D&D 5E (2014) Scabbard of... Silence?

[MarkB]

I tend to the opinion that incredibly powerful magical weapons should NOT have their inherent weaknesses taken away. The party is generally capable of destroying or at least throwing such things away if they become a problem.

Well, the sword is going to spend most of its downtime in that scabbard. Maybe it'll turn its attention to influencing it, leading to either the sword gaining the ability to cast Silence as an area-effect at the most inconvenient times, or else the scabbard eventually becoming an evil, intelligent, talking scabbard of silence.

 

[Greenstone.Walker]

I imagine the sword will be quite upset when taken out of the scabbard. The first combat should be very interesting…

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

I didn't say one personality was going to be GOOD! .

Nothing wrong with the other personalities being worse than the original.

 

[Unwise]

Pity the Scabbard of Silence is itself evil It was owned by an assassin and casts silence on the wielder for one turn when you draw a weapon. It lets you get that one good shot off while the victim can't scream. The paladin might find their vocal component spells not working in the first turn of a combat. Still, they will put it down to a quirk of the enchantment and even a handy benefit. Not knowing the origin of the item. The scabbard will be overjoyed to meet the sword. It can cast silence when the cleric is trying to heal the paladin, when he needs to call for help, when he needs to negotiate a truce, when he needs to cast a spell. It is patient though and will bide its time.

I don't know the sword in question, do you have to attune to it? Certainly in my games attunement is a pretty big deal, you are binding some pretty integral parts of yourself to the item. If so, then nightmares, subtle influences and dark desires are likely to come from binding to an evil item, even if you stop it talking.

 

[jadrax]

I tend to the opinion that incredibly powerful magical weapons should NOT have their inherent weaknesses taken away. The party is generally capable of destroying or at least throwing such things away if they become a problem.

TBH, its already possible to get round this by just sticking it in a bag of holding or similar. The custom scabbard is probably an over-investment.

 

[n00b f00]

Sounds like a hilarious moment, a good way to deal with it, and some funny ideas about how to spin it.

Sword being super pissy when drawn or the scabbard of silence sabotaging them. I guess it depends on the table. But it sounds like a funny story.

 

[Shadowdweller00]

TBH, its already possible to get round this by just sticking it in a bag of holding or similar. The custom scabbard is probably an over-investment.

Not so much. Since the DM has complete control over what magic items appear. And even if one does appear, all such devices contain a clause about being destroyed by pointy objects. Meaning that the bearer would have to sheathe or draw the sword TWICE to keep it safely quiet; and hope that the blade can't draw itself of its own volition while in the container.

 

[Noctem]

Not so much. Since the DM has complete control over what magic items appear. And even if one does appear, all such devices contain a clause about being destroyed by pointy objects. Meaning that the bearer would have to sheathe or draw the sword TWICE to keep it safely quiet; and hope that the blade can't draw itself of its own volition while in the container.

This is incorrect. No need to draw/sheathe twice. A weapon can't draw itself or remove itself from within a bag of holding, magical / sentient or not.

 

[Shadowdweller00]

This is incorrect. No need to draw/sheathe twice.

Wrong. From the DMG:

If the bag is overloaded, pierced, or torn, it ruptures and is destroyed, and its contents are scattered in the Astral Plane.

The haversack has a few limitations. If it is overloaded, or if a sharp object pierces or tears it, the haversack ruptures and is destroyed. If the haversack is destroyed, its contents are lost forever, although an artifact always turns up again somewhere.

That's how these things have worked since at least 1st edition, kid.

 

[MrZeddaPiras]

Wow, a lot of good stuff here. Thanks a lot guys!

I would create it as an Uncommon item (max spell level 3, Silence is 2) (DMG pg 285)

Crafting Magical Items on DMG pg 129 says "500 gp" for creation cost.

Yea, that's probably more in keeping with the rules. I'll have the artisan start bargaining at 1000-1200 gp for his margin.

That's an interesting idea, and I'd even pursue it if the Paladin was working with the sword to temper it's alignment and was generous about it's acting out. However, what he's doing is trying to gag it. That's not really something that leads me to think that the sword's just going to spontaneously half-decide the Paladin's a good role model.

That's what the paladin character was trying to do before the sword tried to get them killed. Personally I don't think a sentient object should be able to "change its ways", but some form of uneasy alliance could be reached. Anyway, the sword is going to consider the gag as a hostile action, that's sure.