Stacking fire and ice magical effects for weapons.


log in or register to remove this ad

Black Omega said:
But using the arrows created by Flame Arrow with a Frost bow, IMHO, is a different thing. The arrow is on fire when it's picked up, then shot. When it's fired, frost is imbued into the arrow. I can easily see these effects canceling.

I think this is stretching it. It's magic.

Black Omega said:
You really wouldn't let a flaming sword set something on fire? A shocking sword wouldn't zap the person carrying it if they dived into a lake?

A flaming weapon could indeed set something on fire, like a piece of paper or a field of dry grass, but a shocking weapon wouldn't zap the person carrying it if they dived into a lake. Remember, if anything...

The electricity does not harm the wielder.

I'd just stick with that, but I could understand such a ruling.
 


Black Omega said:
A shocking sword wouldn't zap the person carrying it if they dived into a lake?

Nope. And fire isn't negated underwater, sonic doesn't become an area effect, cold doesn't make ice cubes, and acid isn't diluted.

Keep in mind...the basic weapon properties (acid, flaming, frost, lightning, sonic) all require a command word to activate (standard action), and a weapon with multiple properties might well have multiple command words.

Cheers
Nell.
 


Keep in mind...the basic weapon properties (acid, flaming, frost, lightning, sonic) all require a command word to activate (standard action), and a weapon with multiple properties might well have multiple command words.

Even if all properties had the same command word, as a DM I'd require each to be activated separately.

Since speaking a word is a free action, but activating a command-word item is a standard action, there's obviously more to it than just saying the word. You have to say the word as part of the Activate Magic Item action, and that action allows you to activate one power.

-Hyp.
 

Gort said:
Yeah, I wouldn't allow it either. Makes very little sense to me. It's either hot, or it's cold. Can't be both.

But the "blackfire" or whatever doing 2d6 cold damage would be fine by me.

Sure, I often describe frost brands as wreathed in 'cold flame'. The silly thing is saying it can be both hot & cold at the same time. Only on the Rules forum would such a thing be considered IMNSHO. :D
 

The silly thing is saying it can be both hot & cold at the same time. Only on the Rules forum would such a thing be considered IMNSHO. :D

I have no trouble picturing a double-helix of magical energy surrounding a blade - one strand of fire, one strand of frost, which don't interact with each other, but which both deal damage to an opponent on a successful hit.

-Hyp.
 

Benben said:
niteshade6 and the other nay sayers,

What about the other elemental enchantments sonic, acid, or lightning would you let them stack on a single weapon?

To tell you the truth, and this is a personal opinion, I'd prefer not to allow multiple additional elemental damage. But hey, that's just me.

Fire/Cold was the most obvious example of 2 types of elemental damage that don't "stack well", and although there are no real reasons for, say, fire and lightning damage not to stack, I wouldn't be confortable with it. When they designed the elemental damage magical properties, did they intend for it to stack, didn't intend for them to stack or really didn't think about it?

Like I said, this is all IMHO

MS (not to be confused with Mild Sedative)
 

How does the idea of elemental damage stacking with itself sit with you?

(I actually quite like the idea of a +1 flaming flaming flaming flaming longsword perhaps as a powerful weapon forged on the elemental plane of fire)
 

Remove ads

Top