Special Abilities on Weapons

[Jixan]

After playing D&D for several years, I feel kind of foolish for asking this question, but I can't find an answer anywhere, so what the hell...

Is it possible to have more than one type of special ability like fire AND electric, or acid AND sonic, etc. on the same weapon? I looked at the DMG and didn't see anywhere it said you couldn't, but then again, I didn't see anywhere it said you could.

Probably incorrectly, I've always assumed you could do more than one type, but I don't really know for sure. None of the specific weapons in the DMG have more than one elemental type of damage, so I'm guessing you can't. However, some of the weapons have more than one special ability like holy and flaming and I haven't seen any rules anywhere for that type of thing either.

Does anyone know of anywhere where it says one way or the other? If so, can you quote it?

Thanks,
Jixan

 

[Flyspeck23]

It can happen. From the SRD, MagicItems2:

In addition to enhancement bonuses, weapons can have one or more of the special abilities detailed below.

 

[shilsen]

And, to forestall the standard follow-up question, yes - you can have flaming and frost abilities on the same weapon

 

[Hypersmurf]

And, to forestall the standard follow-up question, yes - you can have flaming and frost abilities on the same weapon

But not Holy and Unholy, nor Axiomatic and Anarchic.

-Hyp.

 

[Jixan]

There is some worry by my friend that I talked about this with that if you allow energy damage bonuses to stack then it would be way too powerful. Mainly because you could make a +1 weapon of flaming, shock, acid, and frost which would give you an additional 4d6+1 weapon for a total possible extra damage of 25 per hit excluding weapon damage, STR bonuses, etc. In the scheme of things, this wouldn't be a very expensive weapon (+5 overall). Is that balanced?

-Jixan

 

[Mathew_Freeman]

I reckon it's balanced. If the players want to pay the money, that's what they get. Remember they won't be hitting as often as someone with a higher enhancement bonus, and none of that damage is multiplied on a critical. Apart from that, it's fine.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Is that balanced?

Generally, yes... although not quite as much as it was in 3E, now that DR has changed.

Compare a +2 weapon to a +1 flaming weapon.

The +2 weapon adds an average of 2 points of damage to every hit.
The +1 flaming weapon adds an average of 4.5 points of damage to every hit.

The +2 weapon hits 5% more often, and is unaffected by Energy Resistance.

The +1 Flaming weapon can bypass DR a little, since the Flaming damage is unaffected.

The +2 weapon has better hardness and hit points.

In 3E, the +2 weapon could beat DR X/+2, and could not be damaged by weapons without at least a +2 enhancement bonus. In 3.5, neither of these points apply.

So in 3.5, the balance has shifted a little... but it's still reasonable. A +4 sword might not be as sexy as a +1 Flaming Frost Shocking sword... but in the long run, they're fairly balanced.

-Hyp.

 

[Jixan]

I thought it would be fine as well, but I wanted to ask to make sure I wasn't the only one.

Thanks everyone for the responses, the knowlegable people on these forums have been a great resource.

-Jixan

 

[TracerBullet42]

In 3E, the +2 weapon could beat DR X/+2, and could not be damaged by weapons without at least a +2 enhancement bonus. In 3.5, neither of these points apply.

Is that right? Because sundering has come up quite a few times lately in our game and we came to the conclusion that you needed a enhancement bonus that equals or surpasses the weapon being sundered to do any damage to it...

From the SRD:

Hardness and Hit Points: An attacker cannot damage a magic weapon that has an enhancement bonus unless his own weapon has at least as high an enhancement bonus as the weapon or shield struck. Each +1 of enhancement bonus also adds 1 to the weapon’s or shield’s hardness and hit points.

So what's the deal? You seem to always nail the rules, Hyp. Did you miss this one, or did I miss something?

 

[Hypersmurf]

So what's the deal? You seem to always nail the rules, Hyp. Did you miss this one, or did I miss something?

DMG errata were released last week

If you check the section on Carrying, Exploration, and Movement , you'll find a completely different passage describing the effects of enhancement bonuses on hardness and hit points. (Also check under Magic Shields in the Magic Items section.)

This is the accurate 3.5 rule; the Magic Weapons section in the DMG (which you quoted) is a cut'n'paste error left over from 3E.

-Hyp.