How is a sword of subtlety priced? And how exactly does it work?

[Jay R]

The Dungeon Master's Guide says that a sword of subtlety is a "+1 short sword with a thin, dull gray blade, this weapon provides a +4 bonus on its wielder’s attack and damage rolls when he is making a sneak attack with it."

So is that an additional +4 (for a total of +5) or is it either +1 or +4, depending on use? [I'm aware that the Pathfinder version says an additional +4.]

Secondly, how is it priced? One of my players wants an ancestral relic that is a sword of subtlety that keeps increasing in power.

My first guess is that they looked at the prices of a +1 short sword (2,310 gp) and a +4 short sword (32,310 gp). The upgrade would normally cost +30,000 gp, but since it isn't always +4, they reduced that by 1/3, to 20,000 gp. That is, of course, only a guess.

That gives me a formula I can always apply, but does it look right to people?

Also, I assume that the sneak attack version could still never be more than +5, per the DMG. ["Magic weapons have enhancement bonuses ranging from +1 to +5."] Does this seem right, or would you consider this a special power, not an "enhancement bonus"?

[Eurus]

The way it's written, it seems like the sword gives an extra untyped +4 to attack and damage as a special property costing 20,000 gp. That seems pretty strong compared to other weapon options, but it looks like it's not generally going to be available before level 10 or so, by which point the rogue's base attack bonus is lagging a few points behind, so maybe it's not that bad?

Making a version that works the way you're describing, where it's essentially a normal magic weapon that's 33% cheaper in exchange for losing most of its power if it's not making a sneak attack, sounds like a relatively fair trade to me. The rogue isn't going to be able to do much against sneak attack immune enemies anyway, that's sort of the big problem with the rogue in 3.5.

[Biggus]

The way it's written, it seems like the sword gives an extra untyped +4 to attack and damage as a special property costing 20,000 gp.

That's how I read it as well. It doesn't mention it being an enhancement bonus or increasing the enhancement bonus; compare to the Holy Avenger which says "This +2 cold iron longsword becomes a +5 holy cold iron longsword in the hands of a paladin".

As for the pricing, a -30% cost is suggested for being only usable by one class (DMG p.282, sidebar); possibly they applied a further 30% discount for also only being usable when sneak attacking. The difference between a +1 sword and a +5 sword is 48,000GP, a 60% discount to that comes out at 19,200GP. Rounded up to 20,000GP? I'm just guessing but it seems to fit fairly well.

[Beni-Kujaku]

I don't think it should be a fix addition to the price. There are a few special properties giving you more to-hit in special circumstances, like Bloodthirsty giving you +2 to hit if you killed a creature in the last 24h, or Earthbound (+2 to hit and damage as long as both you and the opponent are one the ground), or Martial Discipline (+3 to hit if you're using a maneuver of the right discipline), all properties costing +1. Basically always twice the cost of the special property. Making it a +2 enchantment would not feel too powerful, I think. For example, a Subtle +1 sword would cost 18k gp (so 16k more than a regular +1 sword), but a Subtle Flaming +1 Sword would cost 32k gp (24k more than a regular +1 Flaming sword). You could go even further beyond and create a Subtle quality giving +8 to attack and damage, but being a +3 or +4 quality, for example.

[Gorthawar]

How does the bonus interact with the penetrating strike ACF? Would it half the extra damage to +2 against usually SA immune enemies? The rogue in my game has both penetrating strike and the island of blades stance. It is quite rare that he doesn't get SA.

[Lilapop]

Penetrating strike reduces the number of sneak attack dice used, but doesn't affect any other damage sources. You could argue that it would be fair to also half this bonus, craven, and probably a bunch of others; however neither version of the ACF text supports it.


My first guess is that they looked at the prices of a +1 short sword (2,310 gp) and a +4 short sword (32,310 gp). The upgrade would normally cost +30,000 gp, but since it isn't always +4, they reduced that by 1/3, to 20,000 gp. That is, of course, only a guess.
[...]
Also, I assume that the sneak attack version could still never be more than +5, per the DMG. ["Magic weapons have enhancement bonuses ranging from +1 to +5."] Does this seem right, or would you consider this a special power, not an "enhancement bonus"?

A ~30% reduction could very much have been the designer's intent. Though this does fall apart once you add more exponentially priced effects, as it doesn't factor into them at all. It doesn't count towards the maximum +5 enhancement or maximum +10 effects either, only the maximum 200k gp magic price. Unless of course you as a DM rule otherwise, though I'm getting the feeling you are asking about the status quo, not what you could do to change it.

[Jay R]

I still haven't figured this out, so this time I'm going to ask some clear, specific questions.

1. As a DM, how would you price a custom Weapon of Subtlety? For instance, if somebody wanted a weapon that was +2 normally, or +5 total when making a sneak attack, how would you calculate the price?

2. Would you allow the bonus only when sneak attacking to exceed +5? For example, would you allow a +2 weapon with an additional +4 (for +6 total) when sneak attacking?

This is for an Ancestral Relic, which will improve over time, so I need a general answer.

Thanks for any advice you can offer.

[Telonius]

I still haven't figured this out, so this time I'm going to ask some clear, specific questions.

1. As a DM, how would you price a custom Weapon of Subtlety? For instance, if somebody wanted a weapon that was +2 normally, or +5 total when making a sneak attack, how would you calculate the price?

2. Would you allow the bonus only when sneak attacking to exceed +5? For example, would you allow a +2 weapon with an additional +4 (for +6 total) when sneak attacking?

This is for an Ancestral Relic, which will improve over time, so I need a general answer.

Thanks for any advice you can offer.

I think Lilapop's idea is a good one. The thing starts out as a +1 weapon. The "Subtlety" enhancement of "grants +4 attack/damage to sneak attack" would effectively be a +3 enhancement, discounted -33% because it's only useful to a Rogue.

Personally I wouldn't mess with the definitions of the enhancement, since that would require you to figure out if "grants +5 attack/damage to sneak attack" is worth a +4 enhancement, and the hair-splitting that would go along with that. That would also cut off questions of whether it ought to count as an Epic weapon based on the bonus.

If you wanted to add extra damage, you'd just make it a +2 sword to start with. That cost isn't discounted, since the regular enhancement would work for everybody. So it would start out as an 8000gp +2 sword. Adding the +3 "subtlety" enhancement would make it an effective +5 weapon, so moving from 8k to 50k, or adding 42k; with a -33% discount for only being useful to a Rogue, so only adding 28k for a total of 36k (plus the cost of masterwork). So as far as Enhancement is concerned, it's a +5 weapon, and you could enchant it for another +5 however you want. But for price, you'd always figure Subtlety last, since it's only effective for some characters.

[ericgrau]

First the wording is really annoying. Literally it is an additional +4 untyped and that might be the intent (with an effective total of +5). It could be a very poorly written swap to a +4 enhancement bonus, and that might be the intent. I really can't tell.

But it doesn't matter a great deal for custom items except as a starting point to help ballpark a price. The pricing discount really depends how situational the bonus is. If it's highly situational it might be more than 1/3rd. If it's less situational then it might be less. As the DM you want the purchase to be a tough choice to the player. Not an automatic choice even for a specific build (in the case of the example weapon, a rogue). Not something the player will automatically ignore either.

It gets a little more confusing if MIC is allowed. Many of the items in that book are a better value than DMG items so you have to decide if the DMG is the standard or if MIC is the standard. Or something in between. If allowing MIC then making it the standard seems easier since it has so many items. Or at minimum all except the top 5% of MIC items.

[Jay R]

OK, thanks. Would you allow a +2 weapon with an additional +4 for sneak attacks, or a +3 weapon with an additional +3 for sneak attacks, or would you disallow that because that's more than +5 overall when sneak attacking?

[Fiery Diamond]

OK, thanks. Would you allow a +2 weapon with an additional +4 for sneak attacks, or a +3 weapon with an additional +3 for sneak attacks, or would you disallow that because that's more than +5 overall when sneak attacking?

As written, it's an untyped bonus, not an increase to enhancement bonus, which means the +5 limit isn't applicable here. So, for ease of use, break it up into two parts: enhancement bonus and untyped bonus. For example:

*Basic Version: +1 Weapon, additional +4 for sneak attacks (+1 enhancement, +4 untyped, total +5)
*Advanced Version: +2 Weapon, additional +4 for sneak attacks (+2 enhancement, +4 untyped, total +6)
*Very Advanced Version: +3 Weapon, additional +4 for sneak attacks (+3 enhancement, +4 untyped, total +7)
*Super Advanced Version: +4 Weapon, additional +4 for sneak attacks (+4 enhancement, +4 untyped, total +8)
*Max Version: +5 Weapon, additional +4 for sneak attacks (+5 enhancement, +4 untyped, total +9)

I would NOT, however, tamper with the value of the untyped bonus (+3 weapon with additional +3 to sneak attacks, for example), as that just complicates things.

I'll go ahead and add my voice to the "price as +3 ability with 1/3 discount" for pricing its value. This would also limit the Ancestral Weapon to having no more than +2 equivalent other special abilities added to it, if you wanted to do it that way, which might be a feature or a bug depending on your perspective.

[Jay R]

I'm not looking for a rote explanation of text; I have to make a DM judgment call. I'm trying to get help on judgment.

I appreciate everybody's discussion; I'm not arguing, I'm just trying to push past what's been said so far to get a better overall understanding.


As written, it's an untyped bonus, not an increase to enhancement bonus, which means the +5 limit isn't applicable here.

OK, could you explain your reasoning? I understand that the exact rule states an enhanced bonus from +1 to +5. Is that the only consideration? For example, would you allow a weapon +10 if it had a +5 enhancement bonus and a +5 sacred bonus, or a +5 enhancement bonus and a +5 untyped bonus? And if so, do you know of any example from any book that allows an overall bonus of more than +5? Is an untyped bonus less valuable, so the justification for a limit of +5 limit shouldn't apply?

I'm nervous about what looks like letting a Rogue have a better sword than a Fighter or Ranger could have. And since it's an Ancestral Relic, the player will push it up to that level eventually.


I would NOT, however, tamper with the value of the untyped bonus (+3 weapon with additional +3 to sneak attacks, for example), as that just complicates things.

OK, that's a good, solid DM judgment call. It makes sense for a lot of DMs. But it doesn't apply here. I have a Ph.D. in mathematical optimization; complicating the arithmetic doesn't bother me a bit.

And he'll have the sword for awhile before he can afford a +3 sneak attack bonus. He may start with standard +1 rapier with an additional +1 for sneak attack. With the 1/3 discount, that would be 6,320 gp [2,320 for a rapier +1, plus 2/3 (6,000 gp) for the additional +1]. His limit at 6th level is 6,500 gp value.


I'll go ahead and add my voice to the "price as +3 ability with 1/3 discount" for pricing its value. This would also limit the Ancestral Weapon to having no more than +2 equivalent other special abilities added to it, if you wanted to do it that way, which might be a feature or a bug depending on your perspective.

That's a good point.

I appreciate your comments. You have pushed the discussion forward. For one thing you made it clear to me (so I can make it clear to everyone else) that what I need is a DM judgment call. I'm not merely applying rules blindly; I'm trying to make a decision that fits within the real, intended game system.

Thanks for the help.

[Fiery Diamond]

OK, could you explain your reasoning? I understand that the exact rule states an enhanced bonus from +1 to +5. Is that the only consideration? For example, would you allow a weapon +10 if it had a +5 enhancement bonus and a +5 sacred bonus, or a +5 enhancement bonus and a +5 untyped bonus? And if so, do you know of any example from any book that allows an overall bonus of more than +5? Is an untyped bonus less valuable, so the justification for a limit of +5 limit shouldn't apply?

I'm nervous about what looks like letting a Rogue have a better sword than a Fighter or Ranger could have. And since it's an Ancestral Relic, the player will push it up to that level eventually.



OK, that's a good, solid DM judgment call. It makes sense for a lot of DMs. But it doesn't apply here. I have a Ph.D. in mathematical optimization; complicating the arithmetic doesn't bother me a bit.

And he'll have the sword for awhile before he can afford a +3 sneak attack bonus. He may start with standard +1 rapier with an additional +1 for sneak attack. With the 1/3 discount, that would be 6,320 gp [2,320 for a rapier +1, plus 2/3 (6,000 gp) for the additional +1]. His limit at 6th level is 6,500 gp value.



That's a good point.

I appreciate your comments. You have pushed the discussion forward. For one thing you made it clear to me (so I can make it clear to everyone else) that what I need is a DM judgment call. I'm not merely applying rules blindly; I'm trying to make a decision that fits within the real, intended game system.

Thanks for the help.

Responses in order:

1) I absolutely would allow a weapon with a +5 Enhancement bonus and a +5 Sacred bonus to be a total +10 bonus. I'm not sure why you would even consider otherwise, to be honest. Bonuses of different types always stack. There's no such "+5 limit" as an absolute limit in the game, and TBH, I don't know where you got that idea from. The +5 limit is for enhancement bonuses. It follows the same logic as bonuses to your ability scores: enhancement bonuses are capped at +6, but if you have multiple different types of bonuses, you can exceed +6 total. For example, you can have a +6 enhancement bonus and a +5 inherent bonus for a total increase of +11 to an ability score. The only rule on weapon bonus limits I can find are the places where it says it can't have an enhancement bonus of higher than +5 or an "effective" enhancement bonus of higher than +10 (counting special abilities).

So, to answer that from a rules perspective: there is nothing in the rules limiting you going over +5 by combining bonuses. There's nothing in the rules that suggests there was intended to be such a limit, either, at least not that I see.

My personal opinion is that the +5 limit is intended to be there as a mirror to the +5 limit on armor, and the +10 limit is put an upper bound on how much magic you can pack into a single weapon (or suit of armor) [and an upper bound on price/value]. Among other things, this forces you to seek out different effects rather than simply pumping the numbers higher and higher, even if all you actually want is the numbers to go higher. Presumably that's more "interesting." Not to mention that those other sources will generally be set values rather than values you can just make as high as you want.

To answer from a DM judgement perspective: I mean, it's up to you whether you consider it too powerful to allow, but that's true for other definitely rules-legal things as well. Personally, I prefer high-power low-optimization games, so I see no issues whatsoever.

2) If you don't have any issue incrementing it and feel completely comfortable with doing so, more power too you. Don't let what I would or wouldn't do hold you back.

3) Thank you for your appreciation.

[ericgrau]

It is a bit clunky to make it a standalone ability. I'd make it a +2 equivalent ability which would bring the original weapon to 18,310 gp. Next I suppose you could add a flat 4,000 gp, or if playing with other items that are stronger than DMG items just waive the 4,000 gp for simplicity. Considering how many enemies are immune to sneak attack, the work to set up sneak attacks and how it limits what other abilities you can add to the weapon it seems fairly reasonable in terms of making it a tough choice for players.