Maximum Enhancement for a Bane weapon?

[Knightfall]

Well, the fact that someone might say that William Howard Taft is the current President of United States doesn't mean that there's any meaningful debate about who's currently in the Oval Office ... if you catch my drift.

And "Not everyone seems to agree" is basically limited to him. So ...

Hmm, well Dice4Hire doesn't seem to agree that a +5 (+7) bane weapon should break through Epic damage reduction, and neither do I, so I think there are a few more on the other side of the debate than just him.

 

[Hypersmurf]

I see the logic behind your thinking, but I'm not going to let a nonEpic weapon bypass Epic damage reduction. it just doesn't work for me.

I have no issue whatsoever with a DM who follows the logic through, sees the conclusion, and then elects to do something different in his own game - that's a DM's right.

-Hyp.

 

[mvincent]

And "Not everyone seems to agree" is basically limited to him. So ...

I seem room for interpretation here (i.e. as Gabe said "it's up to the DM"), and apparently so do Knightfall1972 and Dice4Hire.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

I seem room for interpretation here (i.e. as Gabe said "it's up to the DM"), and apparently so do Knightfall1972 and Dice4Hire.

Yes, but Knightfall was the one with the question, and Dice4Hire said he'd be "leery" of it, but that doesn't fall strongly onto either side of the debate.

There really isn't all that much room for interpretation. DR X / Epic is overcome if a weapon has an enhancement bonus of +6 or greater.

DR X / Magic is overcome if a weapon has an enhancement bonus of +1 or greater.

Does a masterwork sword under the benefits of a magic weapon spell overcome DR X / Magic? If you say yes (and I can't think of anyone who'd seriously say no), then there's really no room to say that a +4 dragon bane longsword doesn't overcome a dragon's DR X / Epic - not and be consistent in your rulings, at any rate.

Of course, as Hyp points out, anyone is more than capable of being inconsistent in their own games without general issue.

 

[pawsplay]

I have no issue whatsoever with a DM who follows the logic through, sees the conclusion, and then elects to do something different in his own game - that's a DM's right.

-Hyp.

Indeed. While it's up to the DM to decide what happens in their own game, I at least interpreted the OP as a rules question.

 

[Nail]

Yep.

In that case, the sword either has a +1 Enhancement bonus (from being a magic sword) or a +5 Enhancement bonus (from the spell).

Whichever it ends up with is increased by +2 against dragons.

In our game, we commonly didn't bother adding "pluses" to the weapon after the first. That was the cleric's job. Now there's even less reason for doing so: Epic is reachable.

 

[Slaved]

In our game, we commonly didn't bother adding "pluses" to the weapon after the first. That was the cleric's job. Now there's even less reason for doing so: Epic is reachable.

Epic in a pretty limited set of cases though. There are not that many creatures with epic damage reduction and they look to be decently spread out over a number of creature types.

I do not know much about spellcasting at epic levels but I assume that there is a spell that is bigger than greater magic weapon as well.

 

[Nail]

We ran into Epic DR before the PCs turned Epic....so Epic Spellcasting wasn't available.

At the time, I had not realized a Bane property could have boosted us into Epic range...so we had to kick its butt the old school way: Lots an' lots of damage....jus' pile it on.

 

[Nifft]

In my game, the Bane trick works.

I'm going to have to add some Magic Item Bane weapons, too.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

Epic in a pretty limited set of cases though. There are not that many creatures with epic damage reduction and they look to be decently spread out over a number of creature types.

... which is why you should always have an artificer on-hand.

What? Oozes today? Oozebane for all!