Post/Author/DateTime	Post
sark 04-02-07, 12:39 PM	The spell compendium and faiths of eberron list the changes for the weapon when using this spell. Does the +1 {weapontype} override the bonuses from the weapon before, e.g. if it was a +3 "something" does it become just a +1 "whatever" and the previous bonuses lost or do they stack? Thanks.
Vharuck 04-03-07, 04:21 PM	You take the highest enhancement bonus and use it (they don't stack), but the special abilities (flaming, whatever) are added on (unless the weapon already has that ability).
Evilmonster 04-12-07, 04:46 PM	Also, as I understand it, a weapon can't be given two types of dditional damage. For example, if you tag Frosting Burst onto a flametongue sword, the spell over writes the normal function. You get a Frosting Burst sword for the duration, not a Frosting-Flameing sword of 2d6 more ouchness.
ChimericalWolf 04-12-07, 04:52 PM	Also, as I understand it, a weapon can't be given two types of dditional damage. For example, if you tag Frosting Burst onto a flametongue sword, the spell over writes the normal function. You get a Frosting Burst sword for the duration, not a Frosting-Flameing sword of 2d6 more ouchness. Nope, completely wrong. Unless everyone I know has been doing it wrong....which could be.
Edark 04-12-07, 05:29 PM	Also, as I understand it, a weapon can't be given two types of dditional damage. For example, if you tag Frosting Burst onto a flametongue sword, the spell over writes the normal function. You get a Frosting Burst sword for the duration, not a Frosting-Flameing sword of 2d6 more ouchness. It is not exactly like this. You can put in a weapon different types of additional damage. The problem comes when you use oposite energy damage, becose one cancels the other. You can make a flaming frost sword, but its damage will be 1d6 sword + 1d6 fire - 1d6 frost If you mix fire and electricity you wont have that problem.
ChimericalWolf 04-12-07, 05:35 PM	It is not exactly like this. You can put in a weapon different types of additional damage. The problem comes when you use oposite energy damage, becose one cancels the other. You can make a flaming frost sword, but its damage will be 1d6 sword + 1d6 fire - 1d6 frost If you mix fire and electricity you wont have that problem. Never heard this anywhere. You got a cite?
Edark 04-13-07, 03:14 PM	Never heard this anywhere. You got a cite? You can deduce it from Heat Metal spell description. Also, in the official PC aplication for D&D E-Tools, you can put differents elements in weapons you create, except those which are oposite.
Neutronium_Dragon 04-14-07, 05:03 AM	In that case, E-Tools has yet another issue. This comes up fairly routinely on the general rules forums. By the actual rules, there is nothing preventing you from putting Flaming and Frost on the same weapon, and they don't interfere with one another. Heat Metal/Chill Metal cancel out because they explicitly say they do. You'll find no such text attached to Flaming or Frost, or to other fire or cold effects in general. You can proclaim "it's not logical" all you want, and you're right - it's not logical, it's magical, and magic doesn't follow physics. A magical weapon *can* burn and freeze you at the same time.
WolfHati 04-14-07, 05:46 PM	In fact, they could do more, if you applied physics, well provided your magic wsa capable of seperating out the flame from the frost part, due to thermal shock effects. Blasting something that's frozen with a sudden increase in heat is going to cause damage when part of it expands suddenly. Since magic can keep flame from being drained by normal temperature air, why can't it keep it from being nulled by something colder than normal temperature? But of course it would take more magical power to do so, so it would be reasonable to diminish the damage, were it not for the thermal shock of being hit with sudden heat then sudden cold or vice versa, which would have the same absolute temperature difference and so roughly the same damage anyway. Heat/chill metal doesn't work like this since it is a slow warming/cooling and not a sudden shock of heat or cold. If you have enough logic/and or physics, you can probably come up with a reason for anything.
KidChainsaw 04-14-07, 11:22 PM	Whatever happened to "so cold it burns" or "so hot your nerves are seared off and all you feel is numb". I didn't do well in science and it is magic after all.... As I understand it unlike descriptors stack and like descriptors do not stack. Hence +1d6 fire damage will stack with +1d6 cold damage but +1d6 holy damage added to +2d6 holy damage will only result in +2d6 holy damage. Sounds like adding frost and fire damage may be the munchkin artificier's solution to get the most bang for their buck (gut reaction, I'm too lazy to dig through my books right now...). That being the case, you may not want to allow it....
Cifer 04-17-07, 01:09 PM	Sounds like adding frost and fire damage may be the munchkin artificier's solution to get the most bang for their buck (gut reaction, I'm too lazy to dig through my books right now...). That being the case, you may not want to allow it.... Why should you not allow it? It's a valid use of a first or second level infusion which almost always requires an action point to be of use. Further, frost/flame is pretty much outclassed by [exactly what you're fighting against at the moment]-Bane.
Warforged Goblin 04-17-07, 01:24 PM	I had an artificer that would just make scrolls of sonic weapon. We were the loudest party ever. If I used my sonic weapon scroll and the cleric used his flame of faith scroll on the fighter's frosted spiked chain, it dealt 2d4 + 1d6 sonic + 1d6 fire + 1d6 cold. Horendous? Not too much and keep in mind, it was only temporary. Nothing worse than charging the BBEG only to have the beholder behind the curtain open its eye and wipe away your toys...
Logos7 04-24-07, 09:51 PM	I thought i read somewhere that you could have multible of the same enchantment of the same item presuming it's pricing was listed as bonus as apposed to fixed. Would a Flaming Flaming Flaming (+3d6 Fire +3 Price Bonus) Be Acceptable? (Preuming it's not from the same source Ie Sonic Weapon Applied 6 times wouldn't work but a flaming sword built like this would?) Logos
Cifer 04-25-07, 09:35 AM	I very much doubt it. Even if you managed to apply the enchantment several times, you'd then have the same effect affecting one weapon three times, none of which stack.
Evilmonster 04-30-07, 03:33 AM	I thought i read somewhere that you could have multible of the same enchantment of the same item presuming it's pricing was listed as bonus as apposed to fixed. Would a Flaming Flaming Flaming (+3d6 Fire +3 Price Bonus) Be Acceptable? (Preuming it's not from the same source Ie Sonic Weapon Applied 6 times wouldn't work but a flaming sword built like this would?) Logos I very much doubt it. Even if you managed to apply the enchantment several times, you'd then have the same effect affecting one weapon three times, none of which stack. Maybe, but mechanically it’s the same as several different kinds of damage. But truthfully I’m a little unsure about stacking on more than one kind of extra damage to a weapon. It makes a +5 sword seem silly when you could have a +1 flaming, shocking, thundering, acid sword for the same price which hurts SO much more particularly in 3.5 when DR no longer has a minimum enhancement bonus needed to bypass. I don’t know, I think I’ll watch this thread a bit longer before deciding.
Grumgarr 04-30-07, 09:01 AM	A +5 weapon is 20% more likely to land a hit than a +1 sword with a boat-load of added energy damage. It does a guaranteed 4 points more damage on each hit, too. Energy damage on the other hand is subject to energy resistance, and even the weakest resistance (usually 5) is likely to cancel your extra d6 completely. For example. try beating up a demon or devil with your shocking-flaming-frosty-acidic weapon and watch those bonus dice all but vanish. That extra 20% chance to hit may not seem like much with the first attack, but it starts to pay off in the later iterative attacks. A +5 weapon is considerably harder to sunder (+8 hardness and +40 hit points more than the +1 weapon), and 20% more likely to beat opposed rolls for disarm/sunder attempts. A critical hit with the +1-and-energy weapon doesn't add those extra dice multiple times, but the +5 weapon's full +5 enhancement bonus will get multiplied. And you're more likely to confirm a critical hit with your extra +4 to hit, too. Even without a DR/magic variant where each +1 beats DR5/magic, the +5 weapon still has its strengths.
Cifer 05-03-07, 09:12 AM	Generally, a mix between pure enhancement bonus and cool special abilities is often preferable - the enhancement will help you to strike your target while the other enchantments will do the damage.