Replacing Magic Weapon +1 Enchantments

[Gwazi Magnum]

Now, I'm 99.9% sure this is how it works, but the way people talked about it lately makes me need to confirm.

When I have a longsword +1, I always figured that means it gives me +1 Attack Roll & +1 damage or gives me a enchantment bonus like fire.

So a +1 weapon wouldn't have, +1 attack, +1 damage, +1d6 fire damage, correct?

If so, are there any situations you find the base +1 attack, +1 damage to be more useful than the other enchantments?

[Lord Vukodlak]

Now, I'm 99.9% sure this is how it works, but the way people talked about it lately makes me need to confirm.

When I have a longsword +1, I always figured that means it gives me +1 Attack Roll & +1 damage or gives me a enchantment bonus like fire.

So a +1 weapon wouldn't have, +1 attack, +1 damage, +1d6 fire damage, correct?

If so, are there any situations you find the base +1 attack, +1 damage to be more useful than the other enchantments?

First and foremost a weapon needs to be +1 before you can apply any special abilities to it.
A +1 Longsword costs 2,000gp(not counting the physical sword).
A +2 Longsword or a +1 flaming longsword costs 8,000gp(again not counting the physical sword just the enchantment).
Special abilities have a +X equivalent for cost purposes.

Generally speaking a special ability is going to be more useful then a simple enchantment bonus. Its more economical to buy a pearl of power 3rd level so your allied wizard or cleric can just cast greater magic weapon on it.

[Morcleon]

Now, I'm 99.9% sure this is how it works, but the way people talked about it lately makes me need to confirm.

When I have a longsword +1, I always figured that means it gives me +1 Attack Roll & +1 damage or gives me a enchantment bonus like fire.

So a +1 weapon wouldn't have, +1 attack, +1 damage, +1d6 fire damage, correct?

If so, are there any situations you find the base +1 attack, +1 damage to be more useful than the other enchantments?

Uh... no. A +1 longsword is as a normal longsword, but you have +1 to attack and damage. The flaming weapon property (which has the equivalent cost to another +1 enhancement) gives +1d6 fire damage.

You must have at least a +1 on a weapon for it to have any special properties.

More info here (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/magicWeapons.htm). :smallsmile:

[Nettlekid]

I'm not sure I entirely understand your question.

A +1 weapon is one that grants +1 enhancement bonus on attack rolls and damage rolls.

There are weapon enhancements like Flaming which cost the same amount as it would cost to increase the enhancement bonus by one, which have various effects.

So a +2 weapon costs the same as a +1 Flaming weapon. The +2 weapon grants a +2 enhancement bonus on attack rolls and damage rolls. The +1 Flaming weapon grants a +1 enhancement bonus on attack rolls and damage rolls, and +1d6 Fire damage as well.

Don't think of +1 and Flaming as being the same, or equitable. They're only comparable when it comes to pricing. And even then, it's not really +1 Weapon and Flaming Weapon that's comparable, it's an increase from +1 to +2 Weapon, and an increase from +1 to +1 Flaming Weapon that's comparable.

Remember of course that a weapon needs to be a +1 Weapon before it becomes a +1 Flaming Weapon. You can never have a Flaming Weapon.

Now, as to your actual question, in my opinion, weapon special abilities like Flaming are always better than another + to the enhancement bonus. True, there are some bad abilities, which might be worse than another +, but don't pick those. Pick the good ones. A +1 Good Ability Good Ability Weapon is, in my opinion, always better than a +3 Weapon.

[eggynack]

A +1 weapon just gives you the +1 to attack and damage. You need a weapon to be at least +1 in order to stick an enchantment on it. There are two circumstances in which having greater than a +1 is worthwhile. The first is a power attack build. A +1 enchantment is going to give you the +1 to damage, and give you the capacity to trade the +1 to attack for another +2 to damage. It adds up to .5 damage less than flaming, but it can also be a regular +1 attack and damage bonus, so it's a bit more versatile. This situation doesn't come up that much, because greater magic weapon partially obviates the need for anything greater than +1. The second circumstance is weapon crystals from the MIC. Greater weapon augment crystals can only be put into a weapon that is +3 or greater, so that can sometimes be a good reason to push the generic enchantment up that high.

[Deaxsa]

So a +1 weapon wouldn't have, +1 attack, +1 damage, +1d6 fire damage, correct?

this sentence confuses me. a +1 weapon indicates that the weapon is enhanced by one point (and thus gives a +1 bonus to attack and damage rolls).

a flaming weapon bonus is not a +1 bonus, it is an enchantment which costs the equivalent of a +1 bonus. that is to say, you have your longsword, it's +1, that's all. you have enough gold to make it +2, but the enchanter could also make it a +1 flaming longsword, for the same price.

and in terms of which i find to be more useful, i almost never like the extra damage dice, because A) monsters tend to have immunities and resistances, B) monsters tend to not have the correct weakness (if they have a weakness at all), c) you can do more with +1 attack than you think (i'm looking at you, power attack), and D) +1 damage multiplies, which 1d6 does not.

[Gwazi Magnum]

I looks like everyone here got confused because I read it differently, (and then led even farther off by how others discussed it later).

I basically thought (originally) that there was no +1 bonus needed for the special abilities so it's possible to have a Flaming Longsword.

Then how others talked later, I got the impression that it was a passive bonus and new ability so a +3 longsword could have +3 attack and damage, AND 3 special abilities. It seems that wasn't the case however.


A +1 weapon just gives you the +1 to attack and damage. You need a weapon to be at least +1 in order to stick an enchantment on it. There are two circumstances in which having greater than a +1 is worthwhile. The first is a power attack build. A +1 enchantment is going to give you the +1 to damage, and give you the capacity to trade the +1 to attack for another +2 to damage. It adds up to .5 damage less than flaming, but it can also be a regular +1 attack and damage bonus, so it's a bit more versatile. This situation doesn't come up that much, because greater magic weapon partially obviates the need for anything greater than +1. The second circumstance is weapon crystals from the MIC. Greater weapon augment crystals can only be put into a weapon that is +3 or greater, so that can sometimes be a good reason to push the generic enchantment up that high.

Interesting... I just took a look at weapon crystals now. I had no idea they existed until you mentioned them. They look cool but I can't find anything overly powerful though. Are they normally sub-par or is there something about them that I'm missing?


this sentence confuses me. a +1 weapon indicates that the weapon is enhanced by one point (and thus gives a +1 bonus to attack and damage rolls).

a flaming weapon bonus is not a +1 bonus, it is an enchantment which costs the equivalent of a +1 bonus. that is to say, you have your longsword, it's +1, that's all. you have enough gold to make it +2, but the enchanter could also make it a +1 flaming longsword, for the same price.

and in terms of which i find to be more useful, i almost never like the extra damage dice, because A) monsters tend to have immunities and resistances, B) monsters tend to not have the correct weakness (if they have a weakness at all), c) you can do more with +1 attack than you think (i'm looking at you, power attack), and D) +1 damage multiplies, which 1d6 does not.

By this I take it stuff like flaming doesn't multiply with critical hits then?

[Barsoom]

Interesting... I just took a look at weapon crystals now. I had no idea they existed until you mentioned them. They look cool but I can't find anything overly powerful though. Are they normally sub-par or is there something about them that I'm missing?I'd guess you're missing the cost.

A crystal adding +1d6 fire damage costs 2,500 gp.
The cost of upgrading a +1 sword into a +1 flaming sword is 6,000 gp.




By this I take it stuff like flaming doesn't multiply with critical hits then?Only base weapon damage and static bonuses are multipied in a crit. Variable bonuses are not.

If something adds +5 damage, it's multiplied on a crit.
If something adds +1d6 damage, it's not multiplied.

[Tar Palantir]

Interesting... I just took a look at weapon crystals now. I had no idea they existed until you mentioned them. They look cool but I can't find anything overly powerful though. Are they normally sub-par or is there something about them that I'm missing?

Some of them are underwhelming, but Demolition and Truedeath crystals are a godsend to rogues, and Least Return is basically a halfway decent feat for a couple hundred gold. The elemental damage ones are good if you already have a magic weapon that you like; rather than pay through the nose for an enchantment like flaming (remember, weapons get exponentially more expensive as they become more enchanted, so adding flaming to a +2 weapon costs more than adding it to a +1), you can buy a couple of crystals, get the same damage, and be able to swap them out if you're fighting something with resistance to that particular element. Above all, though, they're efficiently costed, and you can keep them when you upgrade to whatever shiny bauble you found in today's dragon hoard.

[Gwazi Magnum]

I'd guess you're missing the cost.

A crystal adding +1d6 fire damage costs 2,500 gp.
The cost of upgrading a +1 sword into a +1 flaming sword is 6,000 gp.

I didn't miss the cost, just that enchantment somehow... :/

Yea, that is pretty awesome.


Only base weapon damage and static bonuses are multipied in a crit. Variable bonuses are not.

If something adds +5 damage, it's multiplied on a crit.
If something adds +1d6 damage, it's not multiplied.

Ah, that would of been handy to know a week ago...

Though I probably still would of killed that giant demon thing in one round.


Some of them are underwhelming, but Demolition and Truedeath crystals are a godsend to rogues, and Least Return is basically a halfway decent feat for a couple hundred gold. The elemental damage ones are good if you already have a magic weapon that you like; rather than pay through the nose for an enchantment like flaming (remember, weapons get exponentially more expensive as they become more enchanted, so adding flaming to a +2 weapon costs more than adding it to a +1), you can buy a couple of crystals, get the same damage, and be able to swap them out if you're fighting something with resistance to that particular element. Above all, though, they're efficiently costed, and you can keep them when you upgrade to whatever shiny bauble you found in today's dragon hoard.

O_O LEGION!!! I missed you pal! How have you been!?

Sorry, I had to! :smallbiggrin:

I'll admit, the ability to change them on the fly is a pretty neat feature and cheaper elemental boosts is awesome.

[Renen]

I started D&D only 4 months ago, but I am already amazed at people who don't know basic rules on how magic weapons work/are made.

[prufock]

I started D&D only 4 months ago, but I am already amazed at people who don't know basic rules on how magic weapons work/are made.

It's pretty common. I've seen people who didn't think you need a +1 to add other enchantments and people who thought you'd just add together costs (ie +1 flaming = 2000x2, not 8000). I think it's just from a casual rather than careful reading of that portion of the rules.

[Chronos]

(remember, weapons get exponentially more expensive as they become more enchanted, so adding flaming to a +2 weapon costs more than adding it to a +1)
Nitpick: They get quadratically more expensive, not exponentially more expensive. Exponential would be if every additional +1 doubled the cost, or something like that.

[cerin616]

I find a lot of these answers a bit confusing, so ill try and make it a touch more concise.

When you make a magic weapon, it needs to have atleast a +1 enhancement bonus, in addition to any other enhancements or properties.

If I am making an effective cost +2 weapon, I can either have +2 to attack and damage, or a +1 to attack damage with an additional +1d6 fire damage. A +2 attack and damage with +1d6 fire would effectively be a +3 weapon.

In addition there are costs that are just flat gold that do not count for enhancement bonuses.

[Urpriest]

I started D&D only 4 months ago, but I am already amazed at people who don't know basic rules on how magic weapons work/are made.

People consistently make similar mistakes, and don't get corrected. Sociologically I'm not quite sure how it happens (in my opinion, picking up D&D 3.5 without having someone experienced on hand to explain it makes about as much sense as getting a group of friends together and deciding to play baseball when none of you know the rules or are even fans of the sport), but it's something that we have to take into account, which is why the more outreach-focused handbooks exist.

[cerin616]

People consistently make similar mistakes, and don't get corrected. Sociologically I'm not quite sure how it happens (in my opinion, picking up D&D 3.5 without having someone experienced on hand to explain it makes about as much sense as getting a group of friends together and deciding to play baseball when none of you know the rules or are even fans of the sport), but it's something that we have to take into account, which is why the more outreach-focused handbooks exist.

I like the analogy, but if no one did anything unless someone there knew how to do it, no one would ever learn new things. We would need to have a friend of a friend of a friend who was friends with the creator.

I can only imagine how hard that would be on releasing a new edition

[Urpriest]

I like the analogy, but if no one did anything unless someone there knew how to do it, no one would ever learn new things. We would need to have a friend of a friend of a friend who was friends with the creator.

I can only imagine how hard that would be on releasing a new edition

Well, I don't think this way for games that are actively out and being advertised and so forth. I fully expect people to pick up PF or 4e without any prior connection. Despite the recent re-release of the core 3.5 books though, it's still very much a legacy system.

[cerin616]

Well, I don't think this way for games that are actively out and being advertised and so forth. I fully expect people to pick up PF or 4e without any prior connection. Despite the recent re-release of the core 3.5 books though, it's still very much a legacy system.

Ah, that's fair. I was looking at it along the lines of when 3.5 was released. I guess it is a bit strange to see someone pick up and old system and decide to play it over the new and advertised system when they don't know how the old one works, adn there are no advertised sources on how to find out.

I wonder if wizard customer support would hang up on me if i started asking questions on rules...

[Maginomicon]

So... let me get this straight...

First and foremost a magic weapon is also a masterwork weapon (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/equipment/weapons.htm#masterworkWeapons), so the fact that it's masterwork gives it a +1 on attack rolls. A "+1 weapon" however is a magic weapon where the "+1" in the name overlaps with the +1 on attack rolls (enhancement bonuses from different sources don't stack (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/theBasics.htm#enhancementBonus)) but also gives a +1 to damage rolls.

When you enchant with a special quality, you are buying some number of degrees up of magic enhancement bonuses and trading out that new upgrade for the special quality. For example, when enchanting a masterwork longsword to become a "Flaming Longsword", it's still a masterwork longsword, so it still has its +1 enhancement bonus to attack rolls for being masterwork quality.

In short:

"Masterwork Longsword": +1 enhancement bonus on attack rolls
"+1 Longsword": +1 enhancement bonus on attack and damage rolls
"Flaming Longsword": +1 enhancement bonus to attack rolls, and the flaming special quality.
"+1 Flaming Longsword": +1 enhancement bonus on attack and damage rolls, and the flaming special quality


Sound right?

[Urpriest]

So... let me get this straight...

First and foremost a magic weapon is also a masterwork weapon (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/equipment/weapons.htm#masterworkWeapons), so the fact that it's masterwork gives it a +1 on attack rolls. A "+1 weapon" however is a magic weapon where the "+1" in the name overlaps with the +1 on attack rolls (enhancement bonuses from different sources don't stack) but also gives a +1 to damage rolls.

When you enchant with a special quality, you are buying some number of degrees up of magic enhancement bonuses and trading out that new upgrade for the special quality. For example, when enchanting a masterwork longsword to become a "Flaming Longsword", it's still a masterwork longsword, so it still has its +1 enhancement bonus to attack rolls for being masterwork quality.

In short:

"Masterwork Longsword": +1 enhancement bonus on attack rolls
"+1 Longsword": +1 enhancement bonus on attack and damage rolls
"Flaming Longsword": +1 enhancement bonus to attack rolls, and the flaming special quality.
"+1 Flaming Longsword": +1 enhancement bonus on attack and damage rolls, and the flaming special quality


Sound right?

"Flaming Longsword" doesn't exist. Every magic weapon has to have at least a +1 enchantment.

[eggynack]

So... let me get this straight...

First and foremost a magic weapon is also a masterwork weapon (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/equipment/weapons.htm#masterworkWeapons), so the fact that it's masterwork gives it a +1 on attack rolls. A "+1 weapon" however is a magic weapon where the "+1" in the name overlaps with the +1 on attack rolls (enhancement bonuses from different sources don't stack) but also gives a +1 to damage rolls.

When you enchant with a special quality, you are buying some number of degrees up of magic enhancement bonuses and trading out that new upgrade for the special quality. For example, when enchanting a masterwork longsword to become a "Flaming Longsword", it's still a masterwork longsword, so it still has its +1 enhancement bonus to attack rolls for being masterwork quality.

In short:

"Masterwork Longsword": +1 enhancement bonus on attack rolls
"+1 Longsword": +1 enhancement bonus on attack and damage rolls
"Flaming Longsword": +1 enhancement bonus to attack rolls, and the flaming special quality.
"+1 Flaming Longsword": +1 enhancement bonus on attack and damage rolls, and the flaming special quality


Sound right?
Not quite. There is no such thing as a flaming longsword. You can only throw special enchantments on a weapon that is at least +1 already. Apart from the flaming longsword, I believe that your analysis is accurate.

Edit: My heart; she breaks. I face anew the endless torment of being swordsage'd. Perhaps someday I may have a brief respite from this pain, but I fear that day will never come.

[Maginomicon]

"Flaming Longsword" doesn't exist. Every magic weapon has to have at least a +1 enchantment.Verified. For those that are looking for a quote to back this up...
A weapon with a special property must have at least a +1 enhancement bonus. You can't simply have a flaming longsword — it would have to be at least a +1 flaming longsword.
It still seems wierd though. That necessarily means that every "+1"-worth special quality weapon always in total requires paying for a "+2"-equivalent weapon. Thems the rules, but they don't really make much sense.

Even so, one could argue that if it weren't for this, technically they do already have an enhancement bonus... from being masterwork quality (although that particular enhancement bonus doesn't apply to damage rolls).

[Gwazi Magnum]

It honestly seems stupid that you no longer gain masterwork bonus for your weapon, feels like a waste of 300 gold. Even if enchanted weapons have to be master work for some reason.

[cerin616]

The rules are intensely confusing.

First you take a mastwork weapon, which has an innate +1 enhancement bonus. from there you need to add a magic "+1 enhancement" which increases the cost, but keeps the bonus at +1 since they dont stack. From there you can add other properties, such as flaming, onto it.

would make a ton more sense if the +1 from the masterwork were just a magical enhancement bonus and let it qualify for special properties. from there you would only get a total of +9 additional effects since the masterwork property is already the first +1

[Talderas]

Now, as to your actual question, in my opinion, weapon special abilities like Flaming are always better than another + to the enhancement bonus. True, there are some bad abilities, which might be worse than another +, but don't pick those. Pick the good ones. A +1 Good Ability Good Ability Weapon is, in my opinion, always better than a +3 Weapon.

They have to be good abilities though. I wouldn't consider Flaming squarely in the good category due to the nature of elemental resistances and damage reduction. Then you have other bad enhancements like Defending or Merciful.

[Studoku]

It still seems wierd though. That necessarily means that every "+1"-worth special quality weapon always in total requires paying for a "+2"-equivalent weapon. Thems the rules, but they don't really make much sense.
It means a +2 longsword costs the same as a +1 Flaming Longsword. Since they're roughly equal in power level*, this makes sense to me. What about it doesn't?

* By which I mean are supposed to be.

[Maginomicon]

It means a +2 longsword costs the same as a +1 Flaming Longsword. Since they're roughly equal in power level*, this makes sense to me. What about it doesn't?

* By which I mean are supposed to be.

I meant that it doesn't make a whole lot of sense in fluff for you to have to buy a base +1 magic enhancement bonus before you can buy flaming or any other special property. That is, it doesn't make sense (although it's the rules) that you can't have simply a flaming longsword, it just has to be a +1 flaming longsword for some bizarre reason (as if special properties really needed a bump up in effective price).

[Gwazi Magnum]

Alright, then I should ask now...

Which enchantments (Can be from any book, and lets expand it to include armor now) do you find more useful than the +1 bonus? Which do you find less useful?

[Deaxsa]

Alright, then I should ask now...

Which enchantments (Can be from any book, and lets expand it to include armor now) do you find more useful than the +1 bonus? Which do you find less useful?

that depends on who you are.

harmonizing is GREAT for bards, especially those with lingering song.
ghost touch is also pretty good, if you are fighting the wrong things
vicious/merciful can be quite good as well.
seeking is good for rangers
vorpal is the best enchantment ever

and that's just a few

edit: also, you asked up above if flaming gets multiplied on a crit. everything OTHER THAN extra damage dice gets multiplied on a crit.

[ericgrau]

Once you include critical hits the difference between a +1 and +1d6 is even smaller. Around 0.2 damage. And some things don't take damage from some of the 1d6 abilities. Compare to the popular collision which is only +5 damage but it's untyped, vs. around +6.6 damage from simply adding +2 more. Even without power attack the bonus to hit helps about as much. The real reason you get the other enhancements is greater magic weapon. In fact a medium BAB character needs the +1 to hit more than the damage and if he can't get GMW he's better off mixing in a little enhancement bonus with his damage enchantments.

If no one in the party has GMW, you could go either way and it wouldn't make much difference.

My favorite enchantments are spell storing, holy and collision. At higher levels wounding and dancing are good.

[Fouredged Sword]

Generally you want all enhancements and the minimum static bonus possible. The spell Greater Magic Weapon grants will set the +X bonus to 5 for the whole day, and you can buy your party cleric a metamagic rod of chain to cast it on CL number of weapons for a single spell slot.

[cerin616]

merciful makes you qualify for vow of nonviolence and vow of peace. which is pretty silly.

[Chronos]

If it's just to-hit and damage you want, then the best options are Collision, Martial Discipline, and (in the typical campaign where most enemies are evil) Holy. Collision, as already mentioned, costs +2 and gives you +5 damage. Martial Discipline costs +1, and gives you +1 to attack if you know any maneuver of the appropriate Tome of Battle discipline, or +3 if you're using one (including a stance). And Holy makes your weapon good-aligned and does +2d6 damage that no resistance applies to.

Consider that if you're using a stance from the appropriate discipline, Martial Discipline costs the same as an extra +3, but it gives you +3 to hit and +5 to damage, and it still stacks with Greater Magic Weapon.

But that's just if all you're looking for is more attack bonus and damage. There are so many other options you can get from weapon mods. Enfeebling, Dementia, Stalactite, and Soulbreaker can all inflict significant debuffs on a critical hit. Bodyfeeder weapons can result in you coming out of a fight healthier than you went in. Defending can give you a significant boost to AC, especially if you put it on an incidental weapon like armor spikes. The Aptitude weapon mod is only useful if you have the right build for it, but if you do, it's broken-powerful.

[georgie_leech]

They have to be good abilities though. I wouldn't consider Flaming squarely in the good category due to the nature of elemental resistances and damage reduction. Then you have other bad enhancements like Defending or Merciful.

I dunno, Merciful on it's own isn't great, but it combines interestingly with Viscious if you finagle a way to have immunity to non-lethal damage. Or just be a Warforged.

[JusticeZero]

I'd always heard it described that the first +1 pretty much just comes from the fact that the gear is enchanted AT ALL, and that enchantment is more or less the "operating system" that further enhancements have to be added to.

[TuggyNE]

I'd always heard it described that the first +1 pretty much just comes from the fact that the gear is enchanted AT ALL, and that enchantment is more or less the "operating system" that further enhancements have to be added to.

There's also the practical consideration that, if you did have a Flaming Longsword, it would be unable to bypass DR/magic, despite being a magic weapon. That's sufficiently confusing to write a rule to avoid it, I'd say (although I might just give any magical weapon the ability to bypass DR/magic, never mind the enhancement bonus).

[Gwazi Magnum]

There's also the practical consideration that, if you did have a Flaming Longsword, it would be unable to bypass DR/magic, despite being a magic weapon. That's sufficiently confusing to write a rule to avoid it, I'd say (although I might just give any magical weapon the ability to bypass DR/magic, never mind the enhancement bonus).

I always assumed they would bypass because it was an enchanted special ability.

[FleshrakerAbuse]

Anyways, for your question about good enchancements, lemme name a few. I don't use weapons much, so answers may have lack of experience.

-The energy ones (not bursts) (+1): The burst weapons cost too much for a small chance of a bit more damage, but the normal +1d6 is solid.
-Expansion (+2): +5 damage per hit. This damage can multiply, and is thus awesome.
-Bane: Good for common enemies.
-Stunning Surge (+1) or the broken Sudden Stunning (+2000): Note that the second one is a flat cost, thus much better. And both abilities scale off of your stats, and stays good late game.
-Holy Surge, Caustic Surge, Shocking Surge (+1): 3d6 extra damage, Con or Cha/day. Pretty good.

Those are some good choices. Don't take +5 or +4 unless really worth it, because of the amount of others you can stack for that. (Vorpal is too odd).

[TuggyNE]

I always assumed they would bypass because it was an enchanted special ability.

The fire damage gets past just fine. But the weapon damage itself does not.