Enhancing items which are already magical

[Rumo]

And yet another newbie question from me. I suppose the answer can be found in one of the numerous rule books, but not knowing where and even in which one makes the search rather difficult.

I play in two D&D groups. One DM tells me that a Sword +1 cannot be upgraded to Sword +2 by paying the margin to the craftsman. "Maybe if it's the same craftsman who already made the +1 item."

The other one seems to permit any kind of upgrade-for-pay, even on non-standard items. Example: Armor of the Beast can in his opinion be improved from Studded leather +1 to +2 and more by pumping the respective amount of gold into it. I have a slight feeling that this can't be correct.

Is there a clear ruling on this question?

[SciChronic]

to enhance a weapon, the previous enhancement is stripped off, and a new one is placed upon it., so you essentially pay full price minus the cost of the masterwork weapon.

[Tohsaka Rin]

to enhance a weapon, the previous enhancement is stripped off, and a new one is placed upon it., so you essentially pay full price minus the cost of the masterwork weapon.

What? No.



Adding New Abilities

A creator can add new magical abilities to a magic item with no restrictions. The cost to do this is the same as if the item was not magical. Thus, a +1 longsword can be made into a +2 vorpal longsword, with the cost to create it being equal to that of a +2 vorpal sword minus the cost of a +1 sword.

You pay the difference between what you have, and what you want.

[Rumo]

to enhance a weapon, the previous enhancement is stripped off, and a new one is placed upon it., so you essentially pay full price minus the cost of the masterwork weapon.

Thank you for the information. Is it also handled this way when the +1 is not meant to be replaced by +2, but if for example a +1D6 fire damage is added to the weapon damage?

And can you perhaps give me the source of this rule? Would help me a lot when the subject is discussed in "group 2".

[Tohsaka Rin]

SciChronic's ruling is incorrect. Do not use it.

[Rumo]

What? No.
You pay the difference between what you have, and what you want.

So the "everything goes" as it is handled in the second group is correct? BTW, when I once linked to SRD, I was told that it's not an official source. Personally I don't have a problem with SRD, I don't know any conflicts with WotC 3.5 rules (which shouldn't come as a surprise as I don't know much about D&D rules in general). I'm just not sure if a link to SRD can convince my DM ("group 1").

[eggynack]

So the "everything goes" as it is handled in the second group is correct? BTW, when I once linked to SRD, I was told that it's not an official source. Personally I don't have a problem with SRD, I don't know any conflicts with WotC 3.5 rules (which shouldn't come as a surprise as I don't know much about D&D rules in general). I'm just not sure if a link to SRD can convince my DM ("group 1").
You can also find the quote in question on page 288 of the DMG. As for the other group, it looks like that particular upgrade is fine within the rules. Armor isn't a body slot item, so I don't think you have to pay a premium for the upgrade, though you would have to for a slotted item, per that same cited book section.

[Darrin]

So the "everything goes" as it is handled in the second group is correct? BTW, when I once linked to SRD, I was told that it's not an official source. Personally I don't have a problem with SRD, I don't know any conflicts with WotC 3.5 rules (which shouldn't come as a surprise as I don't know much about D&D rules in general). I'm just not sure if a link to SRD can convince my DM ("group 1").

There are some minor differences with the SRD and the Core books (PHB/DMG/MM), but for the most part the SRD is the most recent "official" version of the rules. The only reason I can think of to say the SRD is "not an official source" is the most common websites hosting the SRD are not run or owned by WotC, they are public domain HTML versions converted from the RTFs published on the Wizards.com website (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=d20/article/srd35). The HTML versions tend to be easier to navigate, and they generally include the most up-to-date errata. Linking to the RTFs might mollify your DM, but it sounds to me like he's wary of anything online... probably a case of being burned by something from dandwiki.com, which had a reputation for mixing the SRD and really bad homebrew, with no clear indication of which was which.

[Firechanter]

Adding additional properties and paying the price difference is the correct way to go.

However, it can be problematic to figure out the cost for enhancing an armour or weapon that already has special properties not covered in the creation guidelines. Like many specific items from DMG, MIC or other sources. It's probably sanest to account for every non-standard property as fixed cost rather than as a bonus.

[Sir Garanok]

Rulewise items can be upgraded,as correctly said by paying the difference.

The DM though might not allow it for various reasons,like not having a crafter good enough to make the upgrade or not having a crafter at all.

A magic shop might sell items from trade,not creating them.

[Rumo]

Thank you for the helpful answers!