Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game
Pathfinder Society

Pathfinder Beginner Box

Pathfinder Adventure Card Game

Pathfinder Comics

Pathfinder Legends

RPG Superstar 2015

Do bane weapon special abilities stack?


Rules Questions

101 to 122 of 122 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Silver Crusade Star Voter 2013

Nevan Oaks wrote:
Malachi Silverclaw wrote:

Nevan, the Orc Bane sword in my example had Orc Bane nine times; Bane is a +1 special ability, so the sword is +10.

As to the maximum enhancement bonus, a +5 Orc Bane sword would be a +7 sword against Orcs.

Sorry but by RAW a weapon can only have an enchantment from +1 to +5 the plus 2 from bane is still an enchantment bonus and you can't go over +5

So there is no point to the DR/epic of an adamantine golem and it might as well be DR/-? A weapon can't have a base enhancement bonus higher than +5, but bane, furious, and other simmilar effects can push it to +6 or higher, necessary to break DR/epic.

Silver Crusade

Nevan Oaks wrote:
Malachi Silverclaw wrote:

Nevan, the Orc Bane sword in my example had Orc Bane nine times; Bane is a +1 special ability, so the sword is +10.

As to the maximum enhancement bonus, a +5 Orc Bane sword would be a +7 sword against Orcs.

Sorry but by RAW a weapon can only have an enchantment from +1 to +5 the plus 2 from bane is still an enchantment bonus and you can't go over +5

A +5 Orc Bane weapon has an enhancement bonus of +5, so is within the rules.

Against a designated foe, the enhancement bonus increases by +2. This results in a weapon that is +7 against Orcs. You certainly may have an enhancement bonus of +6 or higher; have you seen epic weapons? They are in the rules.

We can't enchant a non-epic weapon beyond +5, but we haven't. A perfectly legal Bane (or Furious) magical ability increases the +5 to +7, not the magic weapon creator!

I'm interested what others think about this:-

Is a +5 Orc Bane sword +5 or +7 against Orcs?

Liberty's Edge

Magic Weapons
You can't enchant a weapon with higher than a +5 enhancement bonus, but I don't see anything anywhere that would prevent it from gaining the bonuses from Bane or Furious when the appropriate conditions are met.
A +5 Orc Bane weapon would act as a +7 weapon against Orcs.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16 , Star Voter 2013, Star Voter 2014

correct.

==Aelryinth


Nevan Oaks wrote:


Um a +1 enchantment is considered very different then a +3 enchantment in no way does anyone consider them equal. if I buy a sword +1 I can then add another enchantment becomeing a sword +2 or a sword +1 flaming, or a sword +1 bane (x). These are all considered different enchantments.

Actually the damage is the same, otherwise they would stack. That is what he is saying. As an example if you have a shield in your hand, and someone cast a spell on you that gives a higher shield bonus then take the higher of the bonuses. If someone cast a spell that grants a deflection bonus then you add them together because they are different. In this case you can't stack bane you get one or the other, assuming you could have two banes. Bane is still bane.

Anyway I am sure this will be cleared up in the book SKR was asking about in the thread he created. I meant to put this question there so I will visit the thread now to see if anyone has done so.


Well there are no epic rules for PF, and I must admit I never used the epic rules for 3.5.

So then with your line of though Holy stacks with bane. Holy does 2d6 (untyped) vs. all evil creatures, and bane does 2d6 (untyped) vs. dragon. Since Holy is not bane by what you say (giving 4d6 damage).

So all I have to do is change the name of the enchantment to get the stacking bonus Ie have a mage build a +1 bane (dragon) antagonist (evil outsider), anti (human) and hope I run into an evil outsider half-dragon/human.

Or just remove bane from the name To just call it a sword +1, (evil outsider, dragon). though this does increase the size of the magic weapon property list. But they are now not the same and again stack.

The anarchic, axiomatic and holy weapons show that this is within the rules.

Instead of going to all that trouble as I have been saying bane X, is differnt then bane Y.

But I will gladly create the hunter/slayer/antagonis.... weapons


Until this is cleared up by SKR peoples arguments for or against this Bane X stacking with Bane Y are moot. GMs will rule it the way they choose.

There is no clear line here. The initial line is that they could not both be on the same weapon regardless as they are both Bane properties. Until that element is fully FAQd Bane X and Bane Y are both Bane and thus cannot be on the same weapon.

Of course, GMs may houserule it otherwise until the FAQ makes a statement one way or the other.

- Gauss


Those who rule against bane stacking (or perpendicular alignment stacking), do you rationalize pricing?

Does a +1 elfbane humanbane weapon cost the 18,000 gp of a +3 weapon or the 16,000 of two +2 weapons that it has no advantage over (and the disadvantage that if you're disarmed you don't have a spare that's just as good against anything but an elf or human)?


I don't care about the pricing. I am just going by what the books says. The price of the bane weapon is just the price you pay for specialization. You risk being equally good at attacking everyone to be better at attacking a certain opponent. It is no secret that it is generally better to choose actual enhancements over special abilities. Even if bane was overpriced that would just mean there was an issue with bane that needed to be fixed. It would not make read the rule any differently.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16 , Star Voter 2013, Star Voter 2014

If you want to invent the old Slayer-Slaying-Dread combos for Pathfinder, go ahead.

FYI, in 1E, Giant-Slaying swords were always +2, but +3 and did double normal weapon damage against Giants (including no other bonuses).

Dragon Slaying Swords were also +2, but +4 against all Dragons, and did triple normal Weapon damage against ONE specific dragon type.

Bane weapons were like the Swords +1, +4 vs Reptiles.

So, yes, you can indeed invent a whole new class of enhancements that would stack with Bane and be addressed at them. However, any wise DM would simply rule that they are subsets of the Bane property, or supercede it.

For instance, I belive that there are Sacred Weapons that are +1d6 against Evil foes...doesn't stack with Holy, which is basically the big Brother. And there's an Epic Holy Weapon enhancement that's +4, +4d6 and chance of instant kill against evil enemies, or something.

But in Core PF, Banes against an enemy don't stack. That's just what it is.

==Aelryinth

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16 , Star Voter 2013, Star Voter 2014

Atarlost wrote:

Those who rule against bane stacking (or perpendicular alignment stacking), do you rationalize pricing?

Does a +1 elfbane humanbane weapon cost the 18,000 gp of a +3 weapon or the 16,000 of two +2 weapons that it has no advantage over (and the disadvantage that if you're disarmed you don't have a spare that's just as good against anything but an elf or human)?

A +1 Bane weapon is the equivalent of a +5 Weapon against it's specified foe. That is EXTREMELY powerful if you know you are going to fight such a thing.

I can justify the pricing very easily knowing what the benefit will be. I.e. in Carrion Crown, you KNOW you are going to fight undead. You would be silly NOT to get an undead bane weapon. If not that, then you need to get a Sun Sword with that Bane/Evil property...even better, applies against EVERYTHING in the AP.

heh.

==Aelryinth

Star Voter 2014

I apologize if this has already been covered (although I didn't see it in the thread): but what about Bane from two sources?
Like an Inquisitor with the Grey Gardner PrC; does that mean their Bane Weapon ability would be 8d6, or the same 4d6, but for twice as many rounds?

The PrC specifically says that sneak attack levels stack, but it doesn't say that about Bane Weapon. Of course, it doesn't say they *don't* stack, either. ;)


Bane is still the source. The fact that it came from a class ability should not matter.

Star Voter 2014

wraithstrike wrote:
Bane is still the source. The fact that it came from a class ability should not matter.

So....

(Does that mean they should stack, or no?)


ecw1701 wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:
Bane is still the source. The fact that it came from a class ability should not matter.

So....

(Does that mean they should stack, or no?)

No stacking.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16 , Star Voter 2013, Star Voter 2014

It'd be the same as Greater Magic Weapon from a class ability 'stacking' on a +5 sword.

Nope.

==Aelryinth


Instantaneous Effects: Two or more spells with instantaneous durations work cumulatively when they affect the same target.

so same source doesn't stack except when the bonus is instantaneous.

ie.. 2 fire balls = damage from both, backed by the single source spell magic missle, same source damage stacks (multiple missels to one target).


So, I admit I did not read everything, but since this thread is still going, I'm going to post my thoughts without knowing whether or not this has already been covered.

Does Bane stack? It's irrelevant.

"A bane weapon excels against certain foes. Against a designated foe, the weapon's enhancement bonus is +2 better than its actual bonus. It also deals an extra 2d6 points of damage against the foe."

So, let's say you have a +2 Longsword of X-Bane and Y-Bane. You attack a creature that is XY, so you apply the Bane properties.

Bane X: The creature is X, so the weapon's bonus is 2 higher, making it a +4 weapon. The weapon also deals 2d6 more damage against this specific foe, so it'll deal 1d8+2d6+other mods.

Bane Y: The creature is Y, so the weapon's bonus is 2 higher, making it a +4 weapon. The weapon als deals 2d6 more damage against this specific foe, so it'll deal 1d8+2d6+other mods.

There's no stacking to talk about. The +2 is specifically added to the actual bonus for each iteration of Bane, so the weapon becomes a +4 weapon twice (which has no further effect beyond it being a +4).

Further, the weapon also deals extra damage against that foe. Its damage is not increased by a certain amount against that foe, the weapon itself just deals 2d6 extra damage. As above with the +4, that's two different things that say the weapon deals 2d6 extra damage, so, yeah, the weapon just deals 2d6 extra damage.


In full agreement about the +2 enchantment bonus because it is added to the exsisting bonus. But the 2d6 damage is against the foe, if one foe is orc and one human then you get 2d6 for human and 2d6 for orc.

I do think stacking is the wrong word to use for how this works.

The damage is triggered by the foe type, if the target has foe type x, then bane x does 2d6 damage if foe type y then bane y does 2d6 damage. If you have foe type x/y then bane weapon will do 2d6 x damage and 2d6 y damage


This works the same as Ranger's favoured enemies, surely? i.e. take the highest value, but no stacking. In the bane case (apart from high level inquisitors) the bonuses are always identical so the qwuestion of which to take is moot.


In a related fashion, would a +1 Bane (Evil Outsider), Holy, Grayflame weapon be possible? A +1 Sword that becomes a +3 Sword vs Evil Outsiders, regardless of channeled energy, a +2 sword when energy is channeled. That also does +2d6 vs Evil Outsiders +another 2d6 Cause they're Evil, and potentially another +1d6 ('divine') dmg due to the channeled energy?

Would it be inefficient to do that grayflame addition? As the Holy already provides 'good' qualifier and you could get 'silver' qualifier by simply making the weapon mithral to start with?


Yes a +1 Bane (Evil Outsider), Holy, Grayflame weapon is possible, by RAW.

VS. Evil Outsider with channeled energy it would be a +3 weapon that deals +2d6 (evil outsider), +2d6 (holy), +1d6 (Half the damage is fire damage, but the other half results directly from divine power and is therefore not subject to being reduced by resistance to fire-based attacks <per flame strike>)

VS. evil with channeled energy it would be a +2 weapon that deals +2d6 (holy), +1d6 (Half the damage is fire damage, but the other half results directly from divine power and is therefore not subject to being reduced by resistance to fire-based attacks <per flame strike>)

The 'good' qualifier does over lap and silver can be done cheaper, then grayflame but the real bonus you are looking at is the damage.

101 to 122 of 122 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Paizo / Messageboards / Paizo Publishing / Pathfinder® / Pathfinder RPG / Rules Questions / Do bane weapon special abilities stack? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.