Why must special swords/weapons always be intelligent?

[Numenorean]

Hi all.

Myself and my DM were talking the other day and one of my peeves with 3E, or actually with D&D all the way back to 1st edition is that they ALWAYS made it so swords with special powers had to be intelligent.

I used to play Middle Earth Role Playing using ICE's old Rolemaster rules. In that system you had special swords, lets say Gandalf's Glamdring, or Aragorn's Anduril, and they had special magical abilities but most of them were not written up as "intelligent" per say. They were simply powerful magical swords that had properties and powers.

Now I know that we are all free to do our own thing with the game, and I would imagine that some of you do stick in swords that are created outside the DMG, such as a sword that shoots a lightning bolt 2/ day, or a sword that simply glows brightly near monsters that are evil, etc etc.

My point is in the 3e DMG (and others that preceded it) why weren't they more "loose" with their special sword/weapon creation rules? Who in their right mind wants a quartet or intelligent weapons in their game by the time their PCs reach high level or super high level? For example in our campaign we have an intelligent weapon in the group, its a legendary dagger and it has quite a personality. Thats enough! Anymore and it would be overkill or detract from what has become an interesting "NPC".

To counter this our DM has tinkered with the special weapon creation chart, basically scrapping the mental stat/communication mode slots. For example you might have a special weapon but instead of having speech, or telepathy, it might simply be sentient with empathy abilities.

Just getting something off my chest

 

[Thanee]

So, you're saying that all those Holy Avengers are actually sentient beings?

The truth is out there!

Bye
Thanee

 

[TheAuldGrump]

Hi all.

Myself and my DM were talking the other day and one of my peeves with 3E, or actually with D&D all the way back to 1st edition is that they ALWAYS made it so swords with special powers had to be intelligent.

I used to play Middle Earth Role Playing using ICE's old Rolemaster rules. In that system you had special swords, lets say Gandalf's Glamdring, or Aragorn's Anduril, and they had special magical abilities but most of them were not written up as "intelligent" per say. They were simply powerful magical swords that had properties and powers.

Now I know that we are all free to do our own thing with the game, and I would imagine that some of you do stick in swords that are created outside the DMG, such as a sword that shoots a lightning bolt 2/ day, or a sword that simply glows brightly near monsters that are evil, etc etc.

My point is in the 3e DMG (and others that preceded it) why weren't they more "loose" with their special sword/weapon creation rules? Who in their right mind wants a quartet or intelligent weapons in their game by the time their PCs reach high level or super high level? For example in our campaign we have an intelligent weapon in the group, its a legendary dagger and it has quite a personality. Thats enough! Anymore and it would be overkill or detract from what has become an interesting "NPC".

To counter this our DM has tinkered with the special weapon creation chart, basically scrapping the mental stat/communication mode slots. For example you might have a special weapon but instead of having speech, or telepathy, it might simply be sentient with empathy abilities.

Just getting something off my chest

Wow, considering that there has been exactly one intelligent weapon in my game, I think that you are overstating things by quite a bit. And you know, maybe being able to use mental abilities implies that there might need to be a mind?

The Auld Grump

 

[Numenorean]

Well thats _your_ game. Regardless, if you look at the rules they push a DM in to the corner because for special weapons with powers they require that the weapon possess mental stats, alignment, and some sort of personality, etc. That shouldn't have to be your only choice when it comes to creating special weapons,

That's my point. The rules as they are written are limiting. Now of course most DMs worth their salt go outside of the rules when needed but the game designers shouldn't have made it so limited in the first place.

 

[Chimera]

Been many, many years since I've actually seen an Intelligent Weapon in play. They just are not that common in any of the groups I've ever played in.

Seems, as per above, you could ignore the intelligent part and just give the special powers.

But my first thought upon reading the thread title was "Damn straight! Why can't they be dumb as a brick!" - Picturing an extremely stupid "intelligent" sword. So stupid in fact that when the hero tried to activate it's main powers, s/he had to stop everything to explain the whole thing in excruciating detail to the moronically stupid weapon that just didn't get it.

 

[Templetroll]

In my campaign a ranger decided to go after a nest of stirges by himself, with his wardog and a warg pup he was training. He had an intelligent sword that could heal twice a day.

early in the fight he decided the animals were in more ddanger of dieing than he was so he cleared each of stirges and sent them away. After they were gone he told the sword, "I think I can use that heal now." He was about halfway down in hits. The sword saoid, "No."

The player's jaw dropped, and the character stammered, "No? Why not?" as he continued fighting. The sword replied, "Because that wouldn't be heroic." He tried to control the sword but being half down he didn't succeed.

He had a nice tense fight. He ended up winning with about 4 hits left and he felt great about the fight and planned to do 'something about that sword'.

Can't do that with a dumb sword.

Intelligent weapons can be fun. The early games went overboard quickly with some things, like Monty Haulism, and some of the rules were devised to keep things onboard for a good game. You always have the right to jump in the ocean or to stay away from the edge. As long as you are all having fun.

 

[Talmun]

LotR side-bar...
Anglachel (AKA Durthang) in the Silmarillion(sp?) was apparently sentient, since it responds vocally to Turin's request that it kill him. It's most certainly unique in all of Tolkein's works as a sentient sword.

On to the point...
I think the tendency toward intelligent weapons and other items is just an outgrowth of the desire to have a 'special' item, something unique and fun; sentient items are one way to achieve that. It also can be a pretty d@mn interesting NPC.

Granted, overusing anything makes it tiresome.

 

[CRGreathouse]

As a DM, I've given out exactly two intelligent items*, neither of which appeared before epic levels. One was a rapier (with Cha 3...) and the other was a LG dwarven defender's spirit in a shield.

* I did once give a nonepic group a talking skull, which in a sense is an intelligent item, but it's almost more of an immobile NPC than an item.

 

[tarchon]

I don't think we've ever had any truly intelligent weapons, but a few of the more powerful items have had a little personality.

 

[Allandaros]

I guess that the intelligent weaponry was thrown in as a counterbalance to the huge big&powerful weaponry that would often come up. If the DM wants to throw a curveball, then the sentient weapon can be a very effective tool to do so (as seen above in that story with the ranger).