Transmuting weapon [MIC]

[jontherev]

Does the Transmuting weapon enhancement from the Magic Item Compedium overcome any damage reduction? For example, if a transmuting great sword struck a creature with say DR 15/good and bludgeoning, would it bypass both on the following round? As worded, it appears to work against ANY type of DR. So, I guess the great sword transforms into a good-aligned heavy mace? If the wielder isn't proficient in a heavy mace, should they be penalized? Do they lose their abilities (feats like weapon focus, weapon specialization, etc.) focused on the great sword? Or would you just say they strike with the flat of the blade to get the bludgeoning damage?

I have a hard time believing that a transmuting scythe can still do 2d4 damage and crit X4 by smacking a creature with the back side to get bludgeoning damage. Although it will be quite some time, my players will actually come across this exact scenario (the scythe vs. DR 15/G&B), so that's why I'm asking.

If Transmuting is supposed to be this powerful (which would also bypass EPIC DR!), then the +2 cost seems a bit low to me.

 

[Mistwell]

You should post the text of the ability. A lot of us don't have the book, or don't have it available when reading the thread.

 

[jontherev]

You should post the text of the ability. A lot of us don't have the book, or don't have it available when reading the thread.

I thought posting quotes from books was a no no?

 

[Mistwell]

I thought posting quotes from books was a no no?

Posting a very small quote from a much larger word, for purposes of criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright by definition under the copyright law.

It's hard to comment on an issue if we cannot look at the thing we are commenting on. As long as you are not reproducing a huge chunk of the work, and you are doing it so that people can discuss it, it's fine.

 

[szilard]

Looking at the text of "Transmuting Weapon" it doesn't say that the weapon physically changes into another sort of weapon. Your transmuting greatsword would be a greatsword that bypaseed bludgeoning and good DR.

-Stuart

 

[jontherev]

Looking at the text of "Transmuting Weapon" it doesn't say that the weapon physically changes into another sort of weapon. Your transmuting greatsword would be a greatsword that bypaseed bludgeoning and good DR.

-Stuart

Right, that's the same interpretation that I get. I just don't like it. I guess it's a good thing that I'm the DM. I mean, I'm willing to suspend my disbelief a lot, but allowing great swords and scythes the ability to bypass bludgeoning damage reduction and still do the same amount of damage, with the same crit multiplier...well, that just doesn't make any sense to me. I guess that's why they call it magic...it's not meant to make sense. In any case, I think it's a bit much for the +2 cost. Maybe +3 is more in line? I'd be interested in hearing others' opinions on whether a +2 cost is sufficient to pretty much ignore any enemy's (even Epic DR) damage reduction.

What would have made more sense to me, is if they had the Morphing enhancement as a synergy prerequisite. And THEN, yes, your item morphs into whatever weapon type you need, and it also changes into whatever material type you need. I think this is the house rule I will use.

 

[jontherev]

Posting a very small quote from a much larger word, for purposes of criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright by definition under the copyright law.

I guess I figured enough folks would have this book. Suffice it to say, that I think the wording is sufficient to not even allow argument over. "If the target has multiple types of damage reduction, the weapon overcomes all of them."

My beef is that I just think it's too powerful for a simple +2 enhancement.

 

[DarkJester]

I feel +2 is just about right for an ability which allows you to over come damage reduction. While it will be a useful ability when it comes into play, not all creatures will have damage reduction, and +2 is very costly when you add that to an existing magic weapon. Additionally, the need to attack in your first round and be subject to damage reduction that round weakens the ability even more.

 

[jontherev]

How many times do you get more than 1 attack in the 1st round? Most of the time, it's only 1 attack, so we're talking about being subject to damage reduction for the 1st round only, and most likely only for 1 attack...after that, you're home free, even if the creature has DR 20/Good & Bludgeoning & Lawful & Adamantine & Epic. Note, that as written, this works even if you don't actually do any damage to the opponent...you only have successfully HIT the opponent...meaning you could even do a touch attack if you want to be sure not to miss.

However, good point as far as the cost goes vs. usefulness. Holy is also +2, and applies pretty much all the time. There are probably a lot more evil creatures that you'll fight than creatures with DR.

Still, I think in my game, I like the idea of having a weapon morph first, then transmute, as I said before. I'd even allow a weapon like this to use dedicated feats like weapon focus when the weapon is in a different form. Now, you're talking a +3 bonus, but you get the added benefit of being able to change your weapon form, which can be quite useful when you're marching down a 5' passage and you're 2nd in line (hello reach weapon!). There's just something that bothers me about a slashing weapon magically bypassing bludgeoning DR and I think my house rule makes more sense and also presents a more interesting weapon. YMMV.

 

[DarkJester]

I think the text specifies that the weapon doesn't start overcoming damage reduction until the start of your next turn after you successfully hit someone. I like the imagery of a morphing weapon, it is called a "Transmuting" weapon after all.