My Player Wants To Be A Sentient Weapon? Help.

[Burtreynoldsesq]

I´m starting a new campaign with my friends. One of them is intent on getting this magical item so that he can bind himself to it. The thing is that is isn´t a wizard or an artificer; he's a monk. I decided that he could but on conditions: 1. He takes two levels of the artificer and gets the artificer ability which lets him make one magic item. 2. He has to make a 20-25 DC arcana check. Any ideas or thoughts? I wanna be fair, not let my friend do something dumb and keep the campaign mostly serious. But on the other hand, it won´t make him OP since he gets fewer actions and cant do anything.

[Honest Tiefling]

Quick question, is there even anyone in the party cool with wielding the other character? I'd check that first and see how they feel about it. If they turn into a weapon no one wants to use and no one wants a weapon talking back at them, I advise NOT to do this. Unless the player wants to be an animated weapon?

If at all possible, make some sort of ritual where the character can undo it at a great price in case they get bored.

[Aett_Thorn]

Oooo...extra props to them if they become a Hexblade Warlock, after having somehow made a pact with themselves.

[nickl_2000]

Quick question, is there even anyone in the party cool with wielding the other character? I'd check that first and see how they feel about it. If they turn into a weapon no one wants to use and no one wants a weapon talking back at them, I advise NOT to do this.

PC 1: Oh boy, after year of research and weeks of prep work, I finally completed the ritual to become a sentient longsword.
PC 2: I'm a Ranger and only fight with bows, I won't ever use it.
PC 3: I'm a wizard, even if I could use a longsword I wouldn't want it.
PC 4: Don't look at me, I use GWM and PAM a longsword is completely useless to me *tosses sword PC1 into the back of the cave they are exploring and walks away*
PC 1: Guys? hello, why are you walking away from me? Guys, it's dark in this cave and the humidity is rusting me. GUYS?!?



Overall, seems incredibly overly complicated to me, but hey it's your game.

[MThurston]

Hexblade is the class they want.

[Burtreynoldsesq]

Quick question, is there even anyone in the party cool with wielding the other character? I'd check that first and see how they feel about it. If they turn into a weapon no one wants to use and no one wants a weapon talking back at them, I advise NOT to do this. Unless the player wants to be an animated weapon?

If at all possible, make some sort of ritual where the character can undo it at a great price in case they get bored.

Actually, my other friend wants to wield him. I like that idea of reversing it. It might make a great side quest. My friend is the type to think of a really dumb, interesting idea, then back out of it and get bored of it right after it happens.

[Man_Over_Game]

I'm not at all sure how the hell someone is supposed to "play" this.

Even something like playing a familiar would have a lot more options available.

I'm usually pretty good at making up homebrew stuff on the fly, but this is....something else.

He might have just as much fun getting his own sentient weapon, or playing someone who's using a sentient weapon (that has his soul trapped inside of it).



How about this:

Monk goes to a temple, where sacred weapon is held by a the sword's sole protector. The sword is claimed to absorb the soul of the first thing it touches, in an attempt to trap an almighty being that's foretold to doom the earth, but through some foolery, it ends up trapping the monk in question. It's protector leaves the temple with the sword to fix the problem, and takes the monk's place in his party as recompense for his mistake and the loss of their friend. The monk, p***ed as hell, constantly antagonizes his "protector" while inside of the sword. The sword is sentient, and it houses the additional personality, but it's not a creature and it can't take any actions. The player spends the rest of the game playing as the protector until you introduce a way to free the soul.

[Burtreynoldsesq]

How about this:

Monk goes to a temple, where sacred weapon is held by a the sword's sole protector. The sword is claimed to absorb the soul of the first thing it touches, in an attempt to trap an almighty being that's foretold to doom the earth, but through some foolery, it ends up trapping the monk in question. It's protector leaves the temple with the sword to fix the problem, and takes the monk's place in his party as recompense for his mistake and the loss of their friend. The monk, p***ed as hell, constantly antagonizes his "protector" while inside of the sword. The sword is sentient, and it houses the additional personality, but it's not a creature and it can't take any actions. The player spends the rest of the game playing as the protector until you introduce a way to free the soul.

That´s actually a really awesome idea. Though I would have to tweak it a bit in order to fit better with my setting.

[Unoriginal]

The thing is that is isn´t a wizard or an artificer

What does it have to do with anything? Neither of those classes are required.


He takes two levels of the artificer and gets the artificer ability which lets him make one magic item[/QUOTE]


Why?


2. He has to make a 20-25 DC arcana check.

What happens if he fails?



Any ideas or thoughts? I wanna be fair, not let my friend do something dumb and keep the campaign mostly serious. But on the other hand, it won´t make him OP since he gets fewer actions and cant do anything.

Since you are starting a new campaign, don't make the guy a monk at all. Just start with him playing the sapient sword.

Make it an homebrew sentient magic item, and give the statblock to the player to play. With the wielder getting most of the benefits, of course, but eh, if it's what they want...


Trying to complicate it or gatekeeping it behind levels or ability checks won't help anything.

[Mikal]

You could always just say no.
Part of the dms job is managing flights of fancy you know

[Unoriginal]

You could always just say no.
Part of the dms job is managing flights of fancy you know

This too. But honestly having a sentient magic item played by one of the players rather than the DM could be fun.


My friend is the type to think of a really dumb, interesting idea, then back out of it and get bored of it right after it happens.

Then in that case just say "no" from the get-go. No reason anyone has to waste time on it.

[Burtreynoldsesq]

You could always just say no.
Part of the dms job is managing flights of fancy you know

Yeah, I agree. Honestly, I´m pretty sure my friend is just going to abandon the idea by the time the game starts.

I think that if this is a real thing he wants to do, I might go along with it with some caveats Im gonna talk to him about his character and what he actually wants.

[Tiadoppler]

Have the sword take control of a mindless golem/warforged body.

When the body is holding the sword, the sword is in full control of the body, but when the swords sheathed (or worse, left somewhere), the body is under less and less precise control. If the sword is disarmed in combat, it takes more actions to direct the warforged body on how to move over and pick it up again.

The warforged body does not speak, but has a sign around its neck saying "You want to talk? Talk to my sword."


So, in essence, the character is a warforged who must always use a specific sword, but can (for example) leave the sword in place as a spy, or cast spells with the sword, or something.

[kivzirrum]

If they're really serious about this, maybe they should just play Wield, which is all about playing sentient items/weapons.

Otherwise... I dunno, I think I'd probably just say no. :smalltongue: Especially if it was a campaign I wanted to keep mostly serious.

[Lord8Ball]

Take a look at Matt Mercer's Lingering soul homebrew class. If you like it then why not ask the player if he wants to try it out. I think it will work great for a sentient weapon.

https://img.fireden.net/tg/image/1511/28/1511285281092.pdf

[Callak_Remier]

My Suggestion.
Place a Sentient Weapon in your campaign if they get ahold of it, let that player RP the Weapon.
Make sure its a Weapon that only another character can use.

They get too RP a weapon (i suggest giving guidlines on the items personality)
They still have a standard character to play.

[Expected]

This sounds a lot like the anime "Soul Eater." In it, there are human/weapon hybrids that can change shape into a humanoid or weapon. I would suggest doing that so he/she can still interact with NPC's (besides when killing them).

[Keravath]

Personally, I don't see how you can play a sentient sword in any really contructive way since in practical terms you can't do anything. If someone swings the sword in combat, only one person gets to roll the dice and it isn't the sword. The sword may be able to express opinions and provide comic relief but even if it has actions ... you'd have to give it something it can do since usually it can't do anything.

Role playing a sentient weapon just seems like a dead end to me even if it could be amusing for a session or two.

One option I can think of is you could allow the player to play the sword if it has the ability to take control of its bearer. The sword then controls the character and the character would have to use the sword all the time in combat. The soul less shell that carries the sword might be pretty creepy but you could make it work from a flavor and game play perspective. The upside is that the character becomes very hard to permanently kill since the sword can move on and take over another host. The downside is that they won't ever be upgrading the weapons they use if something better comes along since they are the weapon and one requirement should be that the weapon must be used in any combat.

P.S. I'd probably require such a player to be a hexblade warlock ... :)

[Teaguethebean]

I would tell him no if a player wields him what will he do in combat. Out of combat the being a weapon should make their high charisma useless.

[Garfunion]

I think the player actually wants to play a companion that can transform into a weapon, kind of like the Soul Eater anime....maybe?

[lperkins2]

So, in most campaigns, this would be a flat 'no' from me. But, if it was the right player, and the right campaign, here's how I would handle it.

Have them stat up a PC who in some way has magehand. Could be a standard full caster, could be an arcane trickster. Then they get stuck in a sword. The only extra property the sword grants is blindsight 30'. This lets them see themself, and their nearby surroundings. It's powerful, especially at low levels, but it offsets the other serious limitations on the sword (being unable to talk for one).

By using magehand, the player can move himself around, using an action, and manipulate the world. I also would let the magehand wield the sword, so the player has some way to attack. I'd probably grant the sword damage resistance against physical attacks, use the PCs HP total, and set the AC to 10+dex.

[Sigreid]

So, I think the first thing has to be first. I would have to ask the player(s) involved how they envision this working once the monk becomes a sentient weapon. And by that I mean both of them having meaningful actions and role play.

[DeadMech]

Echoing that this sounds like soul eater anime. Anyway this is certainly an "out there" request and I wouldn't blame you if you're not interested. on the other hand it's certainly unique and could make your life easier in the right situations.

This is basically making two players take their turn in combat at the same time. Or reducing the party size by one. This might make combats faster to run. If I had like 8 players at a table I might want 4 of them to take this option.

How? What does it looks like when they do? Not 100% on that. And I'm a bit busy with my own stuff right now to really put my thoughts into it.

[Mr.Spastic]

I could see this being fun if you had an inexperienced player and an experienced player who want to play co-op. It does have a Soul Eater vibe which could be fun. The question would be what benefits they would get for playing as one unit. Also consider if the "weapon" could move. I personally would not have the option for characters to become bound to a weapon, unless it was a curse or type of imprisonment. I would make the characters start as a pair of "weapon" and wielder and give the "weapon" some abilities that scale with the wielder's level. A better example would be any of the characters from Skullgirls, specifically Squiggly and Filia.

I would also say that the characters should work together, sharing a turn. You would have specific abilities that would be bonus actions or reactions, maybe things similar to action surge. The question would be about hit points and interacting with anti-magic abilities. For hit points I would recommend that it only takes damage from attacks that it lands and after reaching a certain limit, they "pass out" for a while.

My suggestions for abilities would be things like spells, I would recommend a theme though. You should start with a cantrip that the "weapon" could use as the players bonus action and one that they could both use as an action. At certain levels you would get better abilities.

A level scaling Weapon Character based on a Combat Boost theme.

Amount of weapon damage it can take: 15 at level 1, +10 for each new level
Level 1: The weapon can cast Resistance or Guidance on the wielder by using bonus action of the wielder. They can both use their action to cast sword burst. (These spells should be thematic. If you were going for a fire theme, consider Control Flames as the bonus action and green flame blade as the action.)

Level 2: Once per day the weapon can allow the wielder to use an action surge, attack action only. The weapon chooses the target(s). (I think that all weapons should get this, if this is more than a one time thing.)

Level 3: The weapon can cast absorb elements or shield 3/day (it has its own reaction)

Level 4: +1 to hit and damage

Level 5: nothing?

Level 6: Jump or Longstrider 2/day using bonus action

Level 7: The wielder and weapon can you their action to attack and Cast Dispel magic at fourth level on a successful hit. If you have to roll add proficiency bonus instead of intelligence. 1/day

Level 8: +2 to hit and Damage

Level 9: Hex 3/day. Does not use concentration, but if wielder is hit, they have to roll a concentration check to keep ability.

Level 10-20: I don't really know except making it a plus +3 weapon at level 12

[thoroughlyS]

This seems like a simple problem to me. Have the player build a character as normal, and play their character normally in-combat except:

All of their movement speeds are 0 and they can't increase
They exist inside another creature's (the wielder's) space
They move with the wielder
If they Attack or Use an Object it looks like the wielder doing it
If they Dash or Disengage the wielder benefits
If a creature targets the wielder with an attack (or other harmful effect), they may choose to shift the attack to themself instead (with no action required)
If the wielder is prone, they are too
If the wielder is incapacitated, they can't Attack or Use an Object

This way, they feel like a sentient weapon, but basically are just playing another character. Out-of-combat, they can interact with the party just fine, but dealing with NPCs is where the real fun can happen.



To give an example of my idea, suppose the player does build a 1st level Monk as a longsword being wielded by another player (a 1st level Fighter in this example). They are travelling through the woods when they are attacked by a Berserker and a Scout. The party rolls initiative, and the Fighter goes first. They move in and attack the Berserker with their longsword, dealing 1d8 + 3 damage on a hit. The Berserker goes next and attacks the Fighter, nearly dropping them to 0 hp. The Weapon goes and attacks the Berserker, dealing another 1d4 + 3 (the same as they would if using an unarmed strike). They also decide to use their bonus action to attack for another 1d4 + 3, using Martial Arts. The Scout, surprised by the Fighter's apparent attack speed tries to shoot them. The Weapon decides to take the hits instead; you roll against their AC. One of the shots misses, but the other hits the Weapon instead of the Fighter. This keeps the Fighter standing. The Fighter is up next and uses Second Wind before continuing the battle...

[AureusFulgens]

You know, if the sword character was a spellcaster, I could see this being really interesting. Might not even require that much rules alteration to work. You could potentially have a duo of a fighter/rogue/paladin/whatever with a sword that casts wizard/bard/paladin/whatever spells.

So, the alterations:

The sword has a speed of zero and cannot speak. However, it has telepathy out to (some number of feet) and blindsight to (the same distance). I'd also consider letting it have a limited ability to share its wielder's senses. (Alternatively, for anyone who's read the Magnus Chase books, a flying sword could work, and allowing it to speak audibly probably wouldn't cause any balance issues.)
Its AC is fixed, and its HP are set by its class level as normal. Rules for it taking damage and being targeted by effects could be fiddly, and would be the lengthiest section of your rules supplement. I imagine, though, that it would either auto-fail Strength and Dex saves or share them with the wielder; it would make the other types of saves as normal; and it would have certain natural condition and damage modifications (for example, it is probably immune to poison).
I would make healing, Hit Dice and rest recovery, and death saves work as normal. You might wish to alter them for flavor reasons; I don't particularly.
It has a natural racial bonus to Constitution, since it is made of metal, but it does not have either Strength or Dexterity. Its mental scores function as normal.
As a corollary, it cannot use any skills related to Strength or Dexterity (e.g. it cannot make Athletics, Acrobatics, Sleight of Hand, or Stealth checks). Other skills work fine, though I don't know what it would do with Performance unless it can speak aloud.
I don't know what the best way to handle initiative is, but I could see it either getting its own or sharing the wielder's. It would use Intelligence for initiative rolls if it had its own initiative.
It might also take damage when it is used to deal damage. (Perhaps as much as is dealt, but it ignores Sneak Attack, Smites, and other riders.) This could get to be difficult to work around, though, and would incentivize against using it in combat.
It cannot attack, but it can cast spells and use other class features. It waives non-costly material components, but verbal components cause it to hum audibly, and somatic components cause it to glow and vibrate. I'd have to think a little harder to figure out how one might disable its spellcasting. A Sorcerer sword can waive these effects with Subtle Spell.
Some class features might be dead levels, which you could homebrew away or not as suits your tastes, but others could be unexpectedly useful; for example, a sword that is also a Tempest Cleric could fly under its own power at 17th level, and might actually need a Dexterity score. I don't know how I feel about a Druid sword turning into animals.
Spells would also have unusual effects on it, and if it can cast misty step, it might actually get a little bit of mobility.
This might call for a restriction of class options; Wizard, Sorcerer, Bard, Warlock, and Cleric are probably fine, but Druid could cause problems, and Paladin and Ranger might suffer as a result from losing their combat capabilities. Monk, Barbarian, Fighter, and Rogue would be borderline useless.
For flavor purposes, the sword is capable of casting Light targeting itself at will, requiring no components and no use of an action. It can also cast Heat Metal on itself a limited number of times, to deter NPC's from running away with it.
Since a player character is wielding it and it is also a player character, I don't recommend allowing it to initiate a Charisma contest to dominate the wielder, as is normally possible. However, I might consider allowing it to occasionally make brief actions on behalf of the wielder - the main example I'm thinking of is that it could have a Defend reaction, enabling it to shift the target of attacks against its wielder to itself. This could create some really nice heroic moments, like it shattering itself to save its wielder.
For the Soul Eater/etc. vibe, you could consider giving it a (I would say non-combatant) humanoid form. That's not my inclination, but you do you.

[Garfunion]

Going off of my companion weapon(CW) idea.

The player/CW makes a Four Elements Monk choosing the race, background, etc.

Weapon Transformation
While the CW has available Ki points to spend, they can use an action to transform into a melee weapon. Doing so deals damage to the CW equal to their character level. They may use an action to transform back to humanoid form on their turn.

•Regardless of the weapon the CW transform into, the damage die of the weapon will be the same damage die as the CM’s unarmed strike.

•If an ally is within 5ft of the CW when they transform, the ally can use a free action to grab and wield(the Wielder) the CW.

•The CW can telepathically communicate with the Wielder.

•When the CW turn comes up on the initiative order, the only action they can perform is to transform back to humanoid form.

•The Wielder may use their bonus action to use any Monk ability that uses Ki point. Example; the Wielder may have the CW spend 1 Ki point to use flurry of blows, allowing the Wielder to make 2 attacks (with the CW) using the same bonus action or activate and use any Elemental Disciplines.

•The Wielder may use their reaction to shield themselves from one on coming ranged or melee attack damage with the CW. The CW must first allow this action. If the CW does allow this action, they take all the damage from the one ranged or melee attack.

•When the CW has no more Ki points to spend or their hp is reduced to 0, they immediately transform back to humanoid form, occupying an un-occupied space adjacent to the Wielder.


That is my initial idea for a playable Companion Weapon.

[thoroughlyS]

So, the alterations:
It seems like we had basically the same idea.

The sword has a speed of zero and cannot speak. However, it has telepathy out to (some number of feet) and blindsight to (the same distance). I'd also consider letting it have a limited ability to share its wielder's senses. (Alternatively, for anyone who's read the Magnus Chase books, a flying sword could work, and allowing it to speak audibly probably wouldn't cause any balance issues.)
The lack of speech and senses seems unnecessary; the game has sentient weapons which actually speak like Blackrazor, and have senses to a specified range. Simply using a built character's traits for this seem reasonable.

Its AC is fixed, and its HP are set by its class level as normal. Rules for it taking damage and being targeted by effects could be fiddly, and would be the lengthiest section of your rules supplement. I imagine, though, that it would either auto-fail Strength and Dex saves or share them with the wielder; it would make the other types of saves as normal; and it would have certain natural condition and damage modifications (for example, it is probably immune to poison).
Buying armor could be flavored as having the weapon refurbished in some way. The weapon should make all saves normally, just so that it isn't disproportionately effected in unforeseen ways.

It has a natural racial bonus to Constitution, since it is made of metal, but it does not have either Strength or Dexterity. Its mental scores function as normal.
Removing those scores seems fiddly. Limiting certain actions like the proposed limitation on skills seems fine.

It might also take damage when it is used to deal damage. (Perhaps as much as is dealt, but it ignores Sneak Attack, Smites, and other riders.) This could get to be difficult to work around, though, and would incentivize against using it in combat.
This just seems like a bad idea in general. The game already assumes that regular upkeep of items is done behind the scenes, so mechanically bring it to the forefront seems misguided.

It cannot attack, but it can cast spells and use other class features. It waives non-costly material components, but verbal components cause it to hum audibly, and somatic components cause it to glow and vibrate. I'd have to think a little harder to figure out how one might disable its spellcasting. A Sorcerer sword can waive these effects with Subtle Spell.
By disallowing attacks, you're seriously limiting the set of build this idea is compatible with. Letting them swing themselves doesn't break anything.

Some class features might be dead levels, which you could homebrew away or not as suits your tastes, but others could be unexpectedly useful; for example, a sword that is also a Tempest Cleric could fly under its own power at 17th level, and might actually need a Dexterity score. I don't know how I feel about a Druid sword turning into animals.
A Druid sword sounds totally awesome.

This might call for a restriction of class options; Wizard, Sorcerer, Bard, Warlock, and Cleric are probably fine, but Druid could cause problems, and Paladin and Ranger might suffer as a result from losing their combat capabilities. Monk, Barbarian, Fighter, and Rogue would be borderline useless.
I see no reason to have this be the case.

[AureusFulgens]

It seems like we had basically the same idea.

The lack of speech and senses seems unnecessary; the game has sentient weapons which actually speak like Blackrazor, and have senses to a specified range. Simply using a built character's traits for this seem reasonable.

Buying armor could be flavored as having the weapon refurbished in some way. The weapon should make all saves normally, just so that it isn't disproportionately effected in unforeseen ways.

Removing those scores seems fiddly. Limiting certain actions like the proposed limitation on skills seems fine.

This just seems like a bad idea in general. The game already assumes that regular upkeep of items is done behind the scenes, so mechanically bring it to the forefront seems misguided.

By disallowing attacks, you're seriously limiting the set of build this idea is compatible with. Letting them swing themselves doesn't break anything.

A Druid sword sounds totally awesome.

I see no reason to have this be the case.

A lot of good points here. (I think your post went up while I was writing mine and I didn't get a good look at it, so my apologies!) The armor thing in particular seems fair, and I was already kind of ambivalent about the weapon taking damage when used.

I think that a lot of your ideas would make a pretty awesome Jack-type sentient weapon (Jack being the eponymous Sword of Summer, the weapon of the god Frey, as he appears in the Magnus Chase books), with a lot more capacity for independent combat action. I like the idea of the Fighter wielding it and it being able to attack itself, and I'd actually be inclined to give that variety of sword a flying speed of the Eagle Barbarian variety, enabling it on its turn to leap out of its wielder's hand, fly and attack someone, and then return, almost like Captain America's shield.

I think my vision was inclined to a more rigid sense of the player being a weapon, and assuming that I would be choosing a primary spellcasting class which wouldn't require movement or attack rolls very much. Still, I can see that that might be unnecessarily restrictive. I'd have to try it out to see how it works.

[Expected]

A class that has a humanoid form (to interact with PC's/NPC's anytime other than combat) and a weapon form (for combat) could make for an interesting homebrew.

Obviously, it will need to be balanced and adjusted for when allies would wield them (and when they wouldn't). Perhaps it could get a class feature at level 1, such as an upgraded form of mage hand or something similar to how Spiritual Weapon/Arcane Hand are able to float and attack? They could for example, move into a space of an ally who wishes to wield them and transform as a bonus action on their turn. Additionally, as a weapon, they could receive +1/2/3 status and be counted as a magic weapon based on their character/class level (to give players incentive to wield them compared to inanimate magic weapons). At level 3, they could receive a weapon archetype, which could specialize them into a specific form, such as one-handed daggers/swords/rapiers and two-handed glaives/halberds/greatswords/greataxes.

There is a lot of potential for abuse (especially if a PAM, GWM, Sentinel Fighter wields one), but it could work if minor adjustments can be made during the game. I would allow and even play such a class if homebrew rules were allowed.

[Ganymede]

I´m starting a new campaign with my friends. One of them is intent on getting this magical item so that he can bind himself to it. The thing is that is isn´t a wizard or an artificer; he's a monk. I decided that he could but on conditions: 1. He takes two levels of the artificer and gets the artificer ability which lets him make one magic item. 2. He has to make a 20-25 DC arcana check. Any ideas or thoughts? I wanna be fair, not let my friend do something dumb and keep the campaign mostly serious. But on the other hand, it won´t make him OP since he gets fewer actions and cant do anything.

You should probably remind him that being an object is not particularly conducive to playing an adventure game.

If the "I am a sentient weapon" is important to his character's story, it can be done without him being some object. For instance, take a look at Vision from those popular Avengers films. He was originally a magical item, but was turned into a humanoid (a perfect form for adventuring!) complete with special powers. Something like that could be really interesting, especially in how the PC grows now that he is a humanoid.