Say I have a scimitar, which is enchanted with a +1 enhancement bonus, has the keen and spell storing properties, and is made of adamantine; what is the established naming convention that Paizo uses when writing that into a stat block?
I want to get it right for my own stat blocks.
+1 adamantine keen spell storing scimitar?
+1 keen spell storing adamantine scimitar?
keen spell storing adamantine scimitar +1?
keen spell storing adamantine scimitar?
What order is it all supposed to go in? What parts if, any should be italicized or otherwise formatted?
What are the formatting standards of Paizo for specific magical arms and armor in stat blocks? Anyone know?
It's things like this that make a character sheet go from "okay" to "awesome."
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This is making me miss the old "longsword +1/+4 vs. giants"-type stuff from AD&D.
This is making me miss the old "longsword +1/+4 vs. giants"-type stuff from AD&D.
I gots the math for making those:
Pricing +X vs race, etc rules:1- Categories are broader than bane's (any humanoids, flying creatures, large or larger creatures, water breathing creatures)
2- Categories are from bane, or of a similar level of precision (goblinoids, aberrations, dragon-class)
3- Categories are more specific than bane's (hobgoblins, beholders, true dragons, "true" giants, fire-using creatures)
4- Categories are very specific (red dragons, ogres, vampires)
((Target Bonus)^2 - (Base bonus)^2) * X
For example, if you sword is +1, +2 vs Orcs, then Target bonus is 2, and base bonus is 1; if you're looking for +3, +4 vs Orcs, then target bonus is 4, base bonus is 3.
Concrete examples (considering the 300 for masterwork, but not price of base weapon (5-50gp))
- +1 sword, +2 vs orcs: 3350gp (tier 2 target, so (2^2 - 1^2) * 350 = 1050, 1050+2300 for +1)
- +1 sword, +2 vs all humanoids: 4100gp (tier 1 target, so (2^2 - 1^2) *600 = 1800, 1800+2300 for +1)
- +3 sword, +5 vs true dragons: 22300gp (tier 3 target, so (5^2 - 3^2) * 250 = 4000, 4000+18300 for +3)
Example:
4)Mace of Smiting Lesser: +1 with +2 vs outsider, +3 vs constructs.
Price: 2.3K + 3K+ 2800 + 1800= 9900 gp
Not as good as it has no instant destruction, but still worth the price in general.
Tolkien had this in his books:
Caudimordax “Tail Biter”:
Price: 5100 gp (maybe not being able to shealth should affect price?)
Lesser Scalescrapper +1 warhammer, +3 against scaly humanoids
Price: 4, 800 gp.
And
Scalescraper: +2 warhammer, +4 against scaly humanoids. Price 12, 200 gp
Another:
Star of the Sun
was commissioned by the Church of Asterea as reward for Sir Denfain upon his recieving a knighthood for his service to his Church and kingdom. It was last seen borne by Sir Denfain when he ventured into the northern peaks to fight against the Ghoul King.
Star of the Sun is a mace +1, +3 vs. undead. A magically-reinforced star-shaped head of crystal bearing eight spikes caps the polished steel haft, and the grip is wrapped with golden wire and set with ivory scales. The pommel-nut, a dome of amber, unscrews to reveal a compartment perfectly suited to holding a vial of holy water.
Price:2.3K + 2.8K = 5100 gp
Gryphbane: A hammer +1, +2 against spell users, Gryphbane is an ancient weapon belonging to Therex of the Nightwolf House, famous in song and legend as wielded by that chieftain in his battles against the arcane Neu and their artificial servants. Many of the inhuman spell-wielders had the life crushed from them by the hammer's pitiless blows.
Price:2.3K + 1050 gp =3350 gp
Bloodflower:
A sword +1, +2 versus humanoids, Bloodflower can once a day inflict Curse of Impending Blades spell upon a successfully struck opponent, causing them to be wracked with pain for 1 minute. When this ability is activated Bloodflower's blade turns crimson and seems to drip blood.
Price: 2300 gp + 1.8K + 2K =6K gp
A cursed but still use:
Silent Scales: Forged from water-steel of a paticularly translucent nature, and marked with a pattern of overlapping reptilian scales just barely visible in torchlight, Silent Scales is an elegant blade of perfect symmetry. Its hilt is frosted steel tinged faintly peacock-green, with coiling tendrils for a hand-guard; and a single rosy pearl is mounted as a pommel-nut.
Silent Scales is a sword +1. Against creatures of desert or flame the sword inflicts as a +2 vs them, and so long as at least one such creature is killed by the blade each day its bearer is protected from the ravages of the desert and other such environments.
However, as long as Silent Scales is in its bearer's possession -- not merely actively worn or wielded -- its owner is rendered mute.
Price: 2K + 1500 + 2K -2K=3800 gp
Lastly just for fun:
Sword of Bees
A dark shimmering blade with a black opal gem on the hilt. This short sword is quite sharp. It has the following characteristics:
+1 weapon
It emits a low buzzing, humming sound when used in combat.
Any natural 19-20 attack roll causes a swarm of bees to swirl out of the weapon's blade, surrounding the struck foe. These bees cause no damage, but distract and blind the enemy, who suffers a -2 penalty on all actions, and a -2 fear save penalty for three rounds.
Any natural 1 attack roll causes a swarm of bees to attack the wielder as above.
Bees are glittering gold unless a fumble is rolled, in which case they are a sickly green.
Price: 5K
I like my swords like I like my coffee.
Sundered into dust and boiled into dweomer essence?
Thanks for your post bulbaquil, it's pretty much exactly what I was looking for.
I'm not sure there is a hard and fast style rule on whether material comes first or enchantments do. It shows up both ways in Paizo sources: the paladin-wielded holy avenger is described as a "+5 holy cold iron longsword", but there's an enemy in Rise of the Runelords Book 5 who wields a "+1 cold iron returning dagger".
I think the first way makes more sense as it separate the "magical" half (bonus and special properties) from the "mundane" half (material and weapon/armor type).
The first way doesn't seperate it though, it splits it.
[magical enhancement] [mundane material] [magical ability] [mundane weapon]
That's about a scattered/mixed as you can get.
Did you mean to say "the second" which would have all the magic on the left and mundane on the right?
[magical enhancement] [magical ability] [mundane material] [mundane weapon]
Say I have a scimitar, which is enchanted...
what is the established naming convention...
The established naming convention is "enhanced," not "enchanted." In Pathfinder, enchantment is a school of magic including [charm] and [compulsion] spells. A mindless object is immune to both, and therefore cannot be enchanted.
Wow. I haven't had someone complain about that in over ten years. Sorry about that ye' old grognard. :P
I'm pretty sure referring to a magical item as "enchanted" is a commonly accepted use of the term in the English language, if not in the game itself.
I must be a stuffy old grognard too.
I don't get a lot of PF all the time, but I know there are reasons for enhanced and enchanted being separate things. At least, I assumed there were, such as what Kirth has pointed out.
Mosty I just remember that calling a blade enchanted ain't what it used to be. Now it has an enhancement bonus. I wish it were enchanted, but it isn't.
I'm slightly disenchanted about the whole thing….
The first way doesn't seperate it though, it splits it.
I'm confused. Bulbaquil's first quoted method was:
"+5 holy cold iron longsword"
Which is [magical enhancement] [magical ability] [mundane material] [mundane weapon]
Did you mix them round accidentally?
Also, I find it mind blowing that people would complain about 'enchanting' a weapon..... The usage of the term predates DnD, guys. Even some of the magic item text uses it:
"A reliable firearm is enchanted so that it is less likely to jam than other firearms."
Imagine if "staggered" sometimes meant the current Staggered condition, and sometimes meant flat-footed, and sometimes was just a fluff descriptor. Yes, it can mean all of those things in colloquial English, but as a game rules term, in a discussion about proper terminology, it should be restricted to the correct game meaning.
Anyway, on topic, I'd probably call it a "cold iron +5 holy longsword." Not official by any means, but it keeps the material separate from the magic stuff.
Imagine if "staggered" sometimes meant the current Staggered condition, and sometimes meant flat-footed, and sometimes was just a fluff descriptor. Yes, it can mean all of those things in colloquial English, but as a game rules term, in a discussion about proper terminology, it should be restricted to the correct game meaning.
lol. Yes, that makes sense, Kirth.
I'm confused. Bulbaquil's first quoted method was:"+5 holy cold iron longsword"
Which is [magical enhancement] [magical ability] [mundane material] [mundane weapon]
Did you mix them round accidentally?
Either the post was edited after the fact, or I did get it mixed around Blakmane.
I don't know if Paizo has a specific house style, but in my own notes (which I do try to keep typographically consistent cuz I'm like that), I use [bonus] [traits] [material] [weapon].
I also *only* italicize the magical traits, which I realize is actually a slight departure from Paizo's style, but I think it looks better.
Thus, in my game it would be a +1 keen spell storing adamantine longsword.