So...how about that -2 Cursed Sword?

[Golden Ladybug]

After spending a week telling people how stupidly good this cursed item is, and everyone should endeavour to acquire one at the earliest oppurtunity, I've thought of something, which I'm sure has already been thought of, but anyway:

Iaijutsu Focus, when your enemy is flatfooted and your weapon is sheathed, allows you to roll a IF check and deal Xd6 extra damage based on your result, as part of the action you use to draw your weapon. A -2 Cursed Sword, after a week, is always drawn instead of whatever other weapon you were trying to draw.

So, lets say our Iaijutsu Focus using character has taken the Quick Draw Feat and draws the -2 Cursed Sword as a Free Action, rolling Iaijutsu Focus as part of that free action. Then, using another free Action, they drop the sword. Since they have the Quick Draw feat, you can draw the -2 Cursed Sword again and roll Iaijutsu Focus again.

Repeat for Infinite Damage.

I'm almost certain this can't be Legal, but this seems to be one of those cases that no one thought of when writing the rules, as the relevant text for Iaijutsu Focus, when reading the requirements for retrying an Iaijutsu Focus check, seem to suggest that doing this might be more RAW than it seems:


Retry: Against inanimate objects, yes. In a formal duel or combat situation, generally not, unless the requirements for using the skill (sheathed weapon, flat-footed opponent) somehow come about again.

Since you're doing this combo as a chain of Free Actions, unless whatever you want to hit has some way of un-flatfooting themselves before you have enough d6s of Iaijutsu Focus to suit your fancy, you meet the requirements to make a new Iaijutsu Check.

So, what is your opinion on this, Playground?

[Ashtagon]

Relevant sentence:


The sword’s owner automatically draws it and fights with it even when she meant to draw or ready some other weapon.

Nothing says the sword returns to the scabbard automatically. I would take that as meaning that if the character attempts to draw a different weapon, the sword either swaps place with the other weapon or teleports itself into the character's hand, depending on which is more likely to be annoying.

You can't quick draw the sword if it's still on the floor. And if you "try" to quick draw your axe, you find the axe swapping places with your sword, so you end up with an axe on the floor and the sword in your hand.

[Golden Ladybug]

Relevant sentence:



Nothing says the sword returns to the scabbard automatically. I would take that as meaning that if the character attempts to draw a different weapon, the sword either swaps place with the other weapon or teleports itself into the character's hand, depending on which is more likely to be annoying.

You can't quick draw the sword if it's still on the floor. And if you "try" to quick draw your axe, you find the axe swapping places with your sword, so you end up with an axe on the floor and the sword in your hand.

The problem with that is that such interactions aren't really defined; the -2 Cursed Sword is drawn when you mean to draw or ready any other weapon, and thats all that is given to us here. Anything further than that, such as your interpretation, is just an interpretation of how it should work, not necessarily how it does. If a player were to present this to me in a game, then I would rule it like that, but in a pure RAW environment, how does this end up playing out?

The closest thing that I can think of to infinitely drawing a -2 Cursed Sword is the Chicken Infested Flaw from Dragon, which is a very silly flaw, but there isn't much you can say to deny that giving a Chicken Infested Commoner a Spell Component Pouch ends up flooding the world with an untold number of chickens.

[Thurbane]

Some ideas: Cursed sword specialist (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=205319)

[Coidzor]

And if you "try" to quick draw your axe, you find the axe swapping places with your sword, so you end up with an axe on the floor and the sword in your hand.

That would appear to be close enough. Went to draw a weapon, got a different weapon instead, didn't have a weapon in the hand before starting to draw, IF activates.

[DoughGuy]

As a matter of comparison wouldn't you go to the closest source in the rules? The closest source here would be the chicken infested feat from dragon. If a commoner can draw a chicken from nowhere as a free action I'm sure a PC can draw a sword from the ground as a free action.

[KillianHawkeye]

I'd rule that trying to drop the weapon causes you to sheathe it instead, costing you your move action. It's a curse, it's not supposed to be convenient.

[Need_A_Life]

The most useful thing is that you can never be robbed of your weapon.
Stripped of your equipment and thrown in a cell? BAM! Sword.
Swashbuckler steals your sword to ironically kill you with your own weapon? I don't think so.

[Heliomance]

It would let you apply IF to your iterative full attack, IMO, but I wouldn't have thought it would let you make more attacks than normal. It's no different to using a Gnomish Quickrazor, is it?

[Golden Ladybug]

So the consensus is this is a RAW legal trick, just no one would ever let you use it in a game, because "No, stop that sh*t"?

Okay, I can live with that.


It would let you apply IF to your iterative full attack, IMO, but I wouldn't have thought it would let you make more attacks than normal. It's no different to using a Gnomish Quickrazor, is it?

I suppose the contrast can be drawn, but what I'm thinking of here is that, since Iajitsu Focus takes no action to perform, except the action of drawing a weapon, and the combination of Quick Draw and dropping my Sword, as long as you have a single rank of Iaijutsu Focus, allowing you to make an arbitrarily high number of checks before attacking, meaning you gain an arbitrarily high amount of bonus damage.

Unless I've misunderstood how Gnomish Quickrazors work? Don't they Flatfoot enemies when drawn, rather than my combo of just drawing a weapon over and over again and then attacking for an arbitrary amount of damage?


I'd rule that trying to drop the weapon causes you to sheathe it instead, costing you your move action. It's a curse, it's not supposed to be convenient.

Now this I don't agree with; in 3.5, a major part of Magic is that it is predictable. It does what its advertised. Just because you're using a Cursed Item in a way that is advantageous to yourself, doesn't mean the Cursed Item changes the rules.

Of course, as a DM, its your right to houserule that dropping the -2 Cursed Sword is a move action to avoid abuse, but the idea that just because its cursed it should adapt to screw you over doesn't mesh with how 3.5 presents its magic system, at least not in my own mind.

[Need_A_Life]

So the consensus is this is a RAW legal trick, just no one would ever let you use it in a game, because "No, stop that sh*t"?Depending on campaign I'd either applaud you or condemn you for using it.
Usually, you'd get a one-time XP reward for creativity.

Unless I've misunderstood how Gnomish Quickrazors work? Don't they Flatfoot enemies when drawn, rather than my combo of just drawing a weapon over and over again and then attacking for an arbitrary amount of damage?A Gnome Quickrazor is sheathed after each attack (or, if you choose not to, you take -2 to attacks), the usual effect of which is not being able to make AoOs (unless you have IUS).

When I was playing an artificer I moped a bit when the GM wouldn't allow me to make cursed items deliberately... :smallfrown:

[Dragonmuncher]

I'm sorry, I think I missed that thread- why have you been telling everyone how great the -2 Cursed Sword is?

[Lapak]

I suppose the contrast can be drawn, but what I'm thinking of here is that, since Iajitsu Focus takes no action to perform, except the action of drawing a weapon, and the combination of Quick Draw and dropping my Sword, as long as you have a single rank of Iaijutsu Focus, allowing you to make an arbitrarily high number of checks before attacking, meaning you gain an arbitrarily high amount of bonus damage.Unless I'm very much mistaken, the wording of IF runs along the lines of 'when you are making an attack roll immediately after drawing' or similar. It doesn't give you a free attack; it just automatically applies whenever you happen to be already making an attack as your followup to drawing a weapon. Quickrazors (and this trick, possibly) turn the draw/sheath process into free actions and let you draw as part of every attack you already have.

Long story short: IF is not an attack action; it is a bonus that fires off automatically when you make an attack under certain circumstances.

EDIT: To clarify what I'm saying, rerolling the IF check would involve canceling and re-starting your attack action; unless you have a way to do THAT for free what you're suggesting will not work by RAW.

[Vendle]

I'd agree with Lapak here. If the PC chooses to drop the cursed sword (taking a free action) when it is drawn instead of completing their attack which triggered the IF option, they would forfeit the IF bonus.

I can't quite recall, but AFAIK the IF ability is used when attacking, and drawing a weapon as part of that attack. I don't think it is used when drawing a weapon and then weapon juggling.

[Hiro Protagonest]

This isn't about DM rulings. This is about RAW. And by RAW, it works.

[Heliomance]

I think we need exact wording on IF for this argument to be resolved.

[FMArthur]

Iaijutsu Focus's wording is notoriously loose, actually.


If you attack a flat-footed opponent immediately after drawing a melee weapon, you can deal extra damage, based on the result of an Iaijutsu Focus check.

You could draw a sword then shoot an Acid Splash at a flat-footed guy twenty feet away and still get Iaijutsu Focus damage.

[DrDeth]

I'm sorry, I think I missed that thread- why have you been telling everyone how great the -2 Cursed Sword is?

Yes, I'd like to know this also.

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

Check: If you attack a flat-footed opponent immediately
after drawing a melee weapon, you can deal extra damage,
based on the result of an Iaijutsu Focus check.
The act of drawing a weapon only enables the use of IF when you make your attack, drawing multiple weapons will not grant you multiple IF skill checks. Even if it did, as per the definition of the word 'retry' you would only use your most recent IF skill check result, not all of them.


As for drawing the cursed sword multiple times, you would need at least one other weapon sheathed for it to work. Dropping the cursed sword will not free you of its curse, so you attempt to draw your other sheathed weapon you end up holding the cursed sword again.

[Gotterdammerung]

by raw the sword is not given any way to magically teleport into your hand or switch places with your "example axe". The sword says


"The sword's owner automatically draws it and fights with it even when she meant to draw or ready some other weapon."

The curse of the sword restricts you. It doesn't give the sword the ability to teleport around.

ARGUMENT
There are 2 limitations described in the text. You must draw the sword and you must fight with the sword.

Ok lets run some scenarios through the RAW.

You have an axe and your cursed sword at your belt when combat starts. You say "I am drawing my axe." The curse of the sword activates and you reach and draw your sword even though you intended to draw the axe. The sword did not switch places or teleport to your hand. You simply reached for it instead of the axe.


You decide to drop your cursed sword. By raw you must fight with it. So arguably you might say "I drop my sword." and then the curse activates and your character does not actually drop the sword because it must fight with the sword.
But even if you manage to drop the sword, when you say "Now I draw my axe." The curse will activate. You have already drawn the sword once, that leaves the second part of the statement. The player must fight with the sword even when she meant to draw or ready some other weapon. So at this point when you say "Now I draw my axe." Your character instead would move over and pick the sword back up.



In short, the curse OVERRIDES your character decisions. It does not give the sword some teleportation bodysnatcher powers.

Although, you could create a new and different cursed sword with a more specific wording to fit your purpose. Page 273 of the DMG under the header of cursed items says that the listed cursed items are there to give you an example of cursed items. And the game allows and encourages customization.

But by raw, you can't use this specific sword the way you described.





As for drawing and sheathing non stop to stack up multiple rolls of iujistu focus damage. That does not work.

ARGUMENT

The Iaijutsu focus skill starts out very clearly with
if you attack
It goes on to explain that you get the iaijutsu focus roll when you attack if the attack was after immediately drawing the weapon and the attack is against a flat-footed opponent.

You can stand there sheathing and drawing your weapon all day but you won't get an iaijutsu focus skill roll until you attack after drawing against a flat-footed opponent. And at that time you will only get the single skill check roll.

Additionally, the damage is typed as "extra damage". It is unclear if extra damage stacks with itself and therefore up to DM's call. So even if you managed to figure out a way to make multiple focus rolls, You wouldn't be protected by RAW from a GM saying "they don't stack."

[JadePhoenix]

OK, so Gotterdammerung's reading means the curse acts as a curse. Golden Ladybug's reading (which is just wrong regarding IF, btw) means hte curse acts are a boon.

Why are we discussing this, again?

[Golden Ladybug]

I'm sorry, I think I missed that thread- why have you been telling everyone how great the -2 Cursed Sword is?

There wasn't a thread for you to miss :smallwink:

I've been singing the praises of the -2 Cursed Sword in real life, mostly because being cursed to always have a weapon you can use is just horrible, isn't it?

And on the wording of Iaijutsu Focus, a quick Google search turned up this:


Iaijutsu Focus (Cha)

This skill allows you to channel your chi more effectively when making an attack. Whenever you are making an attack roll immediately after drawing a weapon and your target is flat-footed, you may make an Iaijutsu Focus check as a free action. The results of the roll determine the amount of additional damage done, as shown on the following table:

10-14: +1d6
15-19: +2d6
20-24: +3d6
25-29: +4d6
30-34: +5d6
35-39: +6d6
40-44: +7d6
45-49: +8d6
50+: +9d6

This damage is cumulative with sneak attack damage or similar abilities if your character has them.

Action: Not applicable; Iaijutsu Focus checks are made at the beginning of a surprise round or as part of an attack, and are therefore not actions in and of
themselves.

Retry: Against inanimate objects, yes. In a formal duel or combat situation, generally not, unless the requirements for using the skill (sheathed weapon, flat-footed opponent) somehow come about again.

Special: You may also use this ability when making an attack against an inanimate object. This is the technique martial arts masters use to break boards or bricks with their bare hands.

If engaged in a formal iaijutsu duel, you may use your total Iaijutsu Focus modifier in place of your standard initiative if it is higher.

You gain a +2 bonus to Iaijutsu Focus checks if you have 5 ranks in Balance.

[JadePhoenix]

There wasn't a thread for you to miss :smallwink:

I've been singing the praises of the -2 Cursed Sword in real life, mostly because being cursed to always have a weapon you can use is just horrible, isn't it?

And on the wording of Iaijutsu Focus, a quick Google search turned up this:

First of all, that's not the exact text from OA (no bonus from Balance, description is different, actual OA text does not mention sneak attack, etc). Second and most important of all, it does not matter how many weapons you draw, Iaijutsu Focus only triggers when you draw a weapon immediately before making an attack roll.
Actually, I think your confusion comes from using this messed up version of the Iaijutsu Focus text. No free actions are mentioned in the original text, it's obviously done as part of the action of drawing and attacking.
So, no, this does not work.

[Hiro Protagonest]

OK, so Gotterdammerung's reading means the curse acts as a curse. Golden Ladybug's reading (which is just wrong regarding IF, btw) means hte curse acts are a boon.

Why are we discussing this, again?

Have you seen some of the cursed items? Bag of Devouring can be useful with the correct use (such as tossing a dangerous artifact you can't destroy into it, then later destroying the bag by shoving a bunch of bladed weapons into it if you want to get it out). Helm of Opposite Alignment can convert a powerful captured enemy with enough patience for those with high will saves. Potion of Poison is just like any other poison. Dust of Sneezing and Choking is a great mass debuff against mooks at lower levels.

[Ashtagon]

Ok, here is the actual text from OA. The table is the same as the above post.


Use this skill to gather your personal energy (ki) in an iaijutsu duel.

Check: If you attack a flat-footed opponent immediately after drawing a melee weapon, you can deal extra damage, based on the result of an Iaijutsu Focus check. In addition, if you and your opponent both agree to participate in a formal iaijutsu duel, your Iaijutsu Focus check replaces your initiative check for the ensuing combat.

In an iaijutsu duel (see Chapter 6), you and your opponent make opposed Iaijutsu Focus checks, and the winner accumulates extra damage dice according to the accompanying table.

You can also use Iaijutsu Focus in preparation for striking an inanimate object, assuming no distractions. Your extra damage is halved, just like your ordinary damage. This is the technique martial artists use to shatter objects.

Still not mention of Balance :smallconfused:

[Karen Lynn]

If you attack immediately after drawing a weapon.

Rules of language state action must be made(attack) after another specific action(draw weapon).

Continuing the same sentence, which uses the same requirements as already stated, say you can deal extra damage. You can't deal extra without dealing primary. To use IF, you must make an attack action. An attack action is a complex action. You only have one complex action per turn.

[Thurbane]

Even without Iaijutsu Focus, a weapon that is always at hand is pretty sweet, in the right build. Trick it out with weapon crystals; the RAW is probably against adding +X abilities, but adding flat rate +X thousand gp is probably kosher.

Possibly even not bad for an Item Familiar or founding a Legacy Item.

[Calanon]

Quick Draw + IF + Infinite Swords = Infinite Loop...

Alright now we need to think of a way to get infinite swords...

[Ashtagon]

So far, the two approaches to actualising the curse are either it reports itself any time you try to get another weapon, or it over-rides your conscious decisions, and you draw/pick it up instead.

I'm kind of partial to the second, but that does make it possible to abandon the weapon. What if you choose to fight without a weapon (aka unarmed strike)? What if you are disarmed? What if the weapon is stolen from you? What if you keep 'your precious sword' home for safekeeping?

[Gotterdammerung]

So far, the two approaches to actualising the curse are either it reports itself any time you try to get another weapon, or it over-rides your conscious decisions, and you draw/pick it up instead.

I'm kind of partial to the second, but that does make it possible to abandon the weapon. What if you choose to fight without a weapon (aka unarmed strike)? What if you are disarmed? What if the weapon is stolen from you? What if you keep 'your precious sword' home for safekeeping?

You can't choose to fight disarmed, because you must fight with the cursed weapon.

If you are disarmed you try to get your sword back because you must fight with it.

If it is stolen from you, you must try to get it back because you can't fight without it.

You can't leave it at home and if you could some how, you would run home to get it if a fight started because you must fight with it.




Whatever action you try to take to keep from having to use the cursed sword does not actually happen, the curse over-rides your control of your character and instead causes your character to take whatever action is needed to reacquire and wield the cursed sword.

[Rhatahema]

Don't know how helpful this is, but Iaijutsu Focus and especially the -2 sword rely on DM inference to function. There's more or less a consensus on how IF should work, and your DM is probably going to go by that, rather than an interpretation that is counter intuitive and breaks the game. As far as the sword goes, that it cannot be "gotten rid of" is too open to interpretation to claim RAW on any particular trick.

I don't know of any rules discussing new enhancements on cursed items, but according the DMG, pg223, "A weapon with a special ability must have at least a +1 enhancement bonus." -2 wouldn't cut it, even for flat cost enhancements. Least augment crystals would work, as their only prerequisite is that the item be at least masterwork, but the lesser and greater crystals function only when attached to +1 and +3 weapons, respectively. [MIC, pg221] The DMG -2 sword falls 500gp short of qualifying as an item familiar, but if it did meet that prerequisite, you add some interesting abilities. Note that the option to add special abilities through the feat still follow the normal rules for improving magic items.

If adding new enhancements were allowed, I'd house rule a system that worked up from -2 at the same cost as working up from a normal masterwork weapon. So, +2,000gp to make it a -1 sword, +8,000 for no bonuses or penalties aside from masterwork, and at +18,000 you've got a +1 cursed sword you can throw any kind of special ability onto. At that point, the curse becomes functionally equivalent to a +2 special ability.

Personally, I like the item familiar idea more than simply negating the penalties through enhancements.

[Golden Ladybug]

You can't choose to fight disarmed, because you must fight with the cursed weapon.

If you are disarmed you try to get your sword back because you must fight with it.

If it is stolen from you, you must try to get it back because you can't fight without it.

You can't leave it at home and if you could some how, you would run home to get it if a fight started because you must fight with it.

Whatever action you try to take to keep from having to use the cursed sword does not actually happen, the curse over-rides your control of your character and instead causes your character to take whatever action is needed to reacquire and wield the cursed sword.

Yeah, gonna have to stop you there; there is NO indication that the -2 Cursed Sword works like that. Lets look at text, shall we:


This longsword performs well against targets in practice, but when used against an opponent in combat, it causes its wielder to take a -2 penalty on attack rolls.

All damage dealt is also reduced by 2 points, but never below a minimum of 1 point of damage on any successful hit. After one week in a character’s possession, the sword always forces that character to employ it rather than another weapon. The sword’s owner automatically draws it and fights with it even when she meant to draw or ready some other weapon. The sword can be gotten rid of only by means of limited wish, wish, or miracle.

Strong evocation; CL 15th; Craft Magic Arms and Armor, bestow curse, and limited wish or miracle; Price 1,500 gp.

Nothing in that text suggests any compulsion to use the sword in the way you suggest or taking control of the player's character out of the hands of the player. Based on it being an Evocation Item, which as a school, lacks any way to create such an effect. Furthermore, the relevant Spell to craft it is Bestow Curse (although that is common to most Cursed Items), which does not perform any function that lets it control the actions of those effected by it.

This is an item that, unless you break the curse using a Limited Wish, Wish or Miracle, you are stuck with. There is nothing that suggests you are magically required to use it by your own will, only that it prevents you from laying hands on any other weapon. My reading of it suggests that its effect activates as a countermeasure to get you when you try to stop using it. You throw this Cursed Sword away, and the next time you try to draw your Axe, you find the hilt of the sword in your hand.

To the eyes of the 3.x Developers, I wouldn't be surprised if that was a really significant curse that had been inflicted. Not only can you not use your preferred equipment, because this bloody thing keeps jumping into your hand, but your attack and damage is reduced by 2. Since the 3.x Devs keep saying things like "Players always have something to look forward to with the Monk", this doesn't surprise me.

Even if you want to disagree about the wording, the most significant point I can make is that the text does not support your interpretation of you being forced to keep the sword or suddenly losing your ability to fight because it isn't at hand. If the -2 Cursed Sword did that, it would say that it does that. However, it doesn't say that it does that, nor does it suggest that it does that.

However, I can't claim that either of our definitions are indisputably correct or incorrect, so that's really all I can say. I disagree with how you read the effect of this item, and your attitude that just because its cursed it should also screw you over, but I can't do much to change your mind about it.

[Gotterdammerung]

Nothing in that text suggests any compulsion to use the sword in the way you suggest or taking control of the player's character out of the hands of the player.


the sword always forces the character to employ it rather than another weapon.

You can try to bring in magic schools into the discussion but that doesn't change the very clear description. The sword forces you to use it.


There is nothing that suggests you are magically required to use it by your own will, only that it prevents you from laying hands on any other weapon.

It goes one step further. The curse disregards your will. It states that you may want or even try to draw and fight with another weapon, but the curse will ignore your wishes and you will instead draw and fight with the cursed sword. The wording is very clear about how you as the player lose control over your actions when regarding choices about your melee weapon.


My reading of it suggests that its effect activates as a countermeasure to get you when you try to stop using it. You throw this Cursed Sword away, and the next time you try to draw your Axe, you find the hilt of the sword in your hand.

This is actually what you accuse me of doing. This is an assumption not supported by the text. There is no suggestion that the sword has the power to magically teleport itself in to replace the weapon you reached for, or for it to magically change its location in anyway.


your attitude that just because its cursed it should also screw you over, but I can't do much to change your mind about it.

You misunderstand me. i am perfectly fine with using cursed items in creative ways for positive effect. In my own games, I have used the dust of choking and sneezing and the robe of powerlessness and the necklace of strangulation in creative ways to thwart mine enemies. I don't see anything wrong with creative thinking. However, I have analyzed the wording of this particular cursed item and pondered the proposed abuse and I find it incongruous with the RAW of the item. The text does back me up as i repeatedly have shown. And the RAI even backs me up. There is no text however to back your side of the argument. It doesn't say anywhere that your cursed sword is the master of time and space.

[Thurbane]

Just one thing - if the ability of the sword to force it's wielder to use it is a mental compulsion, rather than, say, some kind of teleport effect (i.e. it appears in the wielders hand), what happens with an undead wielder, or someone otherwise immune to mind affects? Or to simply it further, what if while the wielder is unconscious, his fellow party members bury the sword in a field where he has no idea of it's location? Surely then, it wouldn't require a Limited Wish to dispose of it?

Maybe I'm looking on this from a 1E/2E perspective on the same type of cursed sword, but to me, it makes more "internal logic" for the sword to magically appear/teleport into the wielders grip than employing a magic compulsion...

[Heliomance]

What if you drop the -2 sword over the side of a ship into the Marianas Trench? Or into a volcano? Or by some magic it gets embedded into the middle of a mountain? What happens next time you try to fight? You have no way of going and getting it. Absolutely none. There is no way it is RAI or RAW for it to force you to run half way around the world/break open a mountain/dive to the bottom of the sea to retrieve it, especially not in the amount of time it takes to draw a weapon. No, the only way it makes sense is that you reach for your weapon, and the cursed sword is in your hand.

As for IF, the damage clearly only goes off when you make an attack, not just when you draw. Gnomish Quickrazor and (possibly) the cursed sword allow you to make iterative attacks with IF, but they don't give you infinite attacks.

[Ashtagon]

Just one thing - if the ability of the sword to force it's wielder to use it is a mental compulsion, rather than, say, some kind of teleport effect (i.e. it appears in the wielders hand), what happens with an undead wielder, or someone otherwise immune to mind affects? Or to simply it further, what if while the wielder is unconscious, his fellow party members bury the sword in a field where he has no idea of it's location? Surely then, it wouldn't require a Limited Wish to dispose of it?

Maybe I'm looking on this from a 1E/2E perspective on the same type of cursed sword, but to me, it makes more "internal logic" for the sword to magically appear/teleport into the wielders grip than employing a magic compulsion...

Perhaps a third way for the curse to function is as a lesser geas spell (with no expiration). Of course, it's still enchantment school, which some may object to.

[Gotterdammerung]

Just one thing - if the ability of the sword to force it's wielder to use it is a mental compulsion, rather than, say, some kind of teleport effect (i.e. it appears in the wielders hand), what happens with an undead wielder, or someone otherwise immune to mind affects?

Just because an effect takes over control of your character does NOT make it a "mind- affecting" ability. There is plenty of examples to prove my point. Necrotic Domination from the Cyst line spells, not mind-affecting but works very similar to dominate person. An intelligent magic item with a high ego can take over a characters actions, this is not mind-affecting and it also can not be prevented by effects that hedge out "possession". A diplomancer and/or evangelist can influence character actions with his skills, this is also not mind-affecting.

Furthermore, cursed items are weird magic items. Magic items do not follow the school system of magic rigidly. So using the school system of magic to classify a magic item is not going to give you reliable results. All we can judge magic items by is what it says in the text. And the text says it forces the character.


Or to simply it further, what if while the wielder is unconscious, his fellow party members bury the sword in a field where he has no idea of it's location? Surely then, it wouldn't require a Limited Wish to dispose of it?

Except the text of the ability will not allow the party to take it from him.


The sword can be gotten rid of only by means of a limited wish, wish, or miracle.




What if you drop the -2 sword over the side of a ship into the Marianas Trench? Or into a volcano? Or by some magic it gets embedded into the middle of a mountain? What happens next time you try to fight? You have no way of going and getting it. Absolutely none. There is no way it is RAI or RAW for it to force you to run half way around the world/break open a mountain/dive to the bottom of the sea to retrieve it, especially not in the amount of time it takes to draw a weapon. No, the only way it makes sense is that you reach for your weapon, and the cursed sword is in your hand.

You can't drop it in the Marianas Trench or into a volcano or magically embed it into a mountain.

Again...


The sword can be gotten rid of only by means of a limited wish, wish, or miracle.

[Heliomance]

It's a staple of myths and fairy tales that you can think you've got rid of a cursed item, only for it to show up again.

[Rubik]

Dust of Sneezing and Choking is a great mass debuff against mooks at lower levels.At ANY level. There's no save and no SR for the stun effect, and it's a splash weapon, which means attack rolls don't mean diddly.

Basically, take massive Con damage on a failed save and auto-stun. The only way to avoid the latter is to be immune to stunning. Outside of being a (non-living) construct, elemental, ooze, plant, or undead, you're basically auto-screwed.

[Hiro Protagonest]

Oh, I see it now.

...I find it odd that the effect for succeeding a save is worse than the one for failing, since the stunning says "those who succeed on either saving throw" rather than "whether or not they make the saving throw". Also, if you're trying to find someone invisible, this is just as good since they cough a lot.

[dextercorvia]

Ok, here is the actual text from OA. The table is the same as the above post.



Still not mention of Balance :smallconfused:

If you drop the weapon after drawing it, you aren't attacking immediately after drawing it. Instead, you are drawing, dropping, drawing, etc, drawing, Attacking. So you only get one set of IF bonus damage. That will let you IF on a Full attack, but not get infinite damage.

[Thurbane]

Except the text of the ability will not allow the party to take it from him.
OK, this really confuses me...so you're postuilating that it is forcing it's persuasion abilities on the rest of the party? Or how else is it avoiding the party simply picking it up and throwing it in a ditch while the cursed wielder is helpless? It's all well and good for the text to say "only X, Y or Z can free the wielder of the sword", but there are a myriad of in-game situations that the description does not remotely help to explain. If I were a player, and tried get rid of the sword using mundane means, I'd like more of an explanation than just "Bzzt - does not work".

I'm not going to say my idea of how it works is any more valid than yours, simply that it makes more sense to me for it to function as a kind of teleport ability (which to the best of my recollection is how it worked in earlier editions). I will agree, however, that exactly how it works is one of those things that is very poorly defined.

[Averis Vol]

wait, for the OP, if you make an attack against a flat footed opponent and succeed on the hit and deal damage isn't he no longer flat footed making the extra damage moot anyway on any extra attacks? also, isn't there a limit on "free actions" because even though say, talkings a free action, if you keep doing it doesn't it eventually take time?

[Gotterdammerung]

OK, this really confuses me...so you're postuilating that it is forcing it's persuasion abilities on the rest of the party? Or how else is it avoiding the party simply picking it up and throwing it in a ditch while the cursed wielder is helpless? It's all well and good for the text to say "only X, Y or Z can free the wielder of the sword", but there are a myriad of in-game situations that the description does not remotely help to explain. If I were a player, and tried get rid of the sword using mundane means, I'd like more of an explanation than just "Bzzt - does not work".

I'm not going to say my idea of how it works is any more valid than yours, simply that it makes more sense to me for it to function as a kind of teleport ability (which to the best of my recollection is how it worked in earlier editions). I will agree, however, that exactly how it works is one of those things that is very poorly defined.


I can see why you would get confused. The ability leaves a lot unsaid. But this is a discussion on RAW. And unfortunately RAW can get a little silly sometimes. Bottom line the cursed item gives 3 ways to get rid of it. This means all other attempts at getting rid of it, no matter who makes the attempt, will fail.

Dropping the weapon is not a viable action. It breaks 2 of the weapons rules.
#1 you are getting rid of it when you drop it.

#2 you are refusing to fight with it when you drop it.

As little as the ability explains itself, it does manage to tell us a lot about what it does, just not how it does it.

And it explicitly explains that it overrides the players actions if they go against the curse.

Now all of this could be cleared up by a GM ruling, but etiquette dictates that GM rulings are not appropriate in discussions of RAW, because there is no consistency from one GM to another. All we can go on in a raw discussion is

#1 What is said.
#2 Grammar.
#3 vocabulary.


On a side note, if you are asking me "As a GM how would you handle this item at the table?" Then my stance on the issue might change. Historically, I have created a feat called quick sheathe that allows you to sheathe weapons as a free action, so IF builds have never needed to dig deep to make there full attack loop in my games. And I wouldn't feel threatened by ruling in a players favor if he wanted -2 to attack and damage instead of losing a feat (fair enough trade to me). My games are more about creativity and equivalency in the build department. I run story centric games. A cursed sword that the player grows to love reminds me of Roranoa Zoro's cursed sword from One Piece, a wonderful story driven anime. I would likely be motivated by such a enthusiastic show of roleplay that I would end up authoring a specific and special cursed item just for them, tailored with more thematic negatives and more specific positives.

BUT

from a RAW standpoint the sword just doesn't work the way the OP wants it to, and I stand by my interpretation. I haven't seen any RAW based counter arguments to the points I have made. And even if we move the discussion into a RAI discussion I think my points still hold. If we decided to move it into a casual "DM's Opinion" style of discussion I would probably change my tune.

[Thurbane]

Fair enough. But what exactly does happen in my scenario of the wielder being unconscious and his other party members trying to dispose of it without the requisite spells? Obviously, by RAW it fails. But what do the party see? What actually happens to stop them taking it?

Finally, just a point of "devils advocate", nothing in the text of the SRD says the sword subverts the will of the wielder.

After one week in a character’s possession, the sword always forces that character to employ it rather than another weapon. The sword’s owner automatically draws it and fights with it even when she meant to draw or ready some other weapon.
"Forcing" is not a RAW defined term. It is pretty much DM interpretation - the sword could just as easily be "forcing" him by transposing itself with the intended weapon as by imposing it's will mentally. We can argue the common English usage of the terminology, but it is not defined in RAW terms (only the end effect of having the cursed weapon in your hand).

I'm not trying to be adversarial, but I don't think the RAW of the situation is as clear as you do.

[Gotterdammerung]

Fair enough. But what exactly does happen in my scenario of the wielder being unconscious and his other party members trying to dispose of it without the requisite spells? Obviously, by RAW it fails. But what do the party see? What actually happens to stop them taking it?

From a RAW perspective, it doesn't matter what actually happens. From a GM perspective i would likely spend 15 minutes coming up with clever ways to explain why their attempts do not work on a case by case basis.


Finally, just a point of "devils advocate", nothing in the text of the SRD says the sword subverts the will of the wielder.

"Forcing" is not a RAW defined term.




Force is not the only part of the text that implies the sword changes your actions.


This longsword performs well against targets in practice, but when used against an opponent in combat, it causes its wielder to take a –2 penalty on attack rolls.

All damage dealt is also reduced by 2 points, but never below a minimum of 1 point of damage on any successful hit. After one week in a character’s possession, the sword always forces that character to employ it rather than another weapon. The sword’s owner automatically draws it and fights with it even when she meant to draw or ready some other weapon. The sword can be gotten rid of only by means of limited wish, wish, or miracle.

Forces the character.....rather than another weapon
The swords owner Automatically draws it.
The swords owner automatically fights with it.
Even if she meant to draw or ready another weapon.

Now your teleportation thingy might explain why you would automatically draw the sword, but it does not explain why you would automatically have to fight with it.


It is pretty much DM interpretation - the sword could just as easily be "forcing" him by transposing itself with the intended weapon as by imposing it's will mentally. We can argue the common English usage of the terminology, but it is not defined in RAW terms (only the end effect of having the cursed weapon in your hand).


Compounding on what I was explaining above, it becomes a matter of simplicity. The text of the sword explicitly states it defies your intention. No matter what you meant to do, the sword makes you do X instead. You propose that this is because the sword will magically return to your hand ect ect. I propose it is because the sword makes you do X instead.

In other words, for your way to work, we need extra text to tell us that the sword has the ability to magically move itself. There is not text that suggests that.

And for my way to work, we don't need to add any text. The text already says everything it needs to say.

You might counter by saying that my way does need text because it doesn't say it mind zombies you into using the sword. To that vein of thought I reply, I never implied how the sword commandeered your actions. I even argued against it being classified as "mind-affecting". All I have ever said is that the sword forces you to draw and use it. And that is all the ability itself states on the matter.


#1 So in short, Teleportation does not explain how the sword forces you to fight with it.

#2 Your explanation requires extra words to exist, mine requires no extra words to exist.

Side note, why does #2 matter? Well, it doesn't for fluff. If you like the idea of the sword teleporting into the wielders hands every time he tries to grab at another weapon, then fine go with that visual. The important difference comes when we leave fluff and enter game mechanics. If the sword has an added teleport ability, then it is suddenly given extra potential outside the explained parameters of the item. You can throw the sword and reach for your dagger to jerry-rig a returning enhancement for instance. You can do this IF free draw free sheathe trick just by reaching for dummy weapons. And probably a few more tricks if we really sat down and thought about it.
These tricks are not defined in the given text. They only come about when you add the teleportation ability to the curse. So that is why simplicity matters when determining raw.



I'm not trying to be adversarial, but I don't think the RAW of the situation is as clear as you do.

I do not typically take forum discussions in that way. I have a terse and factual writing style that sometimes comes across as angry, annoyed, smug, ect. I can't really help that, I am true to myself and this is the way I speak. So if I came across as adversarial it was unintentional.

I did not take your comments as adversarial and I welcome the debate. I don't mind being wrong (if I turn out to be wrong). It does not bother me, I actually enjoy the learning experience that comes from someone successfully showing me how my thinking was flawed. I feel that I have accurately accessed the ability from a RAW perspective in this situation. But please feel free to take up arms against my logic. Let us lock our minds in the deadly dance of the ancient war art of Debate. We shall dance the dance of my people long into the night.

[Hubert]

Fair enough. But what exactly does happen in my scenario of the wielder being unconscious and his other party members trying to dispose of it without the requisite spells? Obviously, by RAW it fails. But what do the party see? What actually happens to stop them taking it?

The cursed sword can only be gotten rid of by limited wish, wish or miracle? So what happens if the character die? (Or does the sword make you immortal? :smalltongue:)

[Thurbane]

You make a good argument, but I guess we fundamentally disagree on how much weight the word "forces" carries in this context. If I make a successful Bullrush against someone, I am "forcing" them into another square.

I find it perfectly reasonable that a sword, in effect, using a Baleful Transposition effect on itself and the weapon you tried to draw, meets the wording of "forcing" you to fight with it. I guess we'll have to agree to disagree.

[Gotterdammerung]

The cursed sword can only be gotten rid of by limited wish, wish or miracle? So what happens if the character die? (Or does the sword make you immortal? :smalltongue:)

Well done Hubert. Now THAT is the way to bend the hell out of RAW.


Keep thinking like that and you will ruin your home game in no time when you rip apart the fabric of the universe for that sweet juicy power in the center. NOM NOM NOM

I would have to think about it for a second to see if it would work but it might so lets see.

#1 if you die normally you lose your possessions and that can be interpreted as getting rid of the sword.

This means that either A. you can't die. or B. if there is anyway that you can keep possession of your abilities after death, you must use it.
So the next question... is there a way to keep your equipment after you die... hmmm.

#2 the first thing that comes to mind on the topic... Ghosts. All of the equipment on their original bodies is "there equipment". And there equipment is duplicated in ghost form. If the equipment gets removed from the original body, then the ghost loses the use of it in ghost form. So I guess that means that if anyone dies with a -2 cursed sword in their hands they automatically come back with the ghost template added to their character. And because they can not get rid of the sword in any way (except the 3 spells), no one can take it away from their corpse. And because it is on their corpse they automatically get a ghost copy. And since the copy will also restrict them to the curse they have to fight with the cursed ghost sword. And because the sword is not ghost touch... they become the worst ghost ever.


Well that was a fun ride :smallsmile:

[TuggyNE]

And because the sword is not ghost touch... they become the worst ghost ever.

I assume ghost copy weapons are ethereal and/or incorporeal along with the ghost, no? So the only problem is that it has (presumably) a 50% miss chance and the usual -2 to hit and damage. ... OK, yeah, that is pretty terrible. May or may not be "worst ghost ever" but it's sure in the running.

[Eldest]

Quick Draw + IF + Infinite Swords = Infinite Loop...

Alright now we need to think of a way to get infinite swords...

Would a soulknife work here?

[Kansaschaser]

Isn't your opponent no longer flat footed after they get hit the first time? Shouldn't you only get the extra damage from the first attack? :smallconfused:

[Quietus]

I'd just like to point out that neither interpretation - the teleporting sword, or the will-subverting sword - are supported by RAW. In fact, the interpretation is left entirely up to the DM. Arguing over it is silly, though I know this won't stop it.


Also, while the sword is listed as a "Cursed -2 sword", it does not, in fact, have any enhancement bonus. In fact, it isn't even listed as Masterwork. It simply has a -2 penalty to attack and damage, which is unnamed and untyped. If one were to make a Masterwork sword and have it thus cursed, they could in fact give it magic properties as though it were a normal sword, it'd just retain its -2 penalty to attack and damage, mitigating part of those properties.

[dextercorvia]

Isn't your opponent no longer flat footed after they get hit the first time? Shouldn't you only get the extra damage from the first attack? :smallconfused:

There is no such exception that I have ever read.

"At the start of a battle, before you have had a chance to act (specifically, before your first regular turn in the initiative order), you are flat-footed. "

Any other effect that makes you flatfooted, is either against a single attack or until your next turn. The first might be what you are remembering.

[Krotchrot]

Let us also not forget, that since by RAW we can not get rid of said Cursed Sword by any means, said given spells. This weapon is unable to be Sundered. Can we say -2 Cursed Adamantine Hammer anyone? Thinking about this more. It's really the Bestow Curse thats keeping said Item from ever being lost, destroyed, given away, and etc. So all every Crafter has to do is make their pretty Magical Weapons, Armors, and Misc. Use Bestow Curse on it and Presto! Magical Arms that can not break, be dispelled, or other DM Mishaps.

Of course as a DM, I would throw books, call you clever and give you some bonus xp.

As a player, tempted to sneak this by my DM.

[Gotterdammerung]

I'd just like to point out that neither interpretation - the teleporting sword, or the will-subverting sword - are supported by RAW. In fact, the interpretation is left entirely up to the DM.

If I tell my GM that I want to fight with my dagger, I do not get to fight with my dagger. I have to use the cursed sword.

That means my will was subverted by the swords curse.

[dextercorvia]

If I tell my GM that I want to fight with my dagger, I do not get to fight with my dagger. I have to use the cursed sword.

That means my will was subverted by the swords curse.

If you order a cheeseburger, and the drive through guy gives you a chicken sandwich, it isn't that your will is subverted, but the consequences are not what you willed.

[Thurbane]

I'd just like to point out that neither interpretation - the teleporting sword, or the will-subverting sword - are supported by RAW. In fact, the interpretation is left entirely up to the DM.
I very much agree - this was kind of my point, though I may have expressed it poorly.

If you order a cheeseburger, and the drive through guy gives you a chicken sandwich, it isn't that your will is subverted, but the consequences are not what you willed.
Indeed - this is also goes to the point I was trying to express.

Sorry to the OP if debating this point has derailed your thread.

[Calanon]

You can't drop it in the Marianas Trench or into a volcano or magically embed it into a mountain.

What? Who says I can't drop the weapon? I'm not surrendering my weapon, I'm just putting it down the the night... I just so happen to have put it down at the bottom of the sea... And now i begin my career as a Monk since you can't ready/draw an unarmed strike :smalltongue:

The Sword is obviously Mind-Affecting because its either Conjuring itself to the person attempting to draw/ready a weapon or dominating the characters mind to make them move half way around the world and under the sea to get there weapon and they move back to the exact location where they were (All in a free action... I wonder if this would simplify planar travel?)

Albeit the mind-affecting denies a save and SR (Best in Enchantment ever...)
However there is nothing by RAW to support this :smallfrown:

I mean by RAI the sword most likely takes the place of the next weapon you plan to draw... What spell has a material component of a weapon of sort?



Would a soulknife work here?

:smalleek: If someone makes this work Soulknife becomes god-king of smack

[OracleofWuffing]

Y'know, I'd almost say that dropping an item isn't getting rid of it. I'm not getting rid of this apple when I drop it on the floor, I'm not getting rid of my wallet when I drop it on the table, I'm not getting rid of my backpack when I drop it on the ground so's I can fights withouts encumbrances. I'd also almost say that I'm only forced to employ it for a circumstance, and that has no bearing on dropping the weapon.

Almost. Sadly, I'm not allowed to have cursed items ever since I made that infinitely small wizard. :smallfrown:

:eek: Come to think of it, if I'm always forced to employ that cursed item, that means that whenever I drop anything, I end up dropping the cursed item instead!

[FMArthur]

Soulknife doesn't get infinite draws AFAIK and the "trick" doesn't work on any level at all, regardless.

Iaijutsu Focus doesn't ever give you free attacks for any reason.
Iaijutsu Focus says you deal extra damage if you draw a weapon immediately before making an attack - if you draw multiple weapons, the last one drawn is the only one that would have been 'immediately before' the attack.
And even if you got infinite weapon-draws to be simultaneous somehow, the rules on stacking would prevent it all from exceeding the maximum Iaijutsu Focus damage for one check.

[Rubik]

I'm so going to enhance my -2 cursed sword with throwing, so I can hurl it at my foes.

Free returning!

[Golden Ladybug]

Soulknife doesn't get infinite draws AFAIK and the "trick" doesn't work on any level at all, regardless.

Iaijutsu Focus doesn't ever give you free attacks for any reason.
Iaijutsu Focus says you deal extra damage if you draw a weapon immediately before making an attack - if you draw multiple weapons, the last one drawn is the only one that would have been 'immediately before' the attack.
And even if you got infinite weapon-draws to be simultaneous somehow, the rules on stacking would prevent it all from exceeding the maximum Iaijutsu Focus damage for one check.

And that's fine with me; as has been established, my thought process when I flawed, as I didn't have access to the correct text of Iaijutsu Focus. I'm glad that its so, because I would feel pretty lame if I discovered a way of getting infinite damage that was so...simple :smallwink:


Sorry to the OP if debating this point has derailed your thread.

Not a problem at all; this is a much more interesting discussion than whether my poor understanding of Iaijutsu Focus creates an infinite damage hack.

[Gotterdammerung]

If you order a cheeseburger, and the drive through guy gives you a chicken sandwich, it isn't that your will is subverted, but the consequences are not what you willed.

Except it IS that my will has been subverted. Ordering food through a drive-thru is an established system
. I have the power to tell the restaurant workers to prepare me a specific meal. If they make me a different meal, they have undermined that power and therefore subverted my will.




Back to the sword. It does not say when you reach for another weapon you draw the cursed sword instead. It says even if you meant to draw a different weapon you draw the cursed sword instead. You don't ever actually get to reach for the example dagger. You only need to intend to reach for the dagger to activate the curse.

Everyone is also focusing on the part of the sentence that says "draw". There is a whole other criteria given in the "and fight with it" part of the sentence.

[dextercorvia]

Except it IS that my will has been subverted. Ordering food through a drive-thru is an established system
. I have the power to tell the restaurant workers to prepare me a specific meal. If they make me a different meal, they have undermined that power and therefore subverted my will.

No, in that case they have subverted the drive-thru system. They haven't done anything to my will for a cheeseburger.

Now I want a cheeseburger.

[Gotterdammerung]

No, in that case they have subverted the drive-thru system. They haven't done anything to my will for a cheeseburger.

Now I want a cheeseburger.

They have subverted the system by denying my power in the system which is my will to have a cheeseburger not a chicken sandwich.

They most certainly have done something to my will for a cheeseburger, that is how they subverted the system. They denied my power in the system which is my will to have a cheeseburger not a chicken sandwich.

Either way it is a pretty bad example. The drive thru system does not in any way mirror the control a player has over his character.

I do not speak to my DM through an outdated and fuzzy microphone. I do not have to speak over background noise and a running engine.

If you want to make the example more pertinent you could say I buy a chicken sandwich and a cheeseburger but the chicken sandwich is a -2 cursed chicken sandwich. When I decide I want to eat the cheeseburger, I end up grabbing and eating the chicken sandwich instead, even though I fully intended to reach for and eat the cheeseburger.

[dextercorvia]

If you want to make the example more pertinent you could say I buy a chicken sandwich and a cheeseburger but the chicken sandwich is a -2 cursed chicken sandwich. When I decide I want to eat the cheeseburger, I end up grabbing and eating the chicken sandwich instead, even though I fully intended to reach for and eat the cheeseburger.

And, indeed, there are a variety of ways the curse could be implemented. That is left to the DM. It is not mandated to be mind-control. It is also not mandated to be a simple teleportation that can be manipulated to positve effect.

You throw the sword in a volcano, and unbeknownst to you, it embeds itself in a ledge, rather than plunging into the lava. On your way back to the bottom of the mountain, the earth starts to rumble. You hurry, realizing that the volcano might erupt. A small fissure opens just in front of you on the trail, and a gout of lava shoots out. Molten rock, and debris land all around you, but at your feet is something made of steel. Slowly you realize that this is that sword. Acknowledging the inevitable, you pick up the cooling blade. A voice seems to come to you over the wind. Miss me?

Its a curse, have fun with it. Don't just tell your player that they can't throw it away. Have it glue itself to your hand, teleport across the battlefield, or trick you into thinking that you are drawing another weapon.

[OracleofWuffing]

Back to the sword. It does not say when you reach for another weapon you draw the cursed sword instead. It says even if you meant to draw a different weapon you draw the cursed sword instead.
So, if I accidentally draw a dagger, the curse doesn't kick in?


Everyone is also focusing on the part of the sentence that says "draw". There is a whole other criteria given in the "and fight with it" part of the sentence.
Well, we are fighting with it.

[Rhatahema]

...Also, while the sword is listed as a "Cursed -2 sword", it does not, in fact, have any enhancement bonus. In fact, it isn't even listed as Masterwork...

DMG, pg221, states that all magic weapons are masterwork, and the -2 cursed sword is in fact a magic weapon. By RAW it couldn't be created from a non-masterwork sword. So, technically you still get the enhancement bonus to your attack roll. Though I won't say that the designers had this in mind when writing the -2 sword. Maybe they wanted to allow for a cleric of balance with a +2 -2 sword.

[The_Snark]

I prefer to think of it as this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bETCusT5kNM) in sword form, basically. It comes back no matter what. It might show up in your hand through happenstance or a series of contrived coincidences, or it might just show up. It doesn't have to make sense or be consistent. You can hurl it into the depths of a volcano and watch it sink into the lava and walk away thinking you're free, but the next time you get into a fight it'll be in your hand without so much as a scorch mark on it. If you get yourself arrested and stripped of your weapons, and you break out of your cell and wrestle a weapon away from the guard, you will find that you've somehow ended up with the -2 sword—even though you're pretty sure he was armed with a greataxe a moment ago.

Remember, the item is made with (Limited) Wish or Miracle. It's not mind control or teleportation or anything specific; it just changes reality to make the desired outcome happen.

The one thing it won't do is show up when you're fighting unarmed, so if you've been arrested and stripped of weapons and thrown in a cell you're out of luck. Still, it's kind of a neat item, especially if you cast Greater Magic Weapon on it. I don't think that eliminates the penalty, since it's untyped, but it mitigates it.

[Rubik]

Try fighting with an improvised weapon.

The penalty for the cursed sword is still better than the penalty for fighting with, say, a runcible spoon.

[Arbitrarious]

I picked up a loadstone once. I was a druid. So I used it like a sling bullet. The only pouch on my person had my sling bullets so I just kept shooting that same stone. Good times.

[Calanon]

Try fighting with an improvised weapon.

The penalty for the cursed sword is still better than the penalty for fighting with, say, a runcible spoon.

Can you Dual Wield a Curse Sword with a regular dagger? Would the curse allow for that?

[deuxhero]

Make it Adamantite. When captured draw something as an improvised weapon and enjoy your lockpick.

[FMArthur]

What if you had two of the cursed swords? Which would you get when you drew a weapon? One randomized? One in your hand randomized and the other falling to your feet?

[Arbitrarious]

No you see you simply attack with both of them dealing double damage. Add more cursed swords to increase the damage. If you have 4 a single attack action is suddenly a full attack! Those fools, take your successive -5 penalty. I'll take -2 to all my attacks instead. Mwahaha! :smalltongue:

[Calanon]

No you see you simply attack with both of them dealing double damage. Add more cursed swords to increase the damage. If you have 4 a single attack action is suddenly a full attack! Those fools, take your successive -5 penalty. I'll take -2 to all my attacks instead. Mwahaha! :smalltongue:

http://i25.servimg.com/u/f25/15/45/37/90/43325411.jpg

If this works...

[FMArthur]

I think the latest one applied just overrides the other every time it happens, actually. You draw a weapon -> Cursed Sword 1 takes its place -> Cursed Sword 2 takes Cursed Sword 1's place. No variance.

I'd mess with it as a DM of course. Anyone crazy enough to stockpile curses deserves getting fun weirdo mechanics.

[Quietus]

I think the latest one applied just overrides the other every time it happens, actually. You draw a weapon -> Cursed Sword 1 takes its place -> Cursed Sword 2 takes Cursed Sword 1's place. No variance.

I'd mess with it as a DM of course. Anyone crazy enough to stockpile curses deserves getting fun weirdo mechanics.

This is a far more interesting line of conversation to follow. I nominate it for discussion!

[JBento]

Except that you can't have two cursed swords - when you went to pick up the second one, the curse of the first would activate and you'd get that one instead.

Since you never got to touch the second sword, its curse would never affect you.

A similar effect happens if you try the aforementioned two-weapon fighting with a dagger - when you went to draw the dagger, you'd draw the sword. If you already drew the sword, then you two-hand the sword.

[TuggyNE]

Except that you can't have two cursed swords - when you went to pick up the second one, the curse of the first would activate and you'd get that one instead.

Since you never got to touch the second sword, its curse would never affect you.

A similar effect happens if you try the aforementioned two-weapon fighting with a dagger - when you went to draw the dagger, you'd draw the sword. If you already drew the sword, then you two-hand the sword.

TWF both cursed swords starting at exactly the same time? That way the curses take hold simultaneously.

[JBento]

There's no simultaneous actions in D&D - stuff happens one after the other.

[Gotterdammerung]

Technically you could be simultaneously cursed by 2 swords. The curse happens after 1 week of possession. So even if that is only 6 seconds apart, nothing about the first curse will stop the second curse from activating 6 seconds later.



There is no solid raw interpretation for what happens next. It almost requires dm interpretation to continue since both abilities can be considered in contention with each other. It is the "this instead of that" nature of the wording that causes the friction.

Let's explore the possibilities.

#1 you get stuck in a paradox and the game ends because your turn never ends and no one can stop it.


#2 Using quick draw and two weapon fighting, reach for both swords at the same time.

Both curses will activate and resolve at the same time, causing you to mysteriously and unintentionally cross draw. (left hand reaches for left sword, right hand reaches for right sword. Results become left hand reaches for right sword and right hand reaches for left sword.


That is about all that can happen. If you reach for them separately they will contradict each other due to the "you must do this instead of that" nature of their ability.

You must draw and fight with sword one even if you meant to draw or ready sword 2.

AND you ALSO

must draw and fight with sword 2 even if you meant to draw or ready sword 1.

it is impossible to comply to both of these statements yet you must comply.

Thus paradox.

Why does quick draw work?

Because they happen at the same time the curses happen at the same time and therefore don't contradict each other anymore. Each curse plays out simultaneously.


I meant to draw sword 1, therefore I must draw sword 2.
I meant to draw sword 2, therefore I must draw sword 1.

Infinite loop if they happen sequentially but if they happen simultaneously it becomes.




I meant to draw sword 1 and I meant to draw sword 2, therefore I must draw sword 2 and I must draw sword 1.



Did I draw sword 1? yes

Did I draw sword 2? yes

Am I fighting with sword 1? yes

Am I fighting with sword 2? yes

[Bastian Weaver]

The "Get captured, draw improvised weapon, get your cursed sword back" sounds like fun, but I don't think it would work that way.

"Hey, boss, this sword we've taken from that captured guy looks funny".
"Let me see. Ah, yes. I'm aware of such weapons. It is obviously a Cursed Sword -2".
"So what do we do with it, boss?"
"Nothing. Leave it here. And kill the one you've taken it from before locking up the prisoners".
"Oh. Right".


Either this, supposing the sword does possess the ability to return to its owner, or, if it's all about mind control...

"Hey, boss, this unconscious guy still absolutely refuses to let go of this fancy sword!"
"Then kill him. If he values his blade so highly, let him be buried with it".
"Good idea! I guess that's why you're the Grim Overlord".

[Gotterdammerung]

"Hey, boss, this unconscious guy still absolutely refuses to let go of this fancy sword!"
"Then kill him. If he values his blade so highly, let him be buried with it".
"Good idea! I guess that's why you're the Grim Overlord".



Hey boss, remember that unconscious sword grabbing guy? After we buried him he came back as a ghost but he just runs around swinging that fancy sword at everyone. It goes right through you and doesn't even hurt. Can we make him our mascot?

[lesser_minion]

I imagine that if you can't fight without the sword because it's cursed, and you can't fight with the sword because it was thrown into the fires of Mount Doom, you just don't get to fight at all, surely?

[JBento]

I imagine that if you can't fight without the sword because it's cursed, and you can't fight with the sword because it was thrown into the fires of Mount Doom, you just don't get to fight at all, surely?

This might be also what happens if you get two (or more curses on you).

Since you can't draw both cursed swords at the same time (which you would have to to fulfill both curses), you can't draw any weapon.

Since you can't fight with both cursed swords, you can't fight with any weapon.

Hope you got some spellcasting there...

[Gotterdammerung]

You could also take this part of the curse


The sword's owner automatically draws and fights with it

very literally.

You want to cast a spell? too bad you automatically fight with your cursed sword.

You want to throw a tanglefoot bag? Too bad you automatically fight with your cursed sword.


Even more literally.

You want to run away? too bad you automatically fight with your cursed sword.


Even more literally.

You want to fight the enemy? Too bad you have to fight with your cursed sword. ( as in you and your cursed sword must get into a fight with each other. i.e. you versus your cursed sword.)

[FMArthur]

I can imagine you and your mates would get a fairly rigorous training regiment out of owning the weapon when it must be wielded in arguments.

[OracleofWuffing]

If the curse becomes a big thing after a week of possession, you can actually get more than one at the same time if all the cursed weapons were in a bag that you picked up. Now, if you have more cursed swords than you have arms...

[Midnight_v]

I was really irritated by some of those posts couldn't shake why at first, maybe it was the tone, maybe it was because I felt like he's was forcing too much of his interpretation as raw, except the raw is nebulous and determined too much how one thinks "forces" works.
Also, because of his argument the sword led into "Iron heart surge land" in which we've completly gotten away from anything the sword is actually described to do raw.

So for once I'm going to do something I hate to do and talk about RAI...
Hearing all these arguments got me to thinking "I remeber having one of these swords when I was like 13 years old 2nd edition and that thing totally teleported itself to my hand" so I went digging. It took me a minute to find the book and a few more mins to find the passage but this is what is said:


"... when faced with an enemy the sword wil weld iteslf to the character's hand and force him to fight until the enemy or the wilder is slain. Thereafter, the possesor can loose, but never rid himself of the cursed sword. No matter what is done, it will appear in his hand whenever an apponent is faced...."

Thw sword is a legacy item, and isn't written expressly to that effect because the devs assumed we would know what was to happen because thats what was known to them to happen, through years of play.
I do not agree with the:
"lets use the most unfavorable interpretation ever" line of thought.
I also reject the ridiculous notion that people can't render the character helpless and remove him of the sword temporarily. (As well as the subsequent Ghost touch gibberish/shennigans)
However, because I know that's how that things always worked and supposed to work still I'm going to take it as resolved that it does "Appear" in your hand via teleportation.

As a dm, and a discerning player this is how I'd rule it and how I'll rule it should it ever come up in my games:
You can derive some benefits from this cursed sword.
Iujutsu Focus: would work but you would have to carry something with which to draw which would be interesting as the man carrying all those daggers really keeps pulling katanas from hammer space. It wouldn't grant you more attacks than allowed to you naturally however, it would get you the same effect as carrying multiple katanas etc. So that actally ends up being cool. . .
...instead of the ridiculous assumption that no one can take the sword and throw it into the sun, or that it gets an {Indestructable} but not a teleporting/reforming one...
Other Effects
You could greater magic weapon it.
You could try to use a table leg and get your Curse -2 adamantine sword instead the instant lock pick trick would work.

Getting rid of it: You could also get out of it by leaving it somewhere or having someone steal it and then you subsequently don't draw a weapon or try to fight for x amount of time, and hope that they've used it by and that it has attuned to them by then.

These are reasonable things, and good things and should be taken into account because this is one of the times when niether of you can prove the argument via raw without serious interpretational leeway.

[That_guy_there]

You can't choose to fight disarmed, because you must fight with the cursed weapon.

If you are disarmed you try to get your sword back because you must fight with it.

If it is stolen from you, you must try to get it back because you can't fight without it.

You can't leave it at home and if you could some how, you would run home to get it if a fight started because you must fight with it.




Whatever action you try to take to keep from having to use the cursed sword does not actually happen, the curse over-rides your control of your character and instead causes your character to take whatever action is needed to reacquire and wield the cursed sword.

Gotterdammerung's reading and arguments are Exactly RAW. The Rules Literally Say that you draw and fight witht he cursed sword. Dropping it isn't even an option. So roll well on that IF and fight away with that -2.

And the easy "fix" to the can you be under the curse of two -2 cursed swords would be (in my opinion) simply this: Yes you can and must fight with both swords. In fact you would be cursed to draw both swords at the same time and fight with both swords (one in each hand) taking all Two Weapon Fighting penalties for fighting with two longswords.

Also Isn't the curse lifted when the cursed item is destroyed?

:smallamused:

[OracleofWuffing]

"... when faced with an enemy the sword wil weld iteslf to the character's hand and force him to fight until the enemy or the wilder is slain.
Wait, so in Second Edition, I could have fifty of these things, and when combat begins, they all weld themselves to my hand? Holy cow, if that's a curse, what's an enchantment look like in that edition!?


The Rules Literally Say that you draw and fight witht he cursed sword. Dropping it isn't even an option.
Yes, the rules say that you draw and fight with the sword. The rules do not, however, say draw and make attack actions with the sword. If dropping the sword can be used in a method of fighting, which was somewhat from where the OP came, then I am still fighting with the sword by dropping it.

[That_guy_there]

Wait, so in Second Edition, I could have fifty of these things, and when combat begins, they all weld themselves to my hand? Holy cow, if that's a curse, what's an enchantment look like in that edition!?


Yes, the rules say that you draw and fight with the sword. The rules do not, however, say draw and make attack actions with the sword. If dropping the sword can be used in a method of fighting, which was somewhat from where the OP came, then I am still fighting with the sword by dropping it.


Technically it you could argue that, i guess. But aside from the out of game bonus you'd get for the Iujutsu Focus tomfoolery, it seems to me that its sort of like saying "I throw the Machine gun at the guy because weapons thrown by me do more damage than the gun itself would have."

But i guess i could understand what you were saying....

[JadePhoenix]

Technically it you could argue that, i guess. But aside from the out of game bonus you'd get for the Iujutsu Focus tomfoolery, it seems to me that its sort of like saying "I throw the Machine gun at the guy because weapons thrown by me do more damage than the gun itself would have."

But i guess i could understand what you were saying....

It's iaijutsu, not iujutsu. Also, there's no bonus.

[That_guy_there]

It's iaijutsu, not iujutsu. Also, there's no bonus.
:confused:
Sorry, sorry, With all the madness about this and that i apparently got confused...

I stand by my "no real in-game reason" for a benificial strategy of dropping swords in order to fight with said cursed weapon, however.

[OracleofWuffing]

I'm not too concerned about the practicality of the situation, just more of the potential. Hence why it's an "if" hypothetical.

That said, certain Wizards can get a lot of mileage out of the "Fly over enemy, drop item" strategy, and this would be one way (albeit an inefficient way) of having unlimited ammunition for that.

[dextercorvia]

I'm not too concerned about the practicality of the situation, just more of the potential. Hence why it's an "if" hypothetical.

That said, certain Wizards can get a lot of mileage out of the "Fly over enemy, drop item" strategy, and this would be one way (albeit an inefficient way) of having unlimited ammunition for that.

Let's add Sizing to it. :smallwink:

[Gotterdammerung]

If dropping the sword can be used in a method of fighting, which was somewhat from where the OP came, then I am still fighting with the sword by dropping it.

No. You are dropping the sword to fight with something else. Just because you are still fighting does not mean you are "fighting with the sword".

[Sliver]

:eek: Come to think of it, if I'm always forced to employ that cursed item, that means that whenever I drop anything, I end up dropping the cursed item instead!

So... If I want to hire the service of a caster, I have to pay the sword for the service instead?

[Socratov]

I'm so going to enhance my -2 cursed sword with throwing, so I can hurl it at my foes.

Free returning!

or just take the throw anything feat, then enhance the blade to do nasty things like vorpal and you have a vorpal returning sword with which you can decapitate enemies at a distance... now, that would be funny :) (unless the enhancement bonus stacks like absolute numbers, but that would be stupid)

[OracleofWuffing]

No. You are dropping the sword to fight with something else. Just because you are still fighting does not mean you are "fighting with the sword".
Er, what? I'm not fighting with something else. I am dropping the sword to have it fall on someone's head, dealing damage- it is the same concept that hammers use in order to deal damage. I know that "Dealing damage" with a weapon isn't necessarily fighting per se, but your premise is that there's something else I'm fighting with.

Otherwise, well, fine. I scream "Why do you keep leaving your towels on the floor!?" at my sword before I drop it. :smallannoyed:

Edit: Sorry, had you mixed up with someone else. "Fighting with the sword" does not mean "Make attack actions with the sword." As long as I am employing the sword in some means while fighting, I am fighting with the sword. Much like how I can fight with my Boots of Striding and Springing or potion of Mage Armor (without using them as improvised weapons), even though they do not deal any damage. Just because I used something else to deal damage, does not mean I didn't use other items.

Consider, a Wizard who summons 29 Solars and then wields a Longspear. What's he fighting with?


So... If I want to hire the service of a caster, I have to pay the sword for the service instead?
Yes, and he always squelches on the deal. He also loses the money (no pockets to hold the cash), so he can't even give you a refund.

[That_guy_there]

Consider, a Wizard who summons 29 Solars and then wields a Longspear. What's he fighting with?.

You know... reading the entry again... you're right... the sword's curse actually only applies to weapons. So indeed you can draw components and items, so long as they cannot be defined as "weapons".

Thus as long as you summon first then draw the sword to "fight with it" (however that eventually gets defined :smallsigh: ), it seems its allowable.

After one week in a character’s possession, the sword always forces that character to employ it rather than another weapon. The sword’s owner automatically draws it and fights with it even when she meant to draw or ready some other weapon.
http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/cursedItems.htm#swordCursed