+1 battleaxe?

[daimonionen]

In mines of phandelver, you get a +1 battleaxe. What does that +1 mean?

[Toadkiller]

Plus one to hit and to damage.

[daimonionen]

Uh, do you mean +1 added to attack rolls?

[SharkForce]

Uh, do you mean +1 added to attack rolls?

yes. +1 to attack rolls and damage rolls. if your previous attack bonus was +6, with this axe it would be +7. if you previously did 1d8 + 4 damage with a regular battleaxe, you would now deal 1d8+5 damage.

[daimonionen]

thanks to both

[Baptor]

In mines of phandelver, you get a +1 battleaxe. What does that +1 mean?

You know, at first glance, most of us D&D veterans would think this was a silly question, but it's not.

A "+1 battleaxe" is something only D&D does. And the phrase is completely worthless to new players.

First of all, most of us agree that "+1 weapon" is about the most boring magic item description ever. So the phrase adds nothing to aesthetics.

Second of all, it doesn't even explain what "+1" means. If you didn't already know, you don't get enough information from the description to make anything out of it.

So the term "+1 weapon" is in fact a completely useless descriptor. It is neither aesthetically pleasing, like "Reaping Battleaxe" would be, nor is it descriptive of its functionality. It is a total failure.

Other games do it differently. For example, Pillars of Eternity, which is very D&D-esque, describes enhancement bonuses as Fine and Exceptional. So Fine Battleaxe or Exceptional Battleaxe. It's similar to "masterwork" from 3.5 edition which for some reason WotC abandoned. It doesn't describe what it does, you have to look it up, but it is aesthetically pleasing. Besides, unless your a vet, you're going to have to look up +1 too, and if you are a vet, you'd already know what "Fine" means.

Just another odd sacred cow that should have been replaced or thrown out a long time ago.

Sorry new guy, our old game has lots of weird quirks that make no sense. :(

[Nifft]

In an easier to understand rule-set, "+1 Battleaxe" would simply mean you had an additional Battleaxe.

In a modern setting, "+1 Battleaxe" could mean your Battleaxe got an up-vote.

In a romance genre, "+1 Battleaxe" might mean your wife is also invited to the party.

[Giant2005]

Second of all, it doesn't even explain what "+1" means. If you didn't already know, you don't get enough information from the description to make anything out of it.

It does. The DMG and every adventure that has a +1 weapon (including The Lost Mines) has a description of what exactly a +1 weapon does. For the adventures, the description is found in the appendix.

[Theodoxus]

Man, I'd totally trade "+1 to hit and damage" for "+1 attack", which is what the phrase sounds like it means to me. When removing the obvious 30+ years of bias I have with D&D...

ETA:
It does. The DMG and every adventure that has a +1 weapon (including The Lost Mines) has a description of what exactly a +1 weapon does. For the adventures, the description is found in the appendix.

Maybe he was a player, not a DM, and received it sans explanation? I mean, sure, he should have asked in game, but there might be extenuating circumstances...

[Armored Walrus]

You know, at first glance, most of us D&D veterans would think this was a silly question, but it's not.

A "+1 battleaxe" is something only D&D does. And the phrase is completely worthless to new players.

First of all, most of us agree that "+1 weapon" is about the most boring magic item description ever. So the phrase adds nothing to aesthetics.

Second of all, it doesn't even explain what "+1" means. If you didn't already know, you don't get enough information from the description to make anything out of it.

So the term "+1 weapon" is in fact a completely useless descriptor. It is neither aesthetically pleasing, like "Reaping Battleaxe" would be, nor is it descriptive of its functionality. It is a total failure.

Other games do it differently. For example, Pillars of Eternity, which is very D&D-esque, describes enhancement bonuses as Fine and Exceptional. So Fine Battleaxe or Exceptional Battleaxe. It's similar to "masterwork" from 3.5 edition which for some reason WotC abandoned. It doesn't describe what it does, you have to look it up, but it is aesthetically pleasing. Besides, unless your a vet, you're going to have to look up +1 too, and if you are a vet, you'd already know what "Fine" means.

Just another odd sacred cow that should have been replaced or thrown out a long time ago.

Sorry new guy, our old game has lots of weird quirks that make no sense. :(

Not sure if the OP is a DM or player in the Phandelver game he references, but if DM, just read the module. It's not a +1 battleaxe, it's "Hew" a rusty old battleaxe with dwarven runes on it, that does maximum damage against plants, was created by a dwarf who had a feud with a dryad, and makes the wielder feel anxious if carrying it in a forest. If the DM reads the treasure table at the end of the module, it explicitly states what the +1 is all about.

[Baptor]

Not sure if the OP is a DM or player in the Phandelver game he references, but if DM, just read the module. It's not a +1 battleaxe, it's "Hew" a rusty old battleaxe with dwarven runes on it, that does maximum damage against plants, was created by a dwarf who had a feud with a dryad, and makes the wielder feel anxious if carrying it in a forest. If the DM reads the treasure table at the end of the module, it explicitly states what the +1 is all about.

Oh wow, now that's a great magic weapon!

[Sicarius Victis]

It does. The DMG and every adventure that has a +1 weapon (including The Lost Mines) has a description of what exactly a +1 weapon does. For the adventures, the description is found in the appendix.

Did you even read the whole comment? Baptor was not talking about tLMoP, they were talking about the "+x" terminology.

[bid]

It does. The DMG and every adventure that has a +1 weapon (including The Lost Mines) has a description of what exactly a +1 weapon does. For the adventures, the description is found in the appendix.
Quoting SRD-OGL p250:
"Weapon, +1, +2, or +3
Weapon (any), uncommon (+1), rare (+2), or very rare (+3)
You have a bonus to attack and damage rolls made with this magic weapon. The bonus is determined by the weapon’s rarity."

So yeah, the information is there and it's more an issue of knowing where to look.

[Kurt Kurageous]

In an easier to understand rule-set, "+1 Battleaxe" would simply mean you had an additional Battleaxe.

In a modern setting, "+1 Battleaxe" could mean your Battleaxe got an up-vote.

In a romance genre, "+1 Battleaxe" might mean your wife is also invited to the party.

LULZ!

I actually am ashamed of myself for eyerolling the initial question.

[Shimi43]

So when you roll the die you add one to the roll in addition to your other modifiers and then you add one to the damage in addition to the other modifiers.

[Anderlith]

You know, at first glance, most of us D&D veterans would think this was a silly question, but it's not.

A "+1 battleaxe" is something only D&D does. And the phrase is completely worthless to new players.

First of all, most of us agree that "+1 weapon" is about the most boring magic item description ever. So the phrase adds nothing to aesthetics.

Second of all, it doesn't even explain what "+1" means. If you didn't already know, you don't get enough information from the description to make anything out of it.

So the term "+1 weapon" is in fact a completely useless descriptor. It is neither aesthetically pleasing, like "Reaping Battleaxe" would be, nor is it descriptive of its functionality. It is a total failure.

Other games do it differently. For example, Pillars of Eternity, which is very D&D-esque, describes enhancement bonuses as Fine and Exceptional. So Fine Battleaxe or Exceptional Battleaxe. It's similar to "masterwork" from 3.5 edition which for some reason WotC abandoned. It doesn't describe what it does, you have to look it up, but it is aesthetically pleasing. Besides, unless your a vet, you're going to have to look up +1 too, and if you are a vet, you'd already know what "Fine" means.

Just another odd sacred cow that should have been replaced or thrown out a long time ago.

Sorry new guy, our old game has lots of weird quirks that make no sense. :(
The + descriptor is more apt than using useless throw away words that mean "good" or "better" you dont know what "reaping" means unless you look it up just like +1. & in a game that might have several levels of quality/bonus its easier to refer to the mechanical bonus in a mexhanical way instead of using flowery descriptors that are best left to the DM to describe in-world. If i say you find a Elfmade sword; a master crafted dwarven sword; an exceptional gemmed sword; or an oger sword which would be better? You have no idea unless you knew in advance what each descriptor does.

Using +s are actually better because now you can have a rusted old sword made a thousand years ago but enchanted with powerful magic that makes it better than the hierloom sword of a noble forged by the best smith in the nation. A stone dagger could be more deadly than fine greatsword. Etc.

Let the mechanics be mechanics & let the fluff be he fluff

[Arial Black]

+1 battle axe = one more battleaxe = two battleaxes

Last session we killed seven assassins. After looting the bodies we asked the DM what we found.

DM: Seven +2 daggers.
Me: So...nine?
DM: What?
Me: Nine daggers. Seven plus two is nine.

[Baptor]

The + descriptor is more apt than using useless throw away words that mean "good" or "better" you dont know what "reaping" means unless you look it up just like +1. & in a game that might have several levels of quality/bonus its easier to refer to the mechanical bonus in a mexhanical way instead of using flowery descriptors that are best left to the DM to describe in-world. If i say you find a Elfmade sword; a master crafted dwarven sword; an exceptional gemmed sword; or an oger sword which would be better? You have no idea unless you knew in advance what each descriptor does.

Using +s are actually better because now you can have a rusted old sword made a thousand years ago but enchanted with powerful magic that makes it better than the hierloom sword of a noble forged by the best smith in the nation. A stone dagger could be more deadly than fine greatsword. Etc.

Let the mechanics be mechanics & let the fluff be he fluff

Um...nope.

The very fact the OP did not understand what a "+1 battleaxe" was without asking us or looking it up proves you wrong. If you were right, everyone, even newcomers, would know what a "+1 axe" is without looking it up, but they don't. That was my entire point.

So if you have to look it up anyways, why not make the descriptor more flavorful? Why not "Fine Battleaxe" for +1? Once you are a veteran, you're going to know what "Fine" means just like you know +1 means +1 attack rolls and damage rolls.

For example, as a 3.5 vet I can tell you that "flaming" is +1d6 fire damage and "holy" is +2d6 damage vs evil.

[Anderlith]

You missed my point.

Im not stating that +1 is universally understood. Im saying that it is an easier & faster descriptor than "fine" or "super shiny". Sure both terms need to be loomed up to be understood. Doesnt that goes with out saying? What makes the + better is that when discussing quantitive values it is an easier concept than "fine" "extra shiny" "super shiny" & "chrome". During the course of play the Dm might describe a nobles weapon as finely made but then have to later clear up that it isnt mechanically better, just visually better. As well as in discussions asking whether a certain enhanced weapon would be better than a different enhanced weapon. I.e. if someone on the board asked should i get a +1 flaming sword or a +3 sword? If they instead used descriptors then everyone in the discussion would have to understand that particular games advancement tree, it helps to also reduce the problem of "I have a "shiny" sword, then someone misremembering where that descriptor falls on the range of enhancement. Saying oh wait thats right "shiny" is worse than "fine".

If you find a +1 dagger & a +2 dagger you instantly know which is better enven if you are not sure of what it does.

If you find a "chrome" dagger & a "shiny" dagger oh dang, better check the book, for which is better



The use of + removes an unneeded layer of vocabulary to games that already have a ton of keywords/tags/descriptors