Bladed crossbow question

[the_tick_rules]

Page 47 of the Magic Item Compendium. It says it is capable of functioning as crossbow or as a battle axe. I'm wondering if it would count as two weapons for adding magical weapon properties? If so it sounds like it would make a great wizard weapon.

[Thurbane]

The wording in the description doesn't say that it counts as a double weapon, or that the crossbow and axe parts are enchanted separately, so you should be able to upgrade it without paying for two sets of enchantments, by my reading.

Other similar items are usually very clear if separate enchantments are required:


Magical enhancements to an elvencraft bow only affect its use as a bow. Enhancements to the melee capabilities of the weapon must be added separately.

Naturally, this would depend on DM approval.

On the plus side, you could add ranged or melee attack to the same weapon!

[Blue Jay]

I've always interpreted it as a case where the "melee" and "ranged" are treated separately. Look at the pricing:


heavy crossbow: 50 gp
masterwork: 300 gp
+1 bonus: 2000 gp

battleaxe: 10 gp
masterwork 300 gp
+1 bonus: 2000 gp

Total: 4660 gp

4660 gp is exactly the list price from MIC. So, it looks like they've already priced it as a two-in-one weapon with independently-enhanced components. So, I think it's most likely that you treat it as two separate weapons for enhancements.

Unfortunately, I don't think it's great for a wizard, because you'd most likely have to invest some extra build capital to get battleaxe proficiency. But, investing in a melee weapon isn't a high priority for a wizard anyway.

[the_tick_rules]

I've always interpreted it as a case where the "melee" and "ranged" are treated separately. Look at the pricing:


heavy crossbow: 50 gp
masterwork: 300 gp
+1 bonus: 2000 gp

battleaxe: 10 gp
masterwork 300 gp
+1 bonus: 2000 gp

Total: 4660 gp

4660 gp is exactly the list price from MIC. So, it looks like they've already priced it as a two-in-one weapon with independently-enhanced components. So, I think it's most likely that you treat it as two separate weapons for enhancements.

Unfortunately, I don't think it's great for a wizard, because you'd most likely have to invest some extra build capital to get battleaxe proficiency. But, investing in a melee weapon isn't a high priority for a wizard anyway.

There's a skillful property from complete arcane, makes you proficient in that individual melee weapon amongst other things. That would do the job.

[the_tick_rules]

The wording in the description doesn't say that it counts as a double weapon, or that the crossbow and axe parts are enchanted separately, so you should be able to upgrade it without paying for two sets of enchantments, by my reading.

Other similar items are usually very clear if separate enchantments are required:



Naturally, this would depend on DM approval.

On the plus side, you could add ranged or melee attack to the same weapon!

If that were how it worked think it would work like the swordbow in same book? It's be a nice weapon but only having +10 for two weapons doesn't leave a lot of room.

[Thurbane]

If that were how it worked think it would work like the swordbow in same book? It's be a nice weapon but only having +10 for two weapons doesn't leave a lot of room.

The Swordbow specifically states:


A swordbow’s enhancement bonus can be improved as if improving two separate weapons (for example, improving a +1 swordbow to a +2 swordbow costs 12,000 gp, just as if you were improving two +1 weapons to +2).

If a property can’t apply to both weapons (such as vorpal or distance), it applies only to the swordbow when it is in an eligible form (for instance, a +1 swordbow of distance is a distance weapon only in bow form). If a property can apply to the weapon in only one of its forms, it does not cost double the regular price.

Again, since the Bladed Crossbow lacks any such language, my reading is that enchantments only cost the normal amount, not double as if you were applying it to two different weapons. i.e. if you wanted to add Flaming to your Bladed Crossbow, it would cost 6,000gp and the flaming quality would apply to either usage (crossbow or axe). The RAW/RAI gets wonky if you try to add something that doesn't works for missile weapons only, or melee weapons only.

Now, the RAW on that isn't ironclad, so check with the DM. My main argument is that most weapons that require enhancements to be added and paid for separately clearly spell it out.

[Blue Jay]

The Swordbow specifically states:

Again, since the Bladed Crossbow lacks any such language, my reading is that enchantments only cost the normal amount, not double as if you were applying it to two different weapons. i.e. if you wanted to add Flaming to your Bladed Crossbow, it would cost 6,000gp and the flaming quality would apply to either usage (crossbow or axe). The RAW/RAI gets wonky if you try to add something that doesn't works for missile weapons only, or melee weapons only.

Now, the RAW on that isn't ironclad, so check with the DM. My main argument is that most weapons that require enhancements to be added and paid for separately clearly spell it out.

Well, if the swordbow and the bladed crossbow use the same rules, then why isn't the bladed crossbow priced the same way? In my mind, the swordbow spells out how to price things precisely because it doesn't follow the normal, intuitive rules; and the bladed crossbow doesn't spell it out because it is following the normal, intuitive rules.

The difference, to me, is that the swordbow magically changes shape, while the bladed crossbow is just a crossbow with some axe blades attached to it. So, the bladed crossbow is just like any other double/two-in-one weapon, and it's even priced the same way as a double weapon. The swordbow is not a double weapon, and is not priced like a double weapon, so clearly, it's not using the same rules as double weapons use.

[Thurbane]

Well, if the swordbow and the bladed crossbow use the same rules, then why isn't the bladed crossbow priced the same way? In my mind, the swordbow spells out how to price things precisely because it doesn't follow the normal, intuitive rules; and the bladed crossbow doesn't spell it out because it is following the normal, intuitive rules.

The difference, to me, is that the swordbow magically changes shape, while the bladed crossbow is just a crossbow with some axe blades attached to it. So, the bladed crossbow is just like any other double/two-in-one weapon, and it's even priced the same way as a double weapon. The swordbow is not a double weapon, and is not priced like a double weapon, so clearly, it's not using the same rules as double weapons use.

I do understand your argument, I just don't necessarily agree with it.

I know how I'd rule it for my table, but IMHO this is definitely an area that would require interpretation and a ruling from the DM in question.

[PrismCat21]

So, the bladed crossbow is just like any other double/two-in-one weapon, and it's even priced the same way as a double weapon. The swordbow is not a double weapon, and is not priced like a double weapon, so clearly, it's not using the same rules as double weapons use.

It still doesn't say that it's a double weapon. That may have been the intention, but the bladed crossbow does not have that designation. That's the issue. Making it a double weapon would be a houserule, DM's decision.
It's reasonable to do so, but it isn't RAW.

[Darg]

Double weapon simply means that it's two separate weapons in one. They can make main hand and off hand attacks.

Bladed crossbow is one two hand weapon that can act as one weapon or another at a moments notice. Meaning if you have 2 attacks in a full attack routine you can make a melee attack and a ranged attack.

[PrismCat21]

That is not what double weapon simply means.
Double weapon is a game term that has its own special rules.
Bladed crossbow is not listed as a double weapon, so it can't use those special rules without the DM's specific allowance.

One of those special rules is that you can use both ends of the double weapon as if wielding a one-handed weapon and a light weapon. Which ends of the bladed crossbow would be the one-handed weapon and the light weapon?

[Blue Jay]

It still doesn't say that it's a double weapon. That may have been the intention, but the bladed crossbow does not have that designation. That's the issue. Making it a double weapon would be a houserule, DM's decision.
It's reasonable to do so, but it isn't RAW.

Okay, well I was hoping nobody would mind the lazy shortcut, because I was on my phone and about to get into bed, and "two weapons in one" or "two-in-one weapons" or whatever is not easy to enter.

But you're right: a bladed crossbow is not a double weapon. But, it clearly is two separate weapons combined into one, which by precedent work like double weapons for pricing purposes.

You're also right that my interpretation is not RAW. But, it's a case where RAI seems pretty straightforward. The bladed crossbow works like a "two-in-one" weapon with separate striking surfaces, and its price is equal to the combined price of the two components (just as it would be for any other "two-in-one" weapon); and the only viable alternate reading (i.e. that it counts as a single weapon for enhancements) is something that, as far as I can tell, is unprecedented. Plus, the nearest precedent for that alternate reading (the swordbow) is clearly using mechanics, pricing and enhancing rules that are not being employed for the bladed crossbow. So I just don't feel like that alternate reading is very well justified.

I mean, I guess there are some borderline cases that you could argue are precedents. Like the goad from Frostburn: it has two striking surfaces (a bludgeoning ball and a spike), with quite different damage mechanics. But, there's no mention of how enhancements should be priced, so it's quite open to interpretation: should the ball and spike be enhanced as separate weapons or as a single weapon together?

To a lesser extent, the halberd and scythe and dagger are also interesting possible precedents, but in all those cases, the differences in damage mechanics are pretty subtle, they mostly use different aspects of the same striking surface, and there are only two weapon properties (impaling and whirling) where the mechanical difference between piercing and slashing even matters.

I think Thurbane's argument would hold a lot of water if we were talking about the goad: that's a legitimate borderline case. But, with the bladed crossbow, there are just too many clues that point towards the "separate two-in-one" interpretation for me to believe that there's a real plausible case for the alternative.

[the_tick_rules]

Yeah I kind of get the feeling the bladed crossbow is kind of like a spiked shield as far as enchanting it goes, or at least that is what it was intended to be. Though this elven crafted bow represents some opportunities. It says it counts as a quarter staff which is a double weapon. Does that mean you it counts as three weapons? The possibilities of holding a bow for max enchanted offense and holding two weapons buffed to the max with defensive weapon properties is stunning. It's a little weird investing nearly 600k in a single item but man the results. "Oh this end of the quarter staff is a +5 Parrying, defending and this end is a +5 warning, spell-strike and the bow end is a +5 force, wounding, psychokinetic bow."