The grizzled warrior handed the ancient blade to the wizard and said, "Pray tell old friend, what mighty enchantments have been woven into this finely wrought steel?"
The Wizard replied, "It's a +1 Longsword."
There goes the whole mood of the game, shot down by an item that is all mechanic and no description.
Is there a better way to describe the weapon?
Given the amount of bonuses that all melee centric characters get as they level, add feats, etc. Are +X weapons really just weak holdouts from older versions of the d20 style games?
How do +X weapons impose their +X bonus? Do they hit harder? Do they guide the hand of the wielder?
Even back in OD&D this was a bit of a problem that was danced around. Any ideas for solutions?
Keep tally of how many "plusses" PC uses. End of adventure PC with least wins, unless shoot the moon.
+X is the mechanic effect of the enchantment applied to the weapon, the Wizard wouldn't say something like that, because the mere act of hitting in the real world isn't quantified by a +1 to hit and damage.
As far as its flavor is concerned, it depends on the weapon; an enchanted bow with an enhancement bonus makes the wielder's shots more accurate and deadly, whereas an enchanted sword with an enhancement bonus imbues the magic stored into its attacks, making it capable of penetrating the thickest of armor, as well as being able to damage those whose skins are as tough as nails. You can spin it any way you want; at the end of the day though, you're imparting that it's supposed to be something awesome and cool, but it's still just a +1 weapon.
Order of the Stick is pretty popular, here's how they handle it.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
"Here is your sword, just as I promised: it's been sharpened by axiomites to as fine an edge as nature can allow it to have. At no extra cost, when you say this mix of syllables I made up, it'll glow in the presence of humans, thus saving you money on torches."
"See, I believe that even objects can have spirits, so I prayed to Gorum to make the spirit of this axe really angry. Since it can now chop up fairies without having a cold iron blade, that proves how good it is! Wanna test it out for yourself?"
"With the blessings of Lisalla and some Qlipphoth, I'll infuse your weapon with extra wrath. It'll need a command word as well; what's your favourite blasphemy?"
If the player has an idea for how it works, so much the better!
I like how the magus Bladebound works. You start out with a +1 sword (let's call it "Drizzle Summoner") and it gradually works its way up to +5 at level 20. You could do something like that. As the player learns more about the weapon or he increases in levels (as bladebound) the weapon bonus goes up. You have yourself a special sword that you can describe all you want. Heck, maybe you can even have a quest to learn more about it. Later on in levels, you get to know the name of your weapon. Of coarse this isn't Bladebound and it doesn't have an ego or INT and can be sundered.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
"This b@*#& is sharp. Like, REALLY sharp. Don't test it on your finger unless you want to learn to count in base 9."
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
You could have your shopkeeper describe +1 weapons as "mage-wrought steel." A +2 weapon could be "Valerian steel---you can see by the way light plays along the blade---only noticeable to someone skilled in spellcraft. A +1 frost sword might be described as "mage-wrought steel but look, the metal is marked by a bleak rune. Feel how cold the blade is." +3 could be "elysian steel---its metal is bane to fae, demons (cold iron-equivalent), devils, and werefolk; and so forth.
I think it's a matter of destructive (evocation) magics in the blade. You hit a guy with the sword and the sword's magic also deals more damage. And with such magic emanating from the blade, it's even likely to deal damage when it would otherwise miss, thus explaining the increase in accuracy.
And I would just describe how potent the magic is instead of a numerical value. a +1 might be a minor or light enchantment. +5 is incredible (or your choice of verbiage)
Or since the crafting process of adding enhancement bonuses is pretty straightforward you could just say something like:
A 1st Circle Magic Sword of Flaming. (+1 Flaming Sword).
Seriously, crafters know this stuff.
Or since the crafting process of adding enhancement bonuses is pretty straightforward you could just say something like:
A 1st Circle Magic Sword of Flaming. (+1 Flaming Sword).
Seriously, crafters know this stuff.
I like this and Tier's the best. Marius Castille's idea is a close third.
|
A +1 sword isn't more accurate after it was enchanted than it was before, since it was masterwork. In fact, when discussing the finer points of cool weaponry, MW should be assumed by the speakers in-game, even if the letters 'MW' are not.
So what does a +1 weapon do that a MW weapon doesn't?
* detects faintly of transmutation magic (it's magic!)
* it gets past DR/magic (it can hurt even those creatures who laugh at mundane weapons)
* +2 hardness/+10 hit points (tougher and more durable than a mundane blade)
* +1 damage (wounds more deeply than a mundane weapon)
* (possibly) casts (colour) light as a torch when drawn
It might sound like a chore to have to have a unique description for every +1 sword you find, but no more so than describing the faces/mannerisms of every NPC you meet. So put more effort into describing important NPCs/magic weapons, and less effort into less important ones.
In this, as in most of the game, the more effort you put into it the more you get out of it.
BTW, I would also have no hesitation to say, OOC, that it's a +1 weapon. Who can be bothered with such a pointless mystery!
I remember reading some Greyhawk novels, White plume mountain and decent into the depths of the earth. In it the main character has what is effectively just a +1 sword (might have the keen enchantment, he said it was enchanted to cut better, but even then it was affected by the DR of a cambion) that he pulled from the dead hand of his former master who had fallen in battle. It had a cool hilt, backstory, and the character treated it as a prized tool of his trade. When it was lost to a rust monster the owner was devastated, and not just from being weaponless in the middle of an underdark expedition.
He soon gets a replacement sword, a X+1 holy sword. He doesn't like it because it was decorated for a dandy paladin and was an intelligent weapon with partially incompatible alignment. It talked to much, had an over appreciation of protocol, didn't appreciate the simple yet brutal fighting style of the main character, and had an inflated self worth. He got it rehilted with his old sword's skull pommel and ego slapped it into submission.
Weapons have histories. Some weapons were just mass produced yet high quality tools of the trade for soldiers (elite enough to justify a +1 even), other were owned by individuals of renown and have complex backstory in spite of low bonuses. Sting from the Hobbit was a modest weapon (they did after all let the "burglar" use it), yet its implied that it had a long backstory.
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
The grizzled warrior handed the ancient blade to the wizard and said, "Pray tell old friend, what mighty enchantments have been woven into this finely wrought steel?"
The Wizard replied,
"Er, pretty much the minimum enchantments possible, available off the shelf in any metropolis. Did they tell you 'mighty'? I hope you didn't pay extra for 'mighty'."
Good points everyone!
I do believe that I will describe the +X weapons by the type of magic that enchanted them (Arcane, Divine, Natural etc.)
As an example, a +1 dagger might be...
A Hex bound dagger (arcane)
A Blessed Dagger (divine)
A Fey touched blade (Druidic)
Make everything found in the treasure something other than +1. Mention the +1 as little as possible. So bane or flaming, not just ye olde +1 attack to verisimilitude.
If a wizard crafts a +1 something, everyone laughs at them. Oh ho! A minor magic enchantment, are you big boy yet?
Go here.
+2's On First.
This Longsword has been enchanted with subtle guiding and wounding magics. I count 1 each (+1 to hit = guiding, +1 damage = wounding)
Be careful, "Wounding" is an actual enchantment. A pretty powerful one, too.
Doling out loot in the form of "plus this" or "plus that" can be a mood killer, but it also depends greatly on the group playing, and the kind of game being run. My PF group tends to take out large groups of well-armed enemies, and we have several Bags of Holding full of masterwork and +1 stuff between visits to a city; going over every item with exquisite detail, instead of just reading what it is, would take hours.
The plushwon weapon was not a mood breaker in the Paranoia module Orcbusters. But then, neither was the flooded dungeon room with factions of Machiavellian penguins.
Honestly depends on the level of magic in the game I'm running. If magic is rare, then yes, even a +1 sword will get an evocative description with a name and history. If I'm running a game with typical levels of magic, then it's just a magic sword, unlikely to be that much more special than any other +1 sword.
We have one GM who likes to describe things with lots of fluff. It takes time to give detailed information about each item. He's the same guy that gave us different food items that were different enough looking that they just might have been found in the odd locations. (we gained or lost xp for what we ate) Anyway the group got tired of his complete descriptions and just wanted him to get on with the game. I guess immersion isn't as important with us, as it is with some people.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
there is a difference between immersing yourself enough to imagine, and developing such levels of detailed description, that it is basically graphic description porn. it is a mistake i learned with my many groups i played with, they don't want to hear the elaborate descriptions revolving around Umbriere's Victorian Style Spidersilk dress, when the words, Fancy Black Silken Noble's dress is sufficient.
i used to get quite graphic with every layer back in the day, down to her preferences of bloomers and hosiery over petticoats.
One of my GM's never says masterwork, it's always finely crafted or something.
You could just say it is arcane or enchanted or dweomered or some such. Not sure how to best quantify the various bonuses though. You could have actual magical runes on the blade and then you could have swords that were "doubly sigiled", "thrice sigiled", etc. if you wanted to work that into the lore of how things are crafted. Then you could go on about this one bears the rune of a renowned elven smith.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I can understand describing something as a +1 sword can be immersion breaking but speaking as a player it is incredibly annoying to not know your weapon's properties. When I first started playing my DM was like that. Even after getting someone to cast Identify, he would just give some mystical description so every attack was "I rolled X to hit and X dmg plus whatever my sword does." Gets old quick.
I can understand describing something as a +1 sword can be immersion breaking but speaking as a player it is incredibly annoying to not know your weapon's properties. When I first started playing my DM was like that. Even after getting someone to cast Identify, he would just give some mystical description so every attack was "I rolled X to hit and X dmg plus whatever my sword does." Gets old quick.
Which is why the GM should also give a mechanical description in addition to the in-character.
GM: Elrond inspects the sword carefully before he speaks: "This is Orcrist, the Goblin-Cleaver. A famous blade forged by the High Elves of the West. My kin. May it serve you well." It's a +3 Longsword of Goblinoid Bane.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That was Durngrun, not me.
I think the issue is twofold and depends on the group. Personally I like to be able to know what my character does. A magic item has stats just like a PC does, it's no more immersion breaking to know the stats of your weapon than it is to know your skill bonuses. Why would I treat magic items, which are little more than enhancements, with some sort of impractical reverence that I don't even give to the very character i am playing, who is a living breathing creature with a personality, fears, hopes and dreams?
The only problem is translating them into in game language, as the OP pointed out about magic items or in the case of characters it would be something like this:
Rogue: "Let me jump over the gap to lower the bridge, I have a +16 to acrobatics, it shouldn't be a problem."
You don't do that, in case of character stats however you can easily work around it.
"Let me jump over the gap to lower the bridge, I am a master acrobat, it shouldn't be a problem."
While with shopping for magic weapons you will want specifics which aren't really translatable into in game speech.
Fighter: "I would like a mighty enchanted sword please." - GM: He gives you a +3 longsword: "That'll be 18,310 gold pieces." - Fighter: No I just wanted +2 - GM: Oh, okay he has that too I guess.
The best description I've heard to explain how normal +X enchantments are applied from a character point of view is just that the blade seems to respond better/faster/easier to the wielders actions. so the blade will feel lighter in the hand, and when it strikes it will slice thru things a little easier or hits a little harder when the character connects. Of course these things are also from the point of view of a meager fighter who doesn't have detect magic or identify to simply tell him how the blade is enchanted in the novels I have read.
Asta
PSY
That was Durngrun, not me.Uh ... really?
You didn't say:
GM: Elrond inspects the sword carefully before he speaks: "This is Orcrist, the Goblin-Cleaver. A famous blade forged by the High Elves of the West. My kin. May it serve you well." It's a +3 Longsword of Goblinoid Bane.That's to what I was referring.
I believe threeshades was replying to thejeff.
Give the magic items in your name and a history, that gives it mood
One can just as easily say, "Don't give out any details, other than those discernible via the senses, magic able to ferret out such knowledge, or information gleaned/provided in some other fashion (any of which may be, at the DM's discretion, misleading)." It's more than enough that the player(s) found an enchanted weapon. Part of the fun can be either searching out answers pertaining to it, or simply relying on circumstance to reveal it.
Frankly, knowing precisely what a magical weapon does immediately upon possession is not a player's fundamental right. It's arguably yet another inappropriate attempt to control an aspect of the game that should be entirely in the DM's province.
I don't think I have, in 30+ years of DMing, ever just said, "It's a +1 weapon. Here you go." All of my campaigns' magical items are unique. Pulling them out of the Book of Kewl Stuff the PCs Know All About is not only boring, it's arguably enabling this very type of behavior.
Were I running an AP for Golarion, however, I'd very likely rethink this attitude because it would probably be counterproductive therein. (In that case, Threeshades' method would be an excellent compromise.) In a home-brew, though, it's a DM's pleasure to produce, place and therefore provide magical items, and it's a player's to learn about them, by whatever means possible, during play. Sense of wonder should trump perfect awareness.
I suppose one could also address it with the players.
"Do you want exacting details, or would you like to role-play gleaning a comprehension of the device's capabilities over time?"
I have to admit, though, I'd probably be more inclined to create a more powerful and interesting object if its secrets revealed themselves during play than I would simply to say, immediately upon its reveal, "It's a plus-blah Blah of Blah, with Blah thrice a day, and Blah at will."
The DM's supposed to have fun, too. That can be part of it.
The problem with this approach is, as stated previously, that relying on the GM to now know your exact attack bonus is a bit annoying.
If he hands you a +2 sword but doesn't tell you so, you now have to go "Well I got a 23, plus whatever the sword does" eery single time. And it gets old way quick.
Worse, if your GM is like mine, he probably won't remember every piece of gear every player has and what it does, or at least has to write it down somewhere, so you're either accidentally gypped out of attack bonus or the game is slowed down even more every time you roll an attack (or get attacked, magic armor is a thing too, as are Amulets of Natural Armor, Rings of Protection, etc.).
Players knowing what their stuff does makes it easier on everyone involved.
Having an evolving weapon might be fun every once in a while, but I'd suggest at least going "It's a +3 Greatsword...but it may have qualities you haven't discovered".
Possibly. I like to streamline the game as much as possible myself.
Mysteries are great in their own time and place but if every +1 is like pulling teeth it's just ech. IMO magic stuff shouldn't be mysterious unless it's unique in some manner, which a +X (and arguably Flaming/Frost/Corrosive/Shocking) is not.
Mysteries aren't special if everything is mysterious, in other words.
I like to save the mystery for the weird stuff.
"You have a +3 sword."
[sneakysecretstuff]It is also intelligent, has quite the Ego, and has the task of "slaying all evil", and possesses a number of special powers that only make themselves known in pursuit of that task.[/sneakysecretstuff]
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Treating basic magic items (like a +1 longsword) as rare and mysterious is nice and groovy, as long as you throw the GMG's settlement guidelines out the window and ban the detect magic cantrip and/or the Spellcraft skill (DC 18 to ID a +1 longsword in less than half a minute).
If that's fun for you, more power to you. Just remember that it's not the baseline from which the people around you are speaking, neither is there anything wrong with enjoying what is the standard baseline magic level of the game.
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Does the same principle apply to bad-asses? If everyone's a bad-ass, no one is?
Just to butt into other people's conversation for a second here , my personal answer to this would be "yes". Some baddies need to seriously threaten the PCs, others need to crumple like paper with looks of shock still frozen on their faces, and others just need to be somewhere in-between. For me, at least.