|1 person marked this as a favorite.|
Let's cherry-pick some sentences and see what we can do.
"Magic weapons have enhancement bonuses ranging from +1 to +5."
Table 15-8, pg468
Weapon bonus (+1) = Base Price 2,000 gp
Okay, so there's a thing called a +1 enhancement bonus, and it costs 2,000gp to have.
"A weapon with a special ability must also have at least a +1 enhancement bonus."
Let's think about this. There's a table that documents the price of the range of +1 to +5, with a specific line for +1. It literally tells you what having that costs. Then it tells you if you don't have that thing, you can't have special abilities.
That's called cut & dried.
But let's carry on.
"Wielding it provides a +1 enhancement bonus on attack rolls."
"The enhancement bonus
granted by the masterwork quality doesn’t stack with the enhancement bonus provided by the weapon’s magic."
Well, it seems in the Masterwork weapons section of the book there are two interesting things. First, it turns out that masterwork provides an enhancement bonus to attack rolls. Second, it's clear that masterwork is merely a subset, sub-function, sub-everything of an actual +1 enhancement that comes from being magic.
Huh. They're not the same, they don't cost the same, they don't do the same thing. So yeah, no, there's no sentence saying "you can't put flaming on a merely masterwork glaive" for the same reason there isn't a sentence saying "you can't use the planet as an improvised weapon". You don't need such a sentence.
Now, that all said, it might be valuable to explain what's going on here. The game has a lot of bonuses, and they tend to usually be "named" bonuses. Named bonuses never stack, meaning that if you have a +1 dog bonus to armor class from some spell, and a +2 dog bonus to armor class from a magic item, you don't get +3. You get +2, which is the bigger of the two numbers. But if you can get a +1 cat bonus to armor class from somewhere, that will stack because it's a different named bonus.
The two most common/fundamental named bonuses are "enhancement" and "circumstance". They kind of mean what they say.
A circumstance bonus comes from a situation or detail which is abnormal. For instance, if Character A tries to slide down a bannister, the DM will assign a DC for (probably) an Acrobatics check. If Character A covers the bannister with butter first, the DM might grant Character A a circumstance bonus to the check, because the circumstance is unusual and modified. It's not permanent.
An enhancement bonus usually comes from an improvement or upgrade of some sort. So if Character A has crafted frictionless pants of sliding, those pants will probably give them a circumstance bonus to Acrobatics checks made to slide on things while sitting.
The point is that enhancement bonuses come from items/equipment being "better". So yeah, a masterwork weapon is just a little bit "better" at hitting things because it's better balanced, or sharper, or a bit stronger. A +1 magic weapon is a} magic, and b} so much "better" that it does more damage than a merely masterwork weapon. The masterwork weapon is "enhanced" relative to a normal weapon, but a +1 weapon is "enhanced" beyond that.
The book says you need a +1 enhancement to use a special ability. Yes, masterwork grants a +1 enhancement. Got it Mr. Technicality guy, but in the very same section, it makes clear what "+1 enhancement" means for purposes of magic. It means the full +1 enhancement, that applies to attack rolls and damage. It's talking about the thing a paragraph earlier, not the thing 300 pages earlier, in the non-magic section of the book.
For balance purposes, you are expected to have spent 2,300gp+ on your weapon before you can add other abilities. The flaming ability is expected to require a budget of 8,300gp+ While cutting the budget by 6,000gp isn't the end of the universe, it's clearly not what's intended.
Step away from the cheese. That +1 enhancement bonus is mostly a tax, deliberately pacing the costing in the game.