Mordenkainen's Ridiculously Overpowered Magic Weapons

[MaxWilson]

Mordenkainen's Tome of Foes has a lot of monsters (e.g. Githyanki Kithrak, Gloom Weaver) with magic weapons that do crazy amounts of bonus damage, e.g. 27-28 necrotic damage per hit.

This has two consequences, both of them good for Fighters with lots of attacks:

(1) If a PC Disarms the monster and takes its weapon, the monster goes from very strong to very weak. Typically these monsters do not have very good Athletic or Acrobatics so they are not good at resisting Disarm.

(2) The PC can then attempt to use the weapon. What would happen at your table if the PC tried to kill a Githyanki and/or its dragon using a captured Silver Sword? Would it function as a nonmagical greatsword, a +3 greatsword with no bonus damage due to no attunement, or a +3 greatsword that can cut silver cords and does bonus psychic damage? Would you declare that a Gloom Weaver's spear inflicts massive necrotic damage on anyone who picks it up?

I feel like WotC didn't think things through here beyond the basic "here's how much damage we want these monsters to do", so anyone who has opinions to share is invited to do so here.

I think I'd probably go for "Gloom Weaver weapons inflict damage on anyone who touches them" (because Gloom Weavers have necrotic immunity), and for Githyanki I'd go for "you need to attune to unlock the bonus damage, and that requires [Githyanki initiation ritual which you need to research and probably requires a sacrifice]." For drow weaponry I have in the past gone for "drow apply their poisons as a bonus action before each attack, due to their special training" and I'd probably stick with that despite Drow Favored Consorts already having a pretty busy bonus action due to War Magic. You can steal drow poison and use it, you just can't use it every turn as easily as they can--you need to know a fight is coming and pre-apply it.

[Unoriginal]

The Githyanki's weapons are explicitly +3 weapons which can cut through silver cords. You *can* loot them, but doing so would get you constantly raided by Githyanki and their dragons, because you took one of their people's greatest treasure. The book talks about it.


For the Shadar-Kai, while not explicitly said, it's pretty implied that the extra damage comes from the wielder and not the weapon. Same way as, say, the Duergar's psionic hammer.

For the drow, it's special super-poison. Just assume that they apply the poison once at the beginning of the fight and it lasts for a couple of minutes.


As for the concern "if the weapon is taken away form them, they go form strong to weak", well, it's the whole point. It's true of any creature who use a weapon, even mundane ones. Well, except those who do learn to fight unarmed too, like Hill Giants (as said in SKT).

[MaxWilson]

The Githyanki's weapons are explicitly +3 weapons which can cut through silver cords. You *can* loot them, but doing so would get you constantly raided by Githyanki and their dragons, because you took one of their people's greatest treasure. The book talks about it.

Yes, so is having a weapon that does oodles of extra psionic damage on a hit worth it? All you have to do is get good at killing githyanki (which gets you more XP and more swords).


For the Shadar-Kai, while not explicitly said, it's pretty implied that the extra damage comes from the wielder and not the weapon. Same way as, say, the Duergar's psionic hammer.

If so, that still makes disarming the Gloomweaver a very strong tactic. They're not even proficient in Acrobatics.


For the drow, it's special super-poison. Just assume that they apply the poison once at the beginning of the fight and it lasts for a couple of minutes.

Implication: if you can surprise the drow, they won't have poisoned weapons.

[TIPOT]

Yes, so is having a weapon that does oodles of extra psionic damage on a hit worth it? All you have to do is get good at killing githyanki (which gets you more XP and more swords).


The psychic damage is an ability from the githyanki, in the same way if you take a 8th level war clerics weapon you don't get to add 1d8 damage on the weapon.



If so, that still makes disarming the Gloomweaver a very strong tactic. They're not even proficient in Acrobatics.


I'm not sure there's even rules for disarming people and if there are it'd be generally worse for the players than monsters to be disarmed.




Implication: if you can surprise the drow, they won't have poisoned weapons.

Or it could be some divine blessing from Lolth or some other inherent semi-magic ability of the drow.

[MaxWilson]

I'm not sure there's even rules for disarming people and if there are it'd be generally worse for the players than monsters to be disarmed.

(1) The PHB says you can improvise actions other than those explicitly listed in the PHB, and that the DM will resolve things appropriately.

(2) The DMG has Disarm rules at the back of the book.

(3) In addition, Battlemasters have a disarming maneuver.

[Unoriginal]

Yes, so is having a weapon that does oodles of extra psionic damage on a hit worth it? All you have to do is get good at killing githyanki (which gets you more XP and more swords).

Well, it's certainly an epic tale, so a PC can certainly try.

Just remember that it means you'll have to deal with being hunted by bloodthirsty pirates with dragons, and they'll bring the numbers.

Also, TIPOT is absolutely right, the additional psionic damage is an ability of the Githyanki. The stats of the swords are given, and IRRC they do not include that. A +3 weapon is still amazing nevertheless.



If so, that still makes disarming the Gloomweaver a very strong tactic. They're not even proficient in Acrobatics.

Sure, but again, it's true for any creature who use a weapon.

Note that you need to do something with the weapon after the disarm, or else they can just pick it back up.



Implication: if you can surprise the drow, they won't have poisoned weapons.

Indeed.

Drows are schemers and ambushers. IF you manage to catch them with their pants down, it should suck for them.

[Millface]

In general, 5e does a very good job of making monster damage depend on the abilities of the monster, not the weapons it has.

The Solar's sword, for example, does some pretty crazy things, but it's just a greatsword without the Solar. We weren't meant to be kitted out that way. The Balor is similar, although by RAW it doesn't say that the weapons lose their electricity or fire damage if they aren't in the Balor's hands, it also doesn't say that they drop a longsword that does 3d8 lightning damage.

[Malifice]

Max, the extra psychic/ poison/ necrotic damage isnt a property of the weapon, it's a property of the monster.

Like the extra radiant damage deal by 11th level Paladins, or the extra damage dealt by high level clerics with Divine strike.

[holywhippet]

Yes, so is having a weapon that does oodles of extra psionic damage on a hit worth it? All you have to do is get good at killing githyanki (which gets you more XP and more swords).


That sort of reminds me of the old PC game Morrowind - specifically one of the expansion packs. You'd start getting attacked by an assassin every few times you went to sleep. Since the assassin carried some nice gear it was like free money showing up every so often.

[Kadesh]

For reference, there is actually the rules for the Githyanki's sword as a Legendary Weapon on one of the pages.

[KorvinStarmast]

Mordenkainen's Tome of Foes has a lot of monsters (e.g. Githyanki Kithrak, Gloom Weaver) with magic weapons that do crazy amounts of bonus damage, e.g. 27-28 necrotic damage per hit. Mord's is full of bloat. This is but one example. These entries appear to be at odds with the basic chassis of the game, which was built around bounded accuracy. In this respect, WoTC is successfully harkening back to AD&D 2e: Bloat 'R Us.

I'm not sure there's even rules for disarming people and if there are it'd be generally worse for the players than monsters to be disarmed. There is an optional rule in the DMG that I've seen used at table. *shrug* And since this is 5e, you could always do the old "I am trying to do this ..." and DM calls for an ability check.
(PHB is not in front of me, so I am not sure if they discuss trying to disarm an opponent in ability checks there)

[Unoriginal]

Mord's is full of bloat. This is but one example. These entries appear to be at odds with the basic chassis of the game, which was built around bounded accuracy. In this respect, WoTC is successfully harkening back to AD&D 2e: Bloat 'R Us.

There is no bloat. Creatures being able to do a lot of additional on a hit were in the game way before the Mordenkainen's, and it doesn't go against bounded accuracy.

It could be argued they were in since the PHB, as any thread about nova builds can attest.

[KorvinStarmast]

There is no bloat. Creatures being able to do a lot of additional on a hit were in the game way before the Mordenkainen's, and it doesn't go against bounded accuracy.

It could be argued they were in since the PHB, as any thread about nova builds can attest. Those various nova builds still have to apply limited resources, which run out, and then in your next encounter ... what do you do?

One of the few things I like a lot in Mord's is the detail attempt to flesh out how cults of the various devils are structured, and the hand tailored bonuses for the cultists and leaders. I thought that was value added. The Lore was ... OK, now we have lore to sort of tie together a bunch of things that have gotten unstuck from previous editions.

Most of that book was, in my view, stepping 5e toward Monty Haul. This is perhaps something that can't be helped. (WoW kept upping the max level to keep the player base engaged .....)

This might be a core problem with this particular version of the game: when you get to Tier 4 play, does it really hold together? I'd like to say that I've played a bunch of Tier 4 one shots and can speak from experience, but I have not; our campaigns have a damned hard time staying together, RL being what it is.

What can I do? Look at the numbers (and the "here's a bigger bag of hit points CR 18 creature" trend) and wonder. If their desire was to add meat to the Tier 4 game experience, then maybe I wasted my time getting that book.

[Unoriginal]

Those various nova builds still have to apply limited resources, which run out, and then in your next encounter ... what do you do?

Indeed. And those statblocks are designed for NPCs that confront the PCs for one fight then die/get too incapacitated to try again, defeat the PCs, or flee.



One of the few things I like a lot in Mord's is the detail attempt to flesh out how cults of the various devils are structured, and the hand tailored bonuses for the cultists and leaders. I thought that was value added. The Lore was ... OK, now we have lore to sort of tie together a bunch of things that have gotten unstuck from previous editions.

I liked it, personally, though some of the concepts sounded like they didn't quite wrote all what they wanted about them.

I thought it gave a lot of identity to the 5e versions of the characters and places, in any case.



Most of that book was, in my view, stepping 5e toward Monty Haul. This is perhaps something that can't be helped. (WoW kept upping the max level to keep the player base engaged .....)

The Mordenkainen's basically has nothing that would help in a Monty Haul, at least in the "campaign that reward you extremely well for easy challenges" definition which is the standard one.



This might be a core problem with this particular version of the game: when you get to Tier 4 play, does it really hold together? I'd like to say that I've played a bunch of Tier 4 one shots and can speak from experience, but I have not; our campaigns have a damned hard time staying together, RL being what it is.

What can I do? Look at the numbers (and the "here's a bigger bag of hit points CR 18 creature" trend) and wonder. If their desire was to add meat to the Tier 4 game experience, then maybe I wasted my time getting that book.

One of the stated goals of the book was to provide opponents for the higher tiers of play, yes. Might have been useless to you, and I'm sorry about it, but according to Mearls a lot of people kept asking for it.

It's not the same thing as bloat, however. Bloat is raising the level of the baseline, like publishing more powerful (sub)classes in supplements, making the PHB ones obsolete.

I for one am glad we got Moloch and other fun big baddies.

Also I respectfully ask you to not bring back that whole "bag of HPs" pseudo-controversy, please.

[Vogie]

You could also give those monsters some maneuvers that discourage using a group's own weapons against them - because they are used to using that style of sword, it's easier for them to disarm a PC wielding one... because they've been using that style of sword for years, as opposed to the past couple hours/days.

[Man_Over_Game]

One thing I particularly enjoy is implementing bonuses on the weapons towards a specific damage type, and having the creatures be resistant/immune to that damage type.

It's reasonable for Drow to have resistance to poisons, or at least have the means of gaining resistance or cleansing of poison on hand. So maybe some of their weapons/items utilize Poison damage, so it doesn't benefit players to hunt them constantly.

It's also reasonable for Githyanki to have resistance/immunity to psychic damage (they hunt down Mind Flayers as a hobby, after all). So Githyanki have psychic weapons.

And just repeat this for other creatures. Undead use necrotic weapons, etc.

[MaxWilson]

In general, 5e does a very good job of making monster damage depend on the abilities of the monster, not the weapons it has.

The Solar's sword, for example, does some pretty crazy things, but it's just a greatsword without the Solar. We weren't meant to be kitted out that way. The Balor is similar, although by RAW it doesn't say that the weapons lose their electricity or fire damage if they aren't in the Balor's hands, it also doesn't say that they drop a longsword that does 3d8 lightning damage.

By that metric, 5E is mediocre, the same as any other game. No games say that Balors do not drop longswords that do 3d8 lightning damage.

[KorvinStarmast]

Also I respectfully ask you to not bring back that whole "bag of HPs" pseudo-controversy, please. OK, I won't, but when I read a statblock of a magic using NPC with a CR in the teens that has 23d8 + 54 HP, I have a hard time not scratching my head and wondering at the purpose and logic of that choice. But you are right, that is for another thread ...