Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Nor'Morgwae 06-03-05, 07:34 PM	Can you add the same enchantment to a weapon more than once? For instance could you have a Double Flaming Longsword +1? I ask because I couldn't find anything that said you cannot. The additional dice of damage are an untyped bonus to damage (they do specific types of damage but it isn't a "+1d6 fire bonus to damge") It doesn't seem to be unbalancing because it would cost the same as a Flaming and an Shocking enhancement on the same weapon which would have almost the same effect. (if there has been another recent thread on this I will accept a link as an answer)
DungeonMaster 06-03-05, 08:07 PM	Yup you can. Though some might debate it.
Zaffudo 06-03-05, 08:11 PM	He’s right, it may be debatable whether it’s allowable per the RAW. (I think it is, but I’m not a game designer) The most important question to ask is : Is it balanced to allow a “Double Flaming Longsword +1”? Since it is mechanically weaker then a Flaming, Shocking Longsword +1, and costs the same amount, the answer is a pretty clear Yes.
smrtgmp 06-03-05, 08:14 PM	I would allow it. It doesnt seem unbalancing to me in any way.
Dalthbar 06-03-05, 08:40 PM	I don't see why not. A) you'd just add two +1 flaming abilities. This makes it a base +2 plus any other enchantments B) you can add different energy types all you want. You could have a flaming, shocking weapon at the same cost and would do the same damage (just with 1/2 being fire and 1/2 being electricity). But remember that you're also slightly limitting yourself. If you go against a fire-resistant enemy, then all of your extra damage may be wasted. It may be wise to diversify and get better mobility in your damage output. The only rulings that I would add is opposing energies can't be added to the same weapon. E.g., I'd never allow a flaming, frost weapon. It just sounds dumb to me.
stamhaven 06-03-05, 09:15 PM	I don't allow it unlimited, but I made a 2d6 Greater Frost/Shock/Flaming as a substitue for the Burst versions at the same price (I loathe the mechanics of burst). I also don't allow two energy damage types on a single weapon as a stylistic limitation/ruling.
Seeker95 06-03-05, 10:00 PM	I, too, allow it. I don't consider it "stacking" any more than a fireball stacks 5d6 when cast by a 5th level wizard.
Jaid 06-03-05, 10:35 PM	actually, i think technically it isn't allowed. 2 bonuses from the same source (ie, in this case, the flaming enchantment) don't stack. however, as has been noted, it really isn't terribly overpowered, so feel free to ignore that in your campaign, it shouldn't unbalance anything.
smrtgmp 06-03-05, 10:38 PM	except they arent bonuses, so I dont think that would apply. Damage stacks, regardless of the source.
Loren Pechtel 06-04-05, 12:09 AM	I have no problem with it with one big provision: You do not get a sword that does 2d6 fire damage. Rather you get a sword that does 1d6 fire damage and 1d6 fire damage. The difference is important if the target has energy resistance. Against 1d6,1d6, Fire Resist 5 means 11 of 36 attacks do 1 point of fire damage, 1 does 2 points and the rest add no fire damage. 2d6, however, will inflict fire damage most of the time against the same target.
UZI 06-04-05, 07:47 AM	You could look at it as two separate 1d6 (for resist energy purposes), or you could look at it the same way damage from weapon, strength, power attack, and sneak attack "stack" against DR. That is, 1d6+4+3d6 can provide up to 28 points of damage. However against a non-overcomeable DR of 10, it can provide only up to 18 points of damage.
Thelon Fairblade 06-04-05, 08:45 AM	This was discussed ad nauseum a few months ago. There are actually a few WotC references that have supported the multiple enchantments (I remember someone pointing out a goblin or orc warleader with a +1 Triple Flaming sword). The end result of that conversation (like 7 pages, IIRC) was "Go ahead, and the energy damage stacks."
Drahiricomadus 06-04-05, 11:40 AM	I think that technically nothing prevents you from stacking them RAW. ...but I fear we're talking about extra damage here... the kind you usually cannot stack for other purposes (the same kind you do not multiply when you score a critical hit, and I this this is the case RAW). It is a fact that we've also got epic weapon special abilities such as "acidic blast", "fiery blast" and so on which inflict +3d6 bonus energy damage (6d6 on a critical hit x2 multiplier, 9d6 for a x3 mul and so on), which is worth as a +6 on its market price. Now I ask myself: Why bother creating other epic weapon special abilities when you can obtain the same (if not better) results at lower costs? For the same cost (but it's still an epic weapon) you could have a triple flaming burst sword (+3d6 on each hit, +3d6+3d10 on a critical hit, +3d6+6d10 for a x3 crit.multiplier weapon and so on)... something weird, isn't it? :P I personally wouldn't allow this kind of special-ability-stacking trick in my game.
Thomar_of_Uointer 06-05-05, 09:11 AM	Wrong, Drahiricomadus. The epic versions are multiplied on critical hits, but the normal ones aren't. I would allow superior versions of flaming, shock, and frost enchantments that work the same but do more dice damage.
Drahiricomadus 06-05-05, 10:48 AM	Wrong, Drahiricomadus. The epic versions are multiplied on critical hits, but the normal ones aren't. Hummm... not from my point of view. Actually my ELH at page 129 says:"On any hit, this acid splashes the creature struck, dealing +3d6 points of bouns acid damage. On a successfull critical hit it instead deals +6d6 points of acid damage (or +9d6 if the critical multiplier is x3, or +12d6 if the critical multiplier is x4)" so what do you mean? technically it doesn't say you can multiply the damage even if that would be easier to calculate. Instead you have to add an increased amount of bonus damage according to the weapon's critical multiplier. Exactly like the non-epic versions. What I was trying to explain is that if the game designers had allowed special ability stacking, they wouldn't have created this epic special ability IMHO.
RaspK FOG 06-05-05, 03:43 PM	Hummm... not from my point of view. Actually my ELH at page 129 says:"On any hit, this acid splashes the creature struck, dealing +3d6 points of bouns acid damage. On a successfull critical hit it instead deals +6d6 points of acid damage (or +9d6 if the critical multiplier is x3, or +12d6 if the critical multiplier is x4)" so what do you mean? technically it doesn't say you can multiply the damage even if that would be easier to calculate. Instead you have to add an increased amount of bonus damage according to the weapon's critical multiplier. Exactly like the non-epic versions. What I was trying to explain is that if the game designers had allowed special ability stacking, they wouldn't have created this epic special ability IMHO.Actually, extra damage dice do not get multiplied on a critical hit (unike the epic abilities), so your reasoning has no standing; on the other hand, weapons do not allow one to choose the same special ability more than once (aside from considering the extra damage arising from the same factor thus not stacking with itself anyway), which can be proved this way: consider the fact that, thus, one would be able to make a weapon that deals 4 points of Constitution damage with each hit (4 × Wounding)!! And, Thelon, that orc warleader is Obould Manyarrows... We are talking Faerun, and I don't think you should go that way; and I think it was something shown in a way that it looked like it was a "triple" flaming weapon, even though it wasnt.
bleedoachikaltir 06-05-05, 03:46 PM	The problem I see with that is who decide if the others abilities can be stacked? Can I put 3 times the Vicious enchantement (or the merciful, which one does 2d6?) What about the one with -1 con? This can lead to problem for others enchantment, for the fire, I would say any DM could allow it as it is surely not overpowered, but as a general rule, need to be cautious, there might be an ability somwhere that would make the rule kinda overpowered.
Drachasor 06-05-05, 04:19 PM	Hummm... not from my point of view. Actually my ELH at page 129 says:"On any hit, this acid splashes the creature struck, dealing +3d6 points of bouns acid damage. On a successfull critical hit it instead deals +6d6 points of acid damage (or +9d6 if the critical multiplier is x3, or +12d6 if the critical multiplier is x4)" so what do you mean? technically it doesn't say you can multiply the damage even if that would be easier to calculate. Instead you have to add an increased amount of bonus damage according to the weapon's critical multiplier. Exactly like the non-epic versions. What I was trying to explain is that if the game designers had allowed special ability stacking, they wouldn't have created this epic special ability IMHO. Here's a better question: Why would anyone make a sword with that epic ability anyhow? A simple +6 increase to hit is about as good as +2d6 damage on all attacks, and you don't ever have to worry about energy resistance (and it naturally multiplies on crits). Also, it gives you a +6 bonus to hit, which is very nice. Or you could go with a +3 flaming, shocking, frost sword, +3d6 + 3, and it can handle different resistances better. Or just make a flaming burst, icy blast, shocking burst weapon, that's +3d6 on normal attacks, and +Xd10 extra on a critical, where X = 3 * crit multiplier. That's simply better than the epic enchantment. The Epic improvements are just hideously overpriced, that's the real problem. It isn't worth getting any of them as far as I can tell. Well, maybe triple throw, returning, throwing, distance. That's 20' range increment on a melee weapon that deals triple damage on a hit, for just a +9 modifier (well, +10 with the requisite +1 enchantment bonus). Then add on your flaming, etc abilities and each one of those is tripled. Truly a worthwhile epic enchantment....but most of the others suck. (Well, with the above you could later at Distance Shot (+6) and that gets rid of range penalties...but very, very price, better to just get something that could give you true strike once a round as a free or move action or something--seeing as you are epic). I mean, come on, you pay a +5 more to go from Seeking to Unnerring Accuracy, which only gives you the ability to ignore cover (seeking already ignores concealment)? That's crazy. Anyhow, don't compare it to Epic stuff...that way lies madness. -Drachasor
Drachasor 06-05-05, 04:23 PM	The problem I see with that is who decide if the others abilities can be stacked? Can I put 3 times the Vicious enchantement (or the merciful, which one does 2d6?) What about the one with -1 con? This can lead to problem for others enchantment, for the fire, I would say any DM could allow it as it is surely not overpowered, but as a general rule, need to be cautious, there might be an ability somwhere that would make the rule kinda overpowered. Vicious*3 would do 6d6 extra to the enemy and 3d6 to you every time it hits. Merciful * 3 would do an extra 3d6 non-lethal damage, and the weapon damage would be non-lethal. As for Wounding, that's a +2 bonus for -1 con...so you aren't going to be able to go too far with that without dramatically increasing the price. At that point, which would you rather have, wounding or keen speed (and there are other comparisons to make)? Doesn't seem bad at first glance. -Drachasor
Scifione 06-05-05, 09:25 PM	actually, i think technically it isn't allowed. That is true. Tables 7-14 and 7-15 on page 223 in the DMG point the way. You can't get a weapon with the same property. Not to mention spells like flame of faith page 166 in the "Complete Divine". Double flaming would be more powerful than flaming and frosting. It make 5 resistance less effective. If you allow double flaming burst, it would be too close to epic abilities.
Thomar_of_Uointer 06-05-05, 09:35 PM	I see nothing wrong with just making new enchantments with higher prerequisites. Fire: Upon command, a fire weapon is sheathed in fire. The fire does not harm the wielder. The effect remains until another command is given. A fire weapon deals an extra 2d6 points of fire damage on a successful hit. Bows, crossbows, and slings so crafted bestow the fire energy upon their ammunition. Strong evocation; CL 15th; Craft Magic Arms and Armor and flame blade, flame strike, or fireball; Price +2 bonus. Ice: Upon command, an ice weapon is sheathed in icy cold. The cold does not harm the wielder. The effect remains until another command is given. An ice weapon deals an extra 2d6 points of cold damage on a successful hit. Bows, crossbows, and slings so crafted bestow the cold energy upon their ammunition. Moderate evocation; CL 13th; Craft Magic Arms and Armor, chill metal or ice storm; Price +2 bonus. Lightning: Upon command, a lightning weapon is sheathed in crackling electricity. The electricity does not harm the wielder. The effect remains until another command is given. A lightning weapon deals an extra 1d6 points of electricity damage on a successful hit. Bows, crossbows, and slings so crafted bestow the electricity energy upon their ammunition. Moderate evocation; CL 13th; Craft Magic Arms and Armor, call lightning or lightning bolt; Price +2 bonus.
Titan W 06-05-05, 10:42 PM	I honestly see no problem with it... yes you do greater than epic bonuses for the bursts, however you could aldo make a firey burst/ flaming burst weapon by your standards... that's a +4D6 on damage and +XD10 damage on criticals (Usually +6D6+1D10) when you could take faming 8 Times for +8D6 and no critical bonus, or Flaming Burst 4 Times for +4D6 and +XD10 (Ususally +12D10) damage on a critical, the math says that on a critical taking Flaming burst 4 times is the better deal. It however isn't nececarally broken, I for one think that the Epic bursts sting byond imagnination when compared to the epic mosters you face, +3D6 damage is nearly nothing... and the epic feats Devistating and Overwhelming critical make damge on criticals far less useful, since you could EASLIY make a 34 streangth figher at only 25th level who would have a DC of 32 on the save, add in a large keen wounding kukri and you have a much mroe effective combat tactic... (2D6 damage piercing 15-20 critical -1 con per hit (2 to hit...) 2 handed +1.5 bonus to strength for damage... tha's +18 multiplying damage and 1 to con plus a fort save or die on a critical, +12D10 fire damage is nowhere near this on a critical... especialy at epic levels... (Hitting 5 times with -1 con then a fort DC 32 or die is devistating)... add in a speed weapon fro -6 to con (Assuming all hits) you have a far greater chance of killing somethign that hoing for no fire immunity then no fire resistance, then simply a high fort, which is reduceable... just my humble opinion
Drahiricomadus 06-06-05, 07:47 AM	Actually, extra damage dice do not get multiplied on a critical hit I don't think I said it could, coz I perfectly agree with you... what made you think I was sayin the contrary? :confused: (unike the epic abilities) I'm not sure about it, but I'm not saying you're wrong. Where did you find this rule? on the other hand, weapons do not allow one to choose the same special ability more than once (aside from considering the extra damage arising from the same factor thus not stacking with itself anyway), which can be proved this way: consider the fact that, thus, one would be able to make a weapon that deals 4 points of Constitution damage with each hit (4 × Wounding)!! Well... that's exactly my opinion! :) I was trying to demonstrate it but probably my post wasn't too clear (at least, not as I expected ;) ).
Drachasor 06-06-05, 10:40 AM	If wounding is such a big problem, then one could simply say you can only double up Flaming/Flaming Burst type effects. No problem with those. -Drachasor
Beamup 06-06-05, 11:14 AM	That is true. Tables 7-14 and 7-15 on page 223 in the DMG point the way. You can't get a weapon with the same property. Incorrect. If you look closely, the "reroll if you get a duplicate special ability" statement is a footnote to the "roll again twice" result on the Special Abilities table (not numbered in the SRD I'm using, sorry). As such, it does not apply to any result other than that one specific case. So, you cannot get "roll again twice" and end up with two Flamings from that. However, the following sequence of rolls will do it. Let's make it a Medium magic weapon. Roll on Weapons, suppose we get a 75 - "special ability and roll again." So, we roll on Melee Weapon Special Abilities, suppose it's a 15 - Flaming. Now, we roll again on Weapons. This time it's a 100 - "special ability and roll again." So we roll on Melee Weapon Special Abilities again, getting 15 again - Flaming. Roll a third time on Weapons, get a 40 - +3. So, we've generated a +3 Flaming Flaming weapon, going strictly by the tables, without ever encountering the "reroll duplicate special abilities" footnote. QED. Flaming Flaming, Shocking Shocking, etc. weapons are allowed by the RAW, and this cannot be debated. You can certainly question whether they were intended to be allowed, or whether you actually get any benefit from them, but RAW are 100% explicit. Multiple instances of the same enhancement on a single weapon ARE permitted.
Winter's requiem 06-06-05, 11:47 AM	I've had this discussion too, and I think that one can have more than one enchantment such as (fire, shock, cold, ect.) on a weapon, however I don't think one can have the two enchantments on the sword at the same time. To use for example a shocking, flameing long sword one have to say a command word, and if one says the other command word the elemental enchantment that allready were there "fizzes".
Drachasor 06-06-05, 11:54 AM	I've had this discussion too, and I think that one can have more than one enchantment such as (fire, shock, cold, ect.) on a weapon, however I don't think one can have the two enchantments on the sword at the same time. To use for example a shocking, flameing long sword one have to say a command word, and if one says the other command word the elemental enchantment that allready were there "fizzes". RAW there is nothing that says it would fizzle, and the Sage and all other official sources have said you can stack them all together and have them all active at once. -Drachasor
mvincent 06-06-05, 12:16 PM	actually, i think technically it isn't allowed. 2 bonuses from the same source (ie, in this case, the flaming enchantment) don't stack.I believe that rule is for "bonuses" rather than extra "damage" (which often stack, but cannot be multiplied). WotC has given examples of multiple different elemental enchantments on the same weapon, and has published at least one example (King Snurre) of multiple fire enchantments on the same weapon. A DM is free to rule on it though.
mvincent 06-06-05, 12:20 PM	I don't think one can have the two enchantments on the sword at the same time. To use for example a shocking, flameing long sword one have to say a command word, and if one says the other command word the elemental enchantment that allready were there "fizzes". From the FAQ: "There’s nothing illogical about a flaming, frost, shock weapon (at least not within any framework that allows weapons to generate energy in the first place), and there’s no rule against such weapons (think of the weapon as having fiery, frosty, shocking flames). The character creating such a weapon decides how it can be activated. Most such weapons probably are made so that the wielders can activate all three powers simultaneously, or activate them one at a time, as desired."
Winter's requiem 06-06-05, 12:34 PM	Thanks, nice to know.
SigilSigul 06-06-05, 07:29 PM	I use that extensively with one PC. He worships the god of the sun (he's from the desert) and uses a +2 Flaming Shocking Keen sword. Solar plasma, basically. :P
Loren Pechtel 06-07-05, 01:03 AM	Vicious*3 would do 6d6 extra to the enemy and 3d6 to you every time it hits. Merciful * 3 would do an extra 3d6 non-lethal damage, and the weapon damage would be non-lethal. As for Wounding, that's a +2 bonus for -1 con...so you aren't going to be able to go too far with that without dramatically increasing the price. At that point, which would you rather have, wounding or keen speed (and there are other comparisons to make)? Doesn't seem bad at first glance. -Drachasor I was thinking about a 4x Wounding weapon as being a worst-case. Two of them in the hands of a TWF specialist could be very nasty. However, I'm forced to call it ok. There's that weapon that does d6 con a few times a day. It's almost as nasty and a lot cheaper.