What's the game balance reason for needing a +1 weapon before enchanting further?

[3d6]

I don't think that there is, honestly.

Compare flaming to a simple +1 enhancement bonus. If you're using a greatsword (and most people seem to be), a +1 enhancement bonus is simply better. You can use Power Attack to convert that +1 bonus to attack and damage rolls into a +3 bonus to damage rolls, which is only 0.5 points of damage less than a flaming weapon, except that the enhancement bonus is multiplied on critical hits, isn't affected by fire resistance, and doesn't require a standard action to activate. The best argument in favor of a flaming weapon is greater magic weapon. Without that, I don't think magical special abilities that give a bonus to damage rolls really have a reason to be, other than the alignment properties use in overcoming damage reduction.

 

[Slaved]

You still have to be able to get the weapon. Low levels for having something that is worth over 2300 gold pieces is still at least a few levels in.

Mephits are not out of the question, summon monsters start getting damage reduction around summon monster III, and maybe other things too. Those are just off the top of my head.

Fire resistance is also a factor of course.

Power wise I would choose the +1 weapon. Character wise I would like to have more options. Sometimes having all you really want is a sonic burst weapon because that is what the character would love but you cannot get one until much later because of needing that extra +1 in the front.

 

[Elethiomel]

Then there's the popular choice of making a weapon +1 with +9 worth of special abilities and casting Greater Magic Weapon on them. If you don't have to get that first +1 to enchant things at all, this is viable from level 1 with Magic Weapon. Allow Flaming on "+0" weapons and hey presto, you have a +1 flaming weapon for important battles that you know are coming up.

 

[SlagMortar]

I'm pretty sure Rhun got it exactly right.

Because a +1 weapon is only giving you +1 damage, and not a +1 to hit. You already have that because the weapon must be masterwork.

The first +1 enchantment only gives the weapon +1 to damage and allows it to overcome DR/magic.

I know that you don't also get a +1 to attack like you would with a +1 enhancement, but we all know that BAB doesn't scale with AC anyway. If you didn't force +1 enhancements, my guess is that most people wouldn't take too many of them, especially at the start.

This seems to be a popular misconception. Unless you always power attack for your entire base attack bonus, then a +1 to attack is worth at least +2 damage for a two-handed weapon.

 

[Mouseferatu]

You know, I understand the balance arguments. I'm not arguing against them.

But to me, it's just cooler if you don't require the +1 enhancement first.

I mean, a sword that's only magical against evil creatures? (Holy, no other enhancement.) Or only magical against the swordsmith's traditional foes? (Bane, no other enhancement.) Or is capable of bursting into flame on command, but no more useful at penetrating a demon's hide?

To me, these are just cool, flavorful concepts for magical or legendary weapons, but they only work if you houserule out the +1 requirement.

 

[Croesus]

You know, I understand the balance arguments. I'm not arguing against them.

But to me, it's just cooler if you don't require the +1 enhancement first.

I mean, a sword that's only magical against evil creatures? (Holy, no other enhancement.) Or only magical against the swordsmith's traditional foes? (Bane, no other enhancement.) Or is capable of bursting into flame on command, but no more useful at penetrating a demon's hide?

To me, these are just cool, flavorful concepts for magical or legendary weapons, but they only work if you houserule out the +1 requirement.

Agreed. In our last adventure, one party member got a dagger that can dazzle an opponent on a successful strike, and another found a "life blade" that improves his ability to turn undead. No other abilities - just a couple of effects with some decent flavor.

 

[Nonlethal Force]

This seems to be a popular misconception. Unless you always power attack for your entire base attack bonus, then a +1 to attack is worth at least +2 damage for a two-handed weapon.

I suppose - or perhaps I am misinterpreting your post?

But I can't honestly tell you the last time I played with a two-hander. If this was a damage optimalization thread I'd totally support this argument. But, the significant majority of weapons in D&D aren't two-handers. Since they aren't two handers, for the significant majority of weapons the +1 is still a +1 under power atack.

However, like I said. For two handers, I totally support the same conclusion!

If you are playing with a one hander, then except for DR why would you choose a +1 over a +1d6? If the weapon is masterwork, a +1 only guarantees the minimum result of what a +1d6 would give you.

For the record, if the alteration to allow magic options on a weapon without a +1 base, I would allow DR/magic to be overcome by a +1d6. I realize that it would totally make the +1 useless (except for getting to +2) ... but +1d6 anything is still a magical effect. It still makes the weapon a magical weapon, after all.

 

[SlagMortar]

I suppose - or perhaps I am misinterpreting your post?

Actually, I may have misinterpreted your post. I thought you were saying that the +1 to hit was irrelevant, not that it was already present in a +0 flaming weapon because the weapon is masterwork. I agree with what you say 100%, if you get the +1 to hit from masterwork anyway. If you already have the +1 to hit from masterwork then there is not much reason to take a +1 enhancement bonus over a +1d6 elemental bonus.

The part about power attack is just pointing out that to-hit bonuses are almost always important even if attack bonuses are as high as AC's because it allows for more power attack with the same chance to hit. Most the time in groups I've played with at least one of the main fighters have wielded two-handers, or at least switched between one and two-handed grips depending on the situation.

I think you are right that, in general, straight plusses benefit a two-hander more and +d6 enhancements benefit a one-hander more.