Stacking fire and ice magical effects for weapons.

[0-hr]

But it's not two abilities. It's two parts of the one item. Why should someone with a flame/frost sword be penalized when someone with a vorpal/keen weapon isn't? Especially since they have to use an action, anyway?

Your game, your rules -- but you're still wrong, man.

Wow, you're really asking for it... Good luck with that argument.


For those who think fire and cold damage should cancel out let, me toss a flask of magma and a flask of liquid nitrogen at your face simultaneously. It shouldn't hurt at all.

 

[Hypersmurf]

But it's not two abilities. It's two parts of the one item. Why should someone with a flame/frost sword be penalized when someone with a vorpal/keen weapon isn't? Especially since they have to use an action, anyway?

So do you feel that someone with a Staff of Power should be able to release a Magic Missile, Lightning Bolt, Fireball, and Cone of Cold with a single Spell Trigger action?

A Ring of Shooting Stars activate Ball Lightning and Shooting Stars at the same time?

They're all multiple abilities of the same item. What's the difference?

If Vorpal and Keen were both command-word activated, I'd require two actions to get both of them running as well.

If you have a character with a dual weapon, does it require two standard actions to spark up the flames on both sides?

Absolutely.

That's a good point, but if the wizard who crafted the flaming, frost longsword knew that it required a "command word" action to activate, wouldn't he probably make a single command activate the entire item instead of just one ability? i.e. make it one "flaming, frost" ability that adds all the elemental damage to the sword.

What's the difference between that, and an item that casts Bless, Haste, Mass Bull's Strength and Mass Cat's Grace with a single command word, and a single standard action?

An ability that requires a command word needs a standard action to activate. Two abilities, therefore, need two standard actions.

-Hyp.

 

[Will]

Re: command words...

If a DM were invoking that, I think I'd just leave the elements always on. Oy.

You know, I was so sure there already was a rule saying you couldn't put flaming and frost on the same weapon, but I think I'm half-remembering a spell.

I'm inclined not to make a house rule about it, though. I mean, so half the sword is emitting dangerous cold and half is flame... there already is magic keeping your hand from burning (or freezing), I can't imagine why it couldn't also keep the two effects from mixing and neutralizing.

 

[0-hr]

Keeping the weapon always on is a possibility but you need to convince your DM that your scabbard (as equipment) is considered part of your character and thus also immune to the elemental damage.

 

[Scion]

Keeping the weapon always on is a possibility but you need to convince your DM that your scabbard (as equipment) is considered part of your character and thus also immune to the elemental damage.

Doesnt have to be, a scabbard with enough hardness can just absorb the elemental damage all day long

I think I would prefer to make it so that they all activate properly on attack, that way they would work whenever needed and people dont have to spend 5 rounds in combat trying to get things going.

And, if there was a metamagic that did it, I would allow multiple spells with one. My dm is currently thinking of making a metamagic spell where you add the two spell levels together, add one, and when you cast the newly formed spell both go off at once to the best of their ability. I'd look at the weapons with multiple flaming/icy/whatever the same way, they cost an enormous amount more. Spending a standard action as well is a 'huge' cost.

So in the end I see no reason to not allow the weapons all activate at once. Or simply make them activate on attack. Easy enough.

 

[drnuncheon]

I'm curious Hypersmurf, why would you require that they each be activated? Why not have one command word turn the who shebang on?

Gotta go with the Hyp here, for exactly the same reasons. Otherwise you get ridiculousness like someone crafting ten wands of magic missile, strapping them all together, and claiming that since they all have the same command word, they can activate all of them at once.

As a flavor thing, I have always ruled that command words need to be linked in some way to the power in question - the command word for a flame effect has to have something to do with fire - which provides a lovely in-game explanation for the phenomenon: you simply can't have the same word for both powers.

Regarding keeping the weapon sheathed with the energy on, note that the weapon doesn't harm its wielder - and if you've got a sheathed weapon, you're definitely not wielding it. That scabbard isn't going to last too long. (I suppose you could have a magic scabbard made with a resist elements effect...)

J

 

[Scion]

Gotta go with the Hyp here, for exactly the same reasons. Otherwise you get ridiculousness like someone crafting ten wands of magic missile, strapping them all together, and claiming that since they all have the same command word, they can activate all of them at once.

Completely seperate issue. If it was one item that had a spell that cast 2 magic missiles at once that is fine, it would also cost a great deal. A weapon with multiple of those enhancements on it costs a great deal, and should have a few perks for its limitations

Regarding keeping the weapon sheathed with the energy on, note that the weapon doesn't harm its wielder - and if you've got a sheathed weapon, you're definitely not wielding it. That scabbard isn't going to last too long. (I suppose you could have a magic scabbard made with a resist elements effect...)

Adamantine sheeth. hardness 20. Most elements damage are cut in half. How will it be destroyed or even damaged?

 

[Eeralai]

If it were move equivelant actions to activate the properties, I wouldn't have any problem with it. But say you are wandering through the woods when the ranger spots Ogre-barbarian bandits ready to ambush you. He calls out and the encounter distance begins at, say 100'. The fighter draws his sword as he moves 30' (Thankfully he didn't get surprised by the ambush). Now, the barbarians do a double move, getting past him, with one stopping to deal with the 'ittle 'uman. The fighter activates his elemental property and then ... oops, can't attack. Next round, he can choose to attack, or try to get value out of that second elemental enchantment.

It does provide a disincentive to use stacking elemental echantments. But, it isn't quite the same as the wizard with the staff. Each time the wizard uses the staff to activate a power, the affect is noticable immediately. Even at 20th level, a flaming sword will add at most 5d6 damage a round. Which is the same as the entry level for fireball. Yes, a saving throw is unnecessary, but fire resistance still works. So, it doesn't seem the same as a multi-trigger spell staff to me.

I don't see where it is abusive in damage, nor where it really invalidates the abilities of another class. With the new DR changes, yes it become less important to distinguish between the +1 sword and the +3 sword, and the extra +2d6 elemental damage becomes very appealing if there is no cost associated with it. But, is that abusive enough to make it difficult to always get that benefit?

That's why I ask really. I _know_ that if it is terribly abusive, somebody here can show me. Of course, if it isn't terribly abusive, I still waffle on it. Maybe that's the answer I need. If it's abusive, I can see an easy 'No', but if it isn't, I am still not sure on a 'Yes' to activating everything with one command word. Hmm.

 

[Darklone]

I want my 3.0 Endure Elements back.... sooo nice to screw these multielementenchant/b]ments

Wait, I'm the DM. KachinK!

 

[shilsen]

I want my 3.0 Endure Elements back.... sooo nice to screw these multielementenchant/b]ments

Wait, I'm the DM. KachinK!

Now you're just being greedy! Just use resist energy cast by an 11th lvl caster and even most burst weapons won't get through it. Or make all your villains half-fiendish