with the ability to use arcane spell-like abilities...." is a target of the +2 enhancement and +2D6 Damage/hit.
Now this would include not only all sorcerer, wizards, warlocks, hexblades, bards etc. (which might be the intention - but it really makes some multiclass builds rather dangerous ), but also a shockful of other things. BTW, it is not even stated that the spell-like ability must be innate, so someone with an item-bound spell-like ability may just be fair game, too.
- almost every non-elemental outsider (and many elementals, too )
- most dragons
- many magical beats
- almost all feys
- many (most of the really dangerous ones) aberrations
- several constructs and golems
- many (mostly the more capable ones ) undead
- several giants
- a vast number of races, such as drow, duergar, gnomes (even the standard PHB ones), most other underdark races, all plane-touched races, giths.....

.... all with the same single enhancement... so for a 8000gp investement I can get myself the swiss army knife of "slaying" weapons - "one sword to chop them all" ? Or have it made by the party's cleric/enchanter... for half that ? After all, the spell prequsite for crafting this is merely "Dispel magic"... and CL 8 .....

Now, this seems excessively powerful to me, as it is far more extensive then a simple "racial/category" bane. To add insult to bewilderment, this power is also cheaper than a normal "bane", being listed (twice) as only a "+1" enchantment. I mean who is going to have a "Sword of Demon-/Dragon-/Feybane" made for himself, if he can get a far more universally applicable and cheaper to boot "magebane" weapon ? While I like the power as an idea (aka " a weapon deadly to arcane casters" ), this is so broken it physically hurts.

Or am I missing something major here ?


The second troublesome weapon ability is "Clouting", a +3 enchantment.
Any succesful hit with such a weapon forces the target to make a Fort DC 19 check or be knocked 10' backwards. If such movement is impossible he falls prone if the save is failed. For one, this does basically the same as "Knockback", a +3 enchantment from CW, but "knockback" only causes a Bull Rush check (which is more complicated, yet fairer on many large and massive creatures - I mean large and even huge zombies with tremendous mass don't have all that great Fort save...) and can only be applied to missile weapons. For one, this solves the obvious question if the weapon's wielder actually gets an AoO if he knocks an opponent 10' away, hence causing him to leave a threatened square or what happens if another creature/character blocks the path to the target square...
So with clouting we have an equally priced, very similar weapon ability which is both broader in scope (can be applied to any weapon ) and is generally more powerful against most opponents, especially those with good Str and mass, but weak Fort save (like, say some golems, undeads... ).

To me this looks just like another clear "must buy" over its direct rules-equivalent.

Again, am I missing something inthe rules here taht actually balances thses two abilities ?

Just where the heck was, if it even exists (after looking at the Warlock core-class I severly doubt such a position exists at WotC anyway ) the rules-balance, editing and testing on this one ? Do they check if something they publish hasn't already been published for the same edition with different, yet functional rules ? I mean, after all CW was published roughly within a year of CA, same edition, non-setting specific.... same series of books even !

 

[BAW]

Simple question

How many of those properties you just mentioned (bane and knockback) do PC's actually put on their weapons?

In the campaigns I've played in, it is very rare. In fact such items end up in the party equipment because they were found, not bought.

Clouting vs Knockback:
Personally a save rather than a check at least gives the chance that a creature could fail. How many times does a PC try to bullrush an opponent? Due to the levels these enchantments ares available Knockback is relatively worthless at least with Clouting there is a chance.

Mageslaying looks like a viable alternative to just adding another +1 enhancement bonus to your weapon.

What it does not do is help against most foes which are (or can be) melee orientated. Such as fighters, clerics, druids and creatures which are designed to go toe-to-toe with a party.

So this is a property which might be worthwhile 1/2 the time, provided that we can tell which spell-like abilities are arcane and which are divine.

Compared to what else is on offer it seems fair.

Note: I think the bane enhancements in the DMG are underpowered as they don't give a weapon the ability to bypass damage reduction and neither does Mageslaying.

 

[Marimmar]

Well unless 'Clouting' can be put on a missile weapon, I cannot find it overpowering since most monsters have very good Fort saves and won't be affected by it. I don't know about your campaign but mage bane isn't that powerful either, holy is much more dangerous because of the frequency of evil critters and the ability to bypass a demon's/devil's damage reduction. (Maybe you need another component but you've at least bypassed one requirement)

IMC there is no such thing as creating/buying magic items so I don't have any problems at all with possibly overpowered abilities. My only concern is with class abilities that are unbalancing.

~Marimmar

 

[Taren Seeker]

Bane and Mageslayer are both +1.

I also don't think MS is overpowered. The Bane line is always double edged...you spend time agonizing over what to choose then you spend time agonizing over what you didn't choose during a tough fight

Most people I know would still go for holy and more energy enhancements.

 

[uzagi_akimbo]

How many of those properties you just mentioned (bane and knockback) do PC's actually put on their weapons?

In the campaigns I've played in, it is very rare. In fact such items end up in the party equipment because they were found, not bought.

Clouting vs Knockback:
Personally a save rather than a check at least gives the chance that a creature could fail. How many times does a PC try to bullrush an opponent? Due to the levels these enchantments ares available Knockback is relatively worthless at least with Clouting there is a chance.

Knockback produces a "Bullrush" effect as a free, accompanying effect. This can be extremely dangerous due to the simple fact that a single archer can/will land a multitude of hits on a single target which can push the target through a numebr of threatened squares, producing AoOs. No disadvantage for the archer - and yes, its expensive. But in the campaign where it actually is being used atm, it proves devastating, by pushing (humanoid) opponents into dangerous areas (like overboard, off bridges, into the line of charge of other characters, herding opposition into a the AE effect of a spell - in addition to forced movements through the AoO area of the reach weapon + "Combat Reflexes" tank). Exceedingly useful, and the sole balancing factor being it is limited to a missile weapon, hence the need to shoot several times to put some unlucky git into a specific place.

Mageslaying looks like a viable alternative to just adding another +1 enhancement bonus to your weapon.

What it does not do is help against most foes which are (or can be) melee orientated. Such as fighters, clerics, druids and creatures which are designed to go toe-to-toe with a party.

Ah, so I take it, your characters are never actually facing any opposition using teleport (arcane exclusive spell ), Dimension Door (same), Invisibility (same), spider climb (same), alter self( same) disguise self (same), charm person (same) petrification (same) minor/major/silen image (same) or such as spell-like abilities. Like almost every demon, devil, demodand, intelligent elemental, planar, leonal, ghaele, guardianal, solar, slaad or inevitable does?
Just "evil" guys - never anyone of neutral disposition who happens to strongly disagree with their approach ?
A magebane weapon is basically a weapon of "slay any magic using being" - a very broad category that include some of the toughest melee monsters around. You get "bane" vs. several humanoid races (good or evil) for free on top. Bane vs. aberrations (most). Bane vs. Vampires, Liches, Ghosts etc. ... chekck, got it, too- Bane vs. many golems , too. All Dragons from juvenile age up (usually the more dangerous ones ) are eligible as targets, too, unless your GM is of the opinion that even younger dragons have innate sorcerous abilities, even if not yet developed, and are as such vulnerable from birth.
Giants - Hags, Cloud Giants, Storm Giants, the works. Most monsters having "charm person/monster" or "suggestion" in their repertoire...

That's a huge bunch of monsters you have to go up against toe-to-toe most of the time.
Don't you think a "Bane vs. devils" weapon or "bane vs. undead" is the worse deal for the same enchantment cost ?

And of course, unlike a holy/unholy/axiomatic/anarchic weapon, anyone of any alignment can use it without penalty. Such as an evil guy going for some BBEG.
And of course, it doesn't go all useless like a "holy" weapon if you face a slaad or other nastiness from Limbo. Or some fey creature who happens not to be evil... Or that summoned Djinn coming for you.

So this is a property which might be worthwhile 1/2 the time, provided that we can tell which spell-like abilities are arcane and which are divine.

??????
Very few beings that do have spell-like abilities do not have arcane ones among them. Because according to the MM-I, page 315, "a monster's spell-like abilities are assumed to be the sorcerer's/wizard's version."
Actually it's quite easy to find out which one's are divine, namely those exclusive to clerics and druids, and hardly any others. Therefore, a rather big bunch of monsters are viable targets for the "magebane" enhancement... I do not think your assessment of 1/2 the time/opposition is even close (but that might vary depending on your campaign ) - and I would claim far less usage for "holy" weapons, or any other specific "baneweapon" due to the fact that far too many things commonly fought are neutral or of the wrong monstrous subtype.

Compared to what else is on offer it seems fair.

hmm, compared to a "flaming" weapon ? Or a "shock" weapon ? Looking at most opposition around I would certainly take "mage-bane".. twice, if that was possible....

Note: I think the bane enhancements in the DMG are underpowered as they don't give a weapon the ability to bypass damage reduction and neither does Mageslaying.

Given the fact that any "bane" weapon will add +2 (enhancement increase) +2D6 points of damage to every applicable attack, in a way it cancels out app. 9 points of DR instantly on every hit - with few monsters having more than 10/xxx DR in the first place, so their power is quite ok, but that's just me. Given that you can stack "bane" abilities (if all of them would apply to the target - and you can make some clever deductions ), chuck a "Baneblade" spell (clerical 3rd level ) on your trusty slashing weapon and have at it. For like +4+ 4D6 with a "Magebane" blade with an additional "demonbane" property (and be it by a simple spell ). "Align Weapon" (2nd level clerical spell ) helps out with the Alignment-DRs...
Nopes "bane" is actually priced pretty correct

 

[uzagi_akimbo]

Well unless 'Clouting' can be put on a missile weapon, I cannot find it overpowering since most monsters have very good Fort saves and won't be affected by it. I don't know about your campaign but mage bane isn't that powerful either, holy is much more dangerous because of the frequency of evil critters and the ability to bypass a demon's/devil's damage reduction. (Maybe you need another component but you've at least bypassed one requirement)

IMC there is no such thing as creating/buying magic items so I don't have any problems at all with possibly overpowered abilities. My only concern is with class abilities that are unbalancing.

~Marimmar

"Clouting" can be put on any weapon, yes. As for the fort save - the DC is 19, and given that in mid to high level play any character will usually strike with multiple hits each round (especially with a missile weapon), even if you have a 50% chance to save, the probability stacks up against the target, very fast. And if you cannot be moved, you will be knocked prone (almost as bad IMHO).

And even if you do not allow creation or purchase of magic items that is a) a house rule of your campaign and b) won't help if you play Eberron or any other campaign allowing the Artificer class from that setting , because an Artificer can add any +1 weapon property to his (and later any other weapon) from level 1 forward. And in level 2 or even level 5 fights a magebane weapon can quickly become very dangerous ( especially in Eberron where the Dragonmarks can add spellike abilities to almost every race playable, save the Warforged ).
And outside Eberron, any 8th level cleric, sorcerer or wizard can easily create such a weapon for a campaign.

 

[Henry]

This weapon to me would be worth a +2 Enhancement - it seems too overpowered to a +1. Compare this to a Burst Weapon, for example - I'd take this over the burst weapon EVERY freaking time, because fully 45% of the opponents faced in the lifetime of a typical D&D game use arcane magic in some form. Now, if I had to pay 18,000 gp to have this enhancement, It's still worthy, but by no means a must-have.

Keep in mind that in Eberron, such an enhancement would be not only a "must-have", but every artificer would have several of his 1st and 2nd level infusions earmarked for this purpose! I already have an artificer who makes liberal use of the "Bane" enhancement on the party - the second they face ONE of a certain creature, they have the toughest fighter as well as the missile-using rogue kitted out with an appropriate Bane for the situation. With this enhancement, the player of the artificer in the party would take time out before even THINKING of entering a dangerous situation, to kit out at least two party members. As they get higher in level, it gets more and more likely that they face arcane-using opponents, and hence this becomes a given enhancement. Heck, it's even more useful than, say, a "LIFEBANE" enhancement - at least there's no guarantee that all the opponents you face are alive!

 

[uzagi_akimbo]

This weapon to me would be worth a +2 Enhancement - it seems too overpowered to a +1. Compare this to a Burst Weapon, for example - I'd take this over the burst weapon EVERY freaking time, because fully 45% of the opponents faced in the lifetime of a typical D&D game use arcane magic in some form. Now, if I had to pay 18,000 gp to have this enhancement, It's still worthy, but by no means a must-have.

The question may not be, if the enhancement is worth the money (and for some classes that is not a problem in the first place, imagine, say a Kensai with this enhancement on his weapon(s): or say they have an Anrtificer handy/in group and he may even have invested on the great artifice line of feats, saving money, time and XP ) or not.
The question will rather be - is it better than other stuff of the same "+x category" ?
"Magebane" is definitely better than any other "bane" enhancement - and also stacks far too easily and often with other "bane" enhancements. It is (IMHO) much stronger than axiomatic/anarchic and unholy , the "burst" powers and most other +2 stuff, too. As for "holy" - depending on your type of campaign "holy" may keep up (if you play in a b/w campaign with lots of every EVIL guys to chastise, and rather little areas of greyness and neutral alignments) or not - say in a swashbuckling campaign, one of espionage, more mercenary attitude and - lo and behold, especially an "evil" campaign, the "holy" enchantment becomes more or less useless or even embarassing.
So, to me it's at least a +3 enchantment, and if your campaign goes planar or to the Underdark, it becomes even better...

As for Eberron, yes, this magical weapon ability is especially broken in Eberron.... If I would send an NPC with such a weapon against the group in my current Eberron campaign, I would have four eligible targets out of five PCs, and, in all likelihood, a fair chance for a TPK.... at lower mid-levels.

 

[the Jester]

Hmm, mageslaying looks a lil overpowered but it's easy to fix- have it only apply to arcane casters.

Clouting looks cool from a cinematic perspective, and I always like that sort of thing.

 

[frankthedm]

I think +1 is too cheap for a .normal. bane property, Magebane rocks the house for +1. It is a 'sacred cow" thats been needing resurrection, but +2 & 2d6 boost is damned lethal to most spell users. Half that amount would still be a great deal with as over magicked most D&D foes are.

Definitly a good property to add to your dragonkiller weapon in the old golfbag.