Swivl |
Can it happen?
One of my players has an idea in mind for a weapon. Basically, it's a big rock. He wants to magically enhance it with weapon properties and some such, so at the very least a rock needs to be at least of masterwork quality. I could go either way on this, since I can't remember seeing it in the rules that would disallow this. On the other hand, typically masterwork tools and things add bonuses to skills, and not combat-related at all.
Any thoughts?
StabbittyDoom |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, cause a rock with a well-formed hand-hold and balanced weight can't be better than a random misshapen heap.
Actually, I've never really understood why *only* weapons and armor have to be masterwork. I understand that there'd be "free" bonus for +1 or higher weapons since it doesn't stack with masterwork, but armor's bonus has nothing to do with what the magic provides. </tangent>
My thought: Just let him pay the cost and have the weapon, it's not like it's going to break anything and it'd be kinda fun to think of a barbarian smashing things with a well-formed rock.
StabbittyDoom |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Tanis wrote:LOL, it was my player's idea. Blame him for being a munchkin. ;-)Swivl wrote:a rock needs to be at least of masterwork quality.No. No disrespect, but that's quite possibly the silliest thing i've heard of all week.
How is using an unusual weapon munchkin? It's not like they get extra benefit out of it.
Tanis |
How is using an unusual weapon munchkin? It's not like they get extra benefit out of it.
Except i presume he's going to get feats and stuff that improve his capability with rocks, meaning depending on the terrain he'll pretty much always have a weapon.
meh, it's flavour. If he abuses it you can always say that there's no rocks in sight. Unless you're near a mountain/hill/outcropping. In which case, lesson learnt.
StabbittyDoom |
StabbittyDoom wrote:How is using an unusual weapon munchkin? It's not like they get extra benefit out of it.Except i presume he's going to get feats and stuff that improve his capability with rocks, meaning depending on the terrain he'll pretty much always have a weapon.
meh, it's flavour. If he abuses it you can always say that there's no rocks in sight. Unless you're near a mountain/hill/outcropping. In which case, lesson learnt.
Yeah, I consider "you don't have your weapon" to be a negligible corner case. In other words, I have never seen it happen in 5 years of playing except for two scenarios: Sundered weapon, DM fiat.
Nothing can protect you from the latter, but the former is usually remedied by the all-important back-up weapon, rarely by picking up a rock (which, btw, provokes :P).Swivl |
How is using an unusual weapon munchkin? It's not like they get extra benefit out of it.
Well, I guess you'd just have to see the character build for yourself. The short of it is, a big heavy rock is likely the best weapon he can wield by far. We did some crazy character building rules for this particular game to say the least.
If I went for it, I would go all in, and wouldn't just rid him of his rock sometime later (save for a sunder attempt, maybe).
I agree with Ogre. Bullets are ammunition, but not necessarily weapons, and they are basically rocks. In a primitive sense, rocks are one of the first things savages might turn to for weaponry. My thing is, what would the difference be between a regular rock and a masterwork one? Purely one mineral? This is something I shouldn't expect the rules alone to answer.
Daniel Moyer |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I would say that it should be built up as an exotic weapon or maybe a martial weapon. If it's been modified to be a 'masterwork weapon' then it's not an improvised one.
Dog Slicers and Horse Choppers are not exotic weapons, both are cobbled from scrap by goblins and can be masterwork. Let the Barbarian Hurler have his bowling ball, geez.
Daniel Moyer |
Hmmm, the thought behind mentioning the goblin weapons was that they break on a natural 1, improvised weapons use to be the same which after looking just now, is not the case in Pathfinder. (that I was able to find) *shrug*
Anyway the masterwork quality fixes the natural 1 break possibility on said goblin weapons. The character will likely already have 'caught-off guard' and 'throw anything' removing the penalties of it being an improvised weapon. He now has to make said 'whatever' an exotic weapon too? That seems unfair to me. Why couldn't he find a particularly effective improvised weapon perhaps made of something a bit more durable or valuable? (Ex: Pine/Oak/Darkwood or Brick(clay)/Sandstone/Granite or Copper/Iron/Admantine)
Daniel Moyer |
Ah, but YOU'VE never been coupe-de-grace with a masterwork iron cauldron! *BONG!*
LOL, kidding... you win, geez.
I'm a big fan of originality in character themes, I liked the idea and I don't find improvised weapons all that great. Especially if you start upping the number of feats. It makes that 'no-feat-required-greatsword' (assuming he's a martial character) look mighty nice and that in itself is unfortunate.
It sounds like the player is just interested in having a unique character. However, I don't know said player and his gaming habits. *shrug*
StabbittyDoom |
Ah, but YOU'VE never been coupe-de-grace with a masterwork iron cauldron! *BONG!*
LOL, kidding... you win, geez.
I'm a big fan of originality in character themes, I liked the idea and I don't find improvised weapons all that great. Especially if you start upping the number of feats. It makes that 'no-feat-required-greatsword' (assuming he's a martial character) look mighty nice and that in itself is unfortunate.
It sounds like the player is just interested in having a unique character. However, I don't know said player and his gaming habits. *shrug*
+1, never give up!
I've seen people take all sorts of weird proficiencies for the sake of theme. "Pub Dart", "Battering Ram", "Halfling" and heck, even saw Weapon Proficiency: Corpse once.What it comes down to is if everyone at the table finds the concept acceptable, and it doesn't give you any advantage (or a minor one if you burn the feat), then there's no reason to shoot it down (unless you're playing PFS, of course).
Oh, and obviously you aren't going to get a Masterwork Corpse without some serious mummification work! And all Halflings are masterwork. Not sure why, ask the DM.
GeraintElberion |
My thing is, what would the difference be between a regular rock and a masterwork one? Purely one mineral? This is something I shouldn't expect the rules alone to answer.
Felarn, master of stone, will spend weeks scouring the mountainside for the perfect rock, then he leaves it in a secret spot in a mountain river, turning it a tiny amount every day for several years.
After this is done, Felarn will charge you 301gp for the rock.
Starglim |
One of my players has an idea in mind for a weapon. Basically, it's a big rock. He wants to magically enhance it with weapon properties and some such, so at the very least a rock needs to be at least of masterwork quality.
If he spends time, Profession (miner) checks and supplies to the value of 300gp searching the lands (or perhaps the Elemental Plane of Earth) for the perfect rock worthy of receiving the powers of magic, I don't see why not. Weird rituals and unique items add depth to the game for me.
edit: I would not have predicted being ninja'd on that one.
seekerofshadowlight |
Man, my Warslinger would make you eat those words.
With Ricochet, TWF and a full attack, he'd sneak attack everyone within 30' of each other 3 times.
*sigh* Nostalgia.
I never liked it much, they seen just put in most setting with little flavor or fit. Just there because they are there.
I did like em in eberron and DS, but other then that they seem a waste of space to me.
LazarX |
Can it happen?
One of my players has an idea in mind for a weapon. Basically, it's a big rock. He wants to magically enhance it with weapon properties and some such, so at the very least a rock needs to be at least of masterwork quality. I could go either way on this, since I can't remember seeing it in the rules that would disallow this. On the other hand, typically masterwork tools and things add bonuses to skills, and not combat-related at all.
Any thoughts?
The rules clearly say no. If you want to put in a silly element to a campaign or make say a diety granted exception, it's your choice. But if your world does have a reasonable level of versimilitude no NPC enchanter is even going to try without some exceptional persuasion. (Offering them tons of money would tend to give them a reason to worry about consequences of failure.)
LazarX |
Oh man...kender vampires?
I'm pretty glad i never encountered them.
They'd steal your steel pieces and your soul!
I've got a bit of nostalgia for Krynn, but that's pretty obvious by my avatar, i guess.
You mean by your name. Your avatar doesn't look like Tanis at all.
LazarX |
I'm a big fan of originality in character themes
So am I... until it starts encroaching on world versimilitude. A midget Jedi with stumps for legs might be original... But it's not going to fly if I'm running a classic style Greyhawk campaign.
Swivl |
Oh, and obviously you aren't going to get a Masterwork Corpse without some serious mummification work! And all Halflings are masterwork. Not sure why, ask the DM.
LOL, I didn't think of that!
Because being a masterwork item and being a masterwork weapon are not the same thing. If I hit you with a masterwork tool it does not grant me the same benefits as as masterwork weapon would.
And once you craft something to be a weapon it not longer is an improvised weapon.
Good point. I'll try to remember something so easy next time I title a thread. ;-P
Okay, just got back from work, and I like the discussion. I have to agree that maybe some sort of quest/ritual would be fun, plus I could bring the party up in XP a little (we're down a level right now). GeraintElberion, and Starglim, great examples. That's exactly what I had in mind, thank you.
Tanis |
Tanis wrote:You mean by your name. Your avatar doesn't look like Tanis at all.Oh man...kender vampires?
I'm pretty glad i never encountered them.
They'd steal your steel pieces and your soul!
I've got a bit of nostalgia for Krynn, but that's pretty obvious by my avatar, i guess.
So i've aged badly, i'd like to see how you hold up after helping fight off a five-headed dragon queen of darkness.
0gre |
0gre wrote:I would say that it should be built up as an exotic weapon or maybe a martial weapon. If it's been modified to be a 'masterwork weapon' then it's not an improvised one.Dog Slicers and Horse Choppers are not exotic weapons, both are cobbled from scrap by goblins and can be masterwork. Let the Barbarian Hurler have his bowling ball, geez.
You do realize that the fact that dog slicers and horse choppers are improvised junk turned into martial weapons supports my suggestion?
I have no problem with a rock thrower, I just think something engineered to be a 'masterwork' weapon is no longer an improvised weapon.
Look at it this way, a masterwork harp doesn't get a +1 on attack rolls.
Aris Kosmopoulos |
I just think something engineered to be a 'masterwork' weapon is no longer an improvised weapon.
+2
An improvised weapon is something that is not designed to make an attack but you can use to harm someone, for example a spoon. If it will ever become masterwork then two things have happened.
a) First someone managed to redesigned it in order to be effective as a weapon, so from now on it is not considered improvised in any way as a weapon. You may still considered it difficult to use so treat users not proficient with it unless they have some kind of special training (for example exotic weapon mastery or a special ability/class feature or even a regional trait in your situation)
b) After an item is redesigned in order to be considered a weapon then some one can recreate it in order to be masterwork spending enough materials, time and talent to do so.
So in your case I would say that a masterwork stone has to solve two problems.
a) First find a way of treating it as a weapon (not an improvised one). By using a trait or an exotic weapon feat or a similar way.
b) and then treat is as a masterwork weapon by using sculpting/mining/stone work skill or something similar or say that after a ritual/magic/or some fantastic super lucky way a stone was found with the perfect shape/balance/materials.
The most important thing IMO is to never allow someone to simultaneously benefit from feats/abilities designed for improvised weapons and abilities/mechanics designed for regular weapons such as the masterwork weapon quality. Choose one of these options each time, but not both because this leads to abuse of the system.
Oliver McShade |
Can it happen?
One of my players has an idea in mind for a weapon. Basically, it's a big rock. He wants to magically enhance it with weapon properties and some such, so at the very least a rock needs to be at least of masterwork quality. I could go either way on this, since I can't remember seeing it in the rules that would disallow this. On the other hand, typically masterwork tools and things add bonuses to skills, and not combat-related at all.Any thoughts?
Before Pathfinder, never even heard of Master-Work being a requirement. Just thought that was something added in sometime around 3.0/3.5.
Oh i do miss the old days, when you just cast Enchant item, spend x number of days doing (magic whatever), then cast Spell 1, Spell 2, Spell 3, and the Permanency to seal the deal.
But with the interducktion of Feats, Skills, i guess they need some reason for the players to need them, use them, and take them.
Oterisk |
You do realize that the fact that dog slicers and horse choppers are improvised junk turned into martial weapons supports my suggestion?I have no problem with a rock thrower, I just think something engineered to be a 'masterwork' weapon is no longer an improvised weapon.
Look at it this way, a masterwork harp doesn't get a +1 on attack rolls.
It wouldn't get the +1 on attack rolls, but it would still be a masterwork item, and it would be suitable for enchantment. What enchantments you put on it would be whatever you could convince the wizard to put on it when he stopped laughing.
I just had this picture of a barbarian bashing the brains out of an ogre with a bust of James Jacobs.
err, present company excluded of course.
Oterisk |
Oterisk wrote:It wouldn't get the +1 on attack rolls, but it would still be a masterwork item, and it would be suitable for enchantment.Good point, well made.
It's about the quality of the item being sufficient to hold magical power, not about it having +1 to hit.
I could even see the practical purpose of putting weapon enhancements on non weapons. Imagine again that bust,this time, not James Jacobs, but rather some cruel rich man who was despised even by his servants. They make a habit of destroying his likenesses "accidentally", and he had plenty because he was vain, and so he had them all enchanted so they couldn't be destroyed. more enchantment means more HP for item, won't break if taking falling damage from its pedestal (at least not the first few times).
Sure it isn't terribly bright, and a horrendous waste of money, but some rich people are like that, and likely not to be rich for very long.
edit: Oh, and if it gave +1 to hit, it wouldn't be improvised.
Tanis |
Tanis wrote:Fortunately the real Tanis did not live long enough to worry about age ruining his looks. :)So i've aged badly, i'd like to see how you hold up after helping fight off a five-headed dragon queen of darkness.
That's what i wanted everyone to think, so i could return to a life of normality.