I like this thread!
The article that Ross pointed out is a good one.
A +1 Weapon is just a game mechanic, completely vanilla with no flavor at all.
Magic items take time and a substantial amount of money to build. It would seem that it is not within the realm of most campaign worlds to have magic weapons cranked off of an assembly line with a bar code stamp on them.
In my campaign, I have magic weapons that have some personality and some history if the character cares to pursue it.
For instance, a simple +1 Dagger might be a thassilonian relic that has magic runes that glow when you grip it or it could be a glowing Cheliaxian officers blade with the national symbol on the hilt.
Wands are in need of flavor too.
IMC the characters found a Wand of Magic Missile which was a Darkwood stick with a chunk of amber wrapped on the tip with copper wire. The amber had a wasp suspended in it. When used, the missles looked like glowing amber wasps and made buzzing sounds as they traced through the air to the target.
We should start one of those 101 threads for just +1 longswords.
It would be useful.
|
You know, I used to think the same as the OP...
...until I realized that in order to maintain the level of verisimilitude I would have to come up with fancy descriptions for every magic item the PCs come across. Then I remembered that we're playing D&D (a not, say, Ars Magica) and 70% of magic items get sold at the first opportunity in order to buy more, ahem, viable stuff. At that point I gave up on the fancy stuff. Ofc, artifacts, McGuffins and mood-setting items do get a sentence or two, but coming up with lore and image for +1 longswords is just too much work for too little gain.
Hence the need to make those +1 longswords into magic longswords that have a bonus based on character level. Then you don't have to worry about the revolving door of magic weapons and can name the one or two weapons your character will use throughout the entire game.
Or you could try my take on +x weapons.
+x bonuses are inherent to the quality of the design; meaning there are 5 or more levels of quality.Magical bonuses are just that; magical effects. (IE: keen, flaming, etc...)
|
+x bonuses are inherent to the quality of the design; meaning there are 5 or more levels of quality.
Magical bonuses are just that; magical effects. (IE: keen, flaming, etc...)
Hmm. So a master smith could make a longsword +5 that was not magical in any way? I'm not sure that solves the problem of 'found a weapon +2, time to dump the old weapon +1'. Unless you can reforge said weapon to a higher 'masterwork plus'? Of course, doing that multiple times over a characters life is unusual as far as I know. Most stories only have one reforging scene if any.
My character's backstories are littered with disposable magic items. I think the world has some sort of magical landfill full of +1 daggers and +1 armor that is leeching magical residue into the groundwater and causing the cancer rate of the nearest town to skyrocket.
Is this why
... and ...
E6? E8? What are those?
E6 rules and discussion at this link.
+2 and +3 weapons artefacts? Let me guess? 1st or 2nd edition player?
Let me guess: Never played 1E or 2E? :p
Tribes of Elves degenerated into ... Elves?
Nay, nay. Elves degenerate into dark elves and grimlocks. :)
You know, I used to think the same as the OP...
...until I realized that in order to maintain the level of verisimilitude I would have to come up with fancy descriptions for every magic item the PCs come across. Then I remembered that we're playing D&D (a not, say, Ars Magica) and 70% of magic items get sold at the first opportunity in order to buy more, ahem, viable stuff. At that point I gave up on the fancy stuff. Ofc, artifacts, McGuffins and mood-setting items do get a sentence or two, but coming up with lore and image for +1 longswords is just too much work for too little gain.
Coming up with stuff on the fly is a mark of a good GM.
Of course, all good GMs cheat by having a handfull of ideas prepared and written on paper ahead of time.If done right, a campaign creates itself.Defining the look of that +1 Mace the party just found could be something the player discard or it could be used as an impromtu adventure hook if you play it properly.
Hmm. So a master smith could make a longsword +5 that was not magical in any way? I'm not sure that solves the problem of 'found a weapon +2, time to dump the old weapon +1'. Unless you can reforge said weapon to a higher 'masterwork plus'? Of course, doing that multiple times over a characters life is unusual as far as I know. Most stories only have one reforging scene if any.
+x bonuses are inherent to the quality of the design; meaning there are 5 or more levels of quality.
Magical bonuses are just that; magical effects. (IE: keen, flaming, etc...)
yeah the "you find +x weapon" trap can still happen. But it also goes towards eliminating the magic mart trap as well. It also creates a reason to visit the weapons smith every so often as well. Warriors seeking that perfect weapon will trade/sell the old one for the improved one. The weapon you start with is seldom the one you use through your entire career unless its an heirloom weapon (and I have special rules for those.)
The problem with naming swords is that it's rather anticlmactic to have Excalibur turn out to be a +2 Longsword.
WoTC tried to handle this with Weapons of Legacy, where the weapons grow as you do, but, it was horribly handled. The 'awaken' the ability of the sword requirements was pretty awful, and you sort of had to plan your whole character around your weapon of legacy. Everyone I ever had read my copy of the book thought they were awesome conceptually, but nobody ever wanted to actually own one.
I think that it would be cool to have a 'Legacy Weapon' that had a name, etc, the problem is how to handle the fact that a character would want to get a hold of this at 2nd to 4th level, and have it be useful for a long time.
One thing you might want to try is having 'artifact' weapons be more common. In this sort of situation, you have to give the weapon abilities and drawbacks though. Here's one way I thought of to handle it, but I haven't had a chance to test it in play. Base the sword's abilities off the martial prowess of the wielder. A wielder cannot sell a Legacy Weapon, it simply won't work (perhaps it becomes a normal +2 longsword at that point, and loses all it's special magic). It can be given, or found, however. It can also be inherited. The more powerful the wielder, the more the wielder can get out of the Legacy Weapon.
Weapon Name : Silvassa
Type : Longsword
Description : Silvassa was forged by ancient elves in forgotten rituals for an Elven Princes. It is a blade forged of pure silver, with elven runes along the blade. One side holds the name of the weapon, the other reads 'Loyalty' in ancient Elven. The hilt is forged from pure gold, and the grip is made from a rough hewn but comfortable basalt with a silver core.
Benefits :
Enhancement Bonus : Silvassa has an Enhancement Bonus equal to it's rightful wielder's BAB / 3, rounded down. Silvassa's Maximum Enhancement Bonus is +4
Special Abilities :
BAB 3+ : Once per day, Silvassa can gain the Keen quality for a number of...
I think this is an excellent idea and very similar to something I was tossing around in my head as well.
Everyone seems to be so against the throwaway weapon concept.
Well, I'm against the "everyone-has-a-powerful-magical-weapon-whose secrets-they-are-slowly-unlocking-concept." The opposite extreme in other words. If all magic weapons are special, than none of them are. At least the +X system of doing it is honest about it.
You either have a small number of powerful weapons with great history, or you have enough magic weapons for the entire party and they aren't so magnificent. You can't have your cake and eat it too without destroying verisimilitude.
Everyone seems to be so against the throwaway weapon concept.
Well, I'm against the "everyone-has-a-powerful-magical-weapon-whose secrets-they-are-slowly-unlocking-concept." The opposite extreme in other words. If all magic weapons are special, than none of them are. At least the +X system of doing it is honest about it.
You either have a small number of powerful weapons with great history, or you have enough magic weapons for the entire party and they aren't so magnificent. You can't have your cake and eat it too without destroying verisimilitude.
I disagree.
It is possible to have "unique" weapons with "history" and still have enough for the entire party. It all comes down to how often you hand out "magic" items. If you hand out magic weapons/items at every level then yes; you will have no "special" weapons/items. But if you stagger them out over the course of the campaign then they do become something the players appreciate.
This post at the Alexandrian might be helpful to this discussion.
+1
Thank you for posting that link, it was an excellent read and mimicked my own thoughts exactly. Too bad I can't focus my thoughts as well as the author. :P
Everyone seems to be so against the throwaway weapon concept.
Well, I'm against the "everyone-has-a-powerful-magical-weapon-whose secrets-they-are-slowly-unlocking-concept." The opposite extreme in other words. If all magic weapons are special, than none of them are. At least the +X system of doing it is honest about it.
You either have a small number of powerful weapons with great history, or you have enough magic weapons for the entire party and they aren't so magnificent. You can't have your cake and eat it too without destroying verisimilitude.
Honestly, I prefer a mix.
Yep, there's a lot of +1 and +2 and +3 swords in the world. Occasionally, there are some really special swords.
For a special sword, it should grow with you. For generics, they have no soul, and they're just tools.
Everyone seems to be so against the throwaway weapon concept.
Well, I'm against the "everyone-has-a-powerful-magical-weapon-whose secrets-they-are-slowly-unlocking-concept." The opposite extreme in other words. If all magic weapons are special, than none of them are. At least the +X system of doing it is honest about it.
You either have a small number of powerful weapons with great history, or you have enough magic weapons for the entire party and they aren't so magnificent. You can't have your cake and eat it too without destroying verisimilitude.
I disagree.
It is possible to have "unique" weapons with "history" and still have enough for the entire party. It all comes down to how often you hand out "magic" items. If you hand out magic weapons/items at every level then yes; you will have no "special" weapons/items. But if you stagger them out over the course of the campaign then they do become something the players appreciate.
Ah, so in order to keep the proper feel of things, you only have to screw half the party over half the campaign?
If Bob gets Foecleaver at level one, Jane gets Firelash at 5th-level, Chris gets Godslayer at 10th-level, and Neilson gets Starsplitter at 15th-level, you've just screwed everyone but Bob for 5-15 levels! If everyone gets those weapons at level one, it messes with the "feel" of things. The weapons don't seem so spectacular anymore.
NO THANK YOU.
I'll stick to my +1 "mage-touched" throwaway weapons. The weapons may not seem so special, but the characters sure do. And they are what's important.
I am considering having magic weapons and armor which have jewel sockets that can allow jewels to be added that provide additional powers. I want to get away from the same old "+2 flaming burst sword" idea and have weapons which have more varied, although more limited use, powers. One gem might allow a sword to have the "keen" property for five rounds...
3.5's Magic Item Compendium had weapon and armor augment crystals that pretty much do this, although you can only have one attached to any given item.
What I've done is granted a scaling bonus to character's weapons and armor, that upgrades as they gain levels. It matches the WBL guidelines, but what is happening is that the magic of their strikes (the +n and flaming, etc.) is happening because they are the person wielding it, not because the sword is inherently magical.
If they drop it, or leave it by the wayside, it stays magical; that's how legendary weapons are created.
If they want another one, it takes a week (or GM fiat) of training to attune to the new weapon.
Ah, so in order to keep the proper feel of things, you only have to screw half the party over half the campaign?
If Bob gets Foecleaver at level one, Jane gets Firelash at 5th-level, Chris gets Godslayer at 10th-level, and Neilson gets Starsplitter at 15th-level, you've just screwed everyone but Bob for 5-15 levels! If everyone gets those weapons at level one, it messes with the "feel" of things. The weapons don't seem so spectacular anymore.
NO THANK YOU.
I'll stick to my +1 "mage-touched" throwaway weapons. The weapons may not seem so special, but the characters sure do. And they are what's important.
Lets look at your example shall we?
Bobs Foecleaver (lets assume its an Heirloom since he has it at level one).Foecleaver is keen, vorpal, indestructible (immune to sunder except under special circumstances), and most likely has a special bane ability as well as being intelligent with an encyclopedic knowledge base (not to mention a smart mouth and a low opinion of her current owners skills). (as I said in an earlier post I have special rules for Heirlooms). As such it is the only weapon Bob gets throughout my campaign.
But Foecleaver has a long proud history. It is a very recognizable Blade. Which can be both a blessing and a curse for Bob.
For example: Baron Neutral goes to hire the party to rid his Barony of a goblin tribe that has been harassing his northern farmlands; while he is off to the south with the bulk of his garrison dealing with a larger threat. The Baron recognizes Foecleaver, and immediately offers to triple his original payment. (sounds good yes?) But instead of sending Bob and party to deal with goblins he sends them to go deal with the threat to the south (which he neglected to mention was a young black dragon).
Another example of how Bobs weapon could be bad news for him. Same scenario. But Bob and party do deal with the goblins...
Foecleaver refuses to utilize her powers for Bob against such "unworthy" foes.
Or the Goblin Chieftain has witnessed Foecleaver in action before and orders the tribe to swarm Bob.
maybe Foecleaver was not Bobs grandpas to give away...
And her true owner is hunting for her relentlessly. Constantly crossing Bobs path, sending thieves to steal her back, etc.
Or Maybe Bob is her rightful owner...
But that does not stop Bobs chief rival from trying to get her by hook or crook.
Balance is set by the GM not the mechanics.
Seriously why is the idea that the GM has control of the world not the system is the control, so anathema to some folks?
There is no "screwing over some of players" as you put it.
If you Monty Haul magic weapons/items (hand them out like candy) then they becomes meaningless. Make them rare and they become something special to be treasured and sought after.
Find that sweet spot in between the two extremes and your players will hail you as a genius.
"Seriously why is the idea that the GM has control of the world not the system is the control, so anathema to some folks?"
Because the game can be balanced. GMs cannot. In fact, many GMs are of an arrogant my-way-or-the-highway narcissistic type who host games not for the fun of the group, but as a cruel means of getting personal attention.
I've been considering a system where enhancement bonuses are purely the result of craftsmanship, going in a scale from inferior (break chance a la dogslicer), common, masterwork, superior, exceptional, and finally legendary. Magical abilities would be more 'flashy'--obvious enchantments, rather than a tiny bonus.
|
|
Seriously why is the idea that the GM has control of the world not the system is the control, so anathema to some folks?** spoiler omitted **
TOZ,
Linking to the forum where majority of posters believe that DMs, sorry, Mister Caverns, should all contract herpes and die on fire, and games should be run by AIs, isn't the most ambitious response =)
OK, I'll add something more serious. The "weapons that level with the player" idea is NICE, but:
a) economy?
b) Soooo you kill the Dark Knight of Pure Evil and claim his Shadowsworn Zweihander which shoots SHADOW METEORS out of SKY with every swing, then you equip it to discover that it's just a +2 greatsword with 1d6 shadow damage because he was level 19 and you're, like, 14.
|
|
TOZ,Linking to the forum where majority of posters believe that DMs, sorry, Mister Caverns, should all contract herpes and die on fire, and games should be run by AIs, isn't the most ambitious response =)
Neither is posting slanderous- excuse me, libelous statements about posters who have nothing to do with the conversation at hand. Should I just start a thread here to discuss it? In any event, only the first post really needs to be read to make an opinion, the rest is just further discussion and clarification.
K, I'll add something more serious. The "weapons that level with the player" idea is NICE, but:
a) economy?
b) Soooo you kill the Dark Knight of Pure Evil and claim his Shadowsworn Zweihander which shoots SHADOW METEORS out of SKY with every swing, then you equip it to discover that it's just a +2 greatsword with 1d6 shadow damage because he was level 19 and you're, like, 14.
My fix for B) is that the Shadowsworn Zweihander is an artifact that functions as if its wielder were 19th level no matter who is wielding it.
|
|
Neither is posting slanderous- excuse me, libelous statements about posters who have nothing to do with the conversation at hand. Should I just start a thread here to discuss it?
TOZ,Linking to the forum where majority of posters believe that DMs, sorry, Mister Caverns, should all contract herpes and die on fire, and games should be run by AIs, isn't the most ambitious response =)
Hey I did add something more serious to the post, don't hate my slow fingers.
Also, I'm European, we never get the slander/libel difference.
"Seriously why is the idea that the GM has control of the world not the system is the control, so anathema to some folks?"
Because the game can be balanced. GMs cannot. In fact, many GMs are of an arrogant my-way-or-the-highway narcissistic type who host games not for the fun of the group, but as a cruel means of getting personal attention.
No many GMs are not arrogant my-way-or-the-highway narcissistic types anymore than many players are self-centered rules-lawyering control-freak cry-babies.
GMs are not power-mad.
And...
Players are not either.
You see only what you want to see.
|
|
"Seriously why is the idea that the GM has control of the world not the system is the control, so anathema to some folks?"
Because the game can be balanced. GMs cannot. In fact, many GMs are of an arrogant my-way-or-the-highway narcissistic type who host games not for the fun of the group, but as a cruel means of getting personal attention.
I'm beginning to see a pattern here...
seriously what does any of this crap about GM vs players have to do with making magic weapons more interesting?
tangent discussion that grew out of the original discussion.
Sorry...
Everyone seems to be so against the throwaway weapon concept.
Well, I'm against the "everyone-has-a-powerful-magical-weapon-whose secrets-they-are-slowly-unlocking-concept." The opposite extreme in other words. If all magic weapons are special, than none of them are. At least the +X system of doing it is honest about it.
You either have a small number of powerful weapons with great history, or you have enough magic weapons for the entire party and they aren't so magnificent. You can't have your cake and eat it too without destroying verisimilitude.
I think there's a middle-ground that I shoot for. Everything has a history if it's more than a basic +1 enchantment, but not everything is slowly being unlocked over time. The PCs can find Namarra, Neversleep, The +2 longsword that floats on the water and can cast silence centered on itself, and still decide to retire it when they find a weapon that suits them better.
I don't really like the idea of a PC going in with a stack of weapons and pawning them all off like stolen jewelry, but perhaps there is a museum or church that would like that weapon, or a clan of dwarves who would like to see the +2 battleaxe with the rune of their most storied smith on it returned, or even a lackey or follower of the player who could use it.
I've had some massive fun with treasure lately:
Not that long ago, the players were fighting some charau-ka, the encounter described one of the charau-ka wielding a torch, to set tar pits on fire.
I beefed the monster a little by giving him a +1 flamming club (and I figured the ranger was due for a magic weapon).
The charau-ka called the weapon "torch" in their tounge and the witch with the tounges hex understood what they were saying, and understood the flamming club to be precisely that a 'torch;.
Hilarious, they just left it there. No matter how I described it, or the fact that he seemed to wield it was a main weapon and not a mere light source. Or that an hour later the 'torch' was still burning. I couldnt get anyone's interest in "torch" the +1 flamming club. Hilarious.
Same party ignored a pile of treasure they were walking on in dim light, "you are walking in 2 feet of water, there is something shiny under the water reflecting your light source, the footing underneath you is slippery and unstable when you walk on it."
is there anyway to get up out of the water?
"yes, as you go farther the unstable gravel like material you are walking on gets more plentiful, forming a mound, you can walk up on that if you want"
I even told them as they walked on it, some of it slipped out from under their feet and fell down father making a "clinking" noise.
They were literally walking on treasure and ignoring it.
So I see anything on the walls? Are there secret doors?
What are you supposed to say? 171,000 copper, 75,000 silver and 31,000 gold?
It was very dim light, but all they had to do is examine it closer.
Let me guess: Never played 1E or 2E? :pI actually have...my first introduction to the world of roleplaying was through AD&D 2nd edition...i played a lot of different systems and several small one shots of 1st ed too.
You didn't answer my question though...Artifacts? Really?
He did answer the question you just didn't check the link he provided. I'll summarize in as short and least threadjacky way as I can. E6 and E8, or Epic 6 and Epic 8, are games that focus on the feel of D&D at lower levels, before the groups are full of Demigods. After a certain level, 6 or 8, the players go 'epic' and add feats every 5000xp or so rather than adding character levels. This lets the characters still advance and get stronger while avoiding the painfulness, to some, that is upper level D&D.
The reason a +2 or +3 weapon is like an artifact in those worlds is because nobody in the world will ever progress beyond 6th or 8th or whatever level you set it at. Your PCs won't be crafting +5 items and going to the store and seeing them on the shelf, any item requiring a higher caster level than 6 or 8 to create will have to have a backstory of some kind because it's literally impossible in the rules for the wizards in the world to create one.
Seriously why is the idea that the GM has control of the world not the system is the control, so anathema to some folks?** spoiler omitted **
|
Hence the need to make those +1 longswords into magic longswords that have a bonus based on character level. Then you don't have to worry about the revolving door of magic weapons and can name the one or two weapons your character will use throughout the entire game.Or you could try my take on +x weapons.
+x bonuses are inherent to the quality of the design; meaning there are 5 or more levels of quality.
Magical bonuses are just that; magical effects. (IE: keen, flaming, etc...)
This is my take exactly. A weapon shouldn't need to be magic in order to have +1 to attack and damage... just well-made. When I'm the DM, this is usually how I portray +x weapons.
i once had a female tian swordsage with a masterwork heirloom wakazashi. i named it 'Tensa Shinkuroga' or something like that. the intended translation was 'heaven slicing fang of black death'. the weapon was an heirloom passed down in the family starting with a general named 'Shinkuro' or 'black death'. he was reffered to as the 'Abyssal Tiger of the South' and he dressed in black with sparsesly placed thin pale orange tiger stripes. the sword had a blackened steel blade with a scabbard and handle designed to match it's original wielder's garb. a tigerseye on either side of the pommel. below the guard. the hilt's tip formed a design like a tiger in shape. this blade was mostly Ceremonial, but the swordsage descendant was the first to use this weapon in combat since the daughter she was named after. Nekogami Shuriken, was also named after Shinkuro's youngest daughter and the one who brought glory to the family. she was also her father's youngest daughter. but Irori had decreed to the nekogami family that the youngest daughter of every generation within the family is to be named Shuriken after she who brought the family glory.
not only was this weapon merely masterwork and not magical at all.
it had a prestigious name, a 5 page backstory and an elegant design.
and it was a truly unique weapon.
this blade should have become a legacy weapon or minor artifact.
Actually, that's not true. The names, however, could use some serious work! +3 Flaming burst long sword? Nah. How about "Emberthorn"? Or A +1 Frost scimitar? No thanks. Frostclaw, however? Sign me up!
What names have you given otherwise generic magic arms and armor to make them exciting, and what flavor abilities did you give them to make them unique? A +1 longsword named Shimmer is identical to any other +1 longsword, unless every time you swing it, it trails fairy dust. And dusk thorn is just a +2 shortsword, unless it looks as if it's trying to drink all the light that touches it.
I guess you didn't read your own first post, because that's not what you posted.
I don't see anything in your OP about favorite, or mechanical. Looking at your second post, we could be talking about things like "wave" and "whelm" or the "black razor", which are many of people's favorites. But your first post is clearly talking about common run of the mill weapons, with names.
These TWO topics aren't even actually related. And then you "repost" in a condescending snarky attitude about people who don't post int he way you want them to?
People, just because you made the first post, doesn't mean you "own the thread", have the right to tell people where to go or what they can post.
I have been seeing alot of this lately.
Post didn't go in the direction you were hoping? Tough. Get yourself checked for OCDC and a touch of megalomania. Then take a chill pill.
People, pay close attention. I am going to ask slowly."What was your favorite magic weapon? Did it have a name? Did it have a theme? What were the mechanical qualities? Was it optimal?"
I did not, however, ask, "How should I deal with the proliferation of throwaway magical items so that my characters can have the same weapon throughout their careers?"
Do you see the difference? It's not a complicated question.
Ironicdisaster, llisten very closely. I'm going to explain slowly.
I read the original post. As I read the initial responses. And as this is a public forum where people exchange ideas and sometimes go off on tangents, I pointed out that this concept touched on another point that was worth discussing, that of "throwaway magic stuff."
Some people seem to have thought that was an interesting thing to comment upon. Do you see the way it works? It's not a complicated concept.
i once had a female tian swordsage with a masterwork heirloom wakazashi. i named it 'Tensa Shinkuroga' or something like that. the intended translation was 'heaven slicing fang of black death'. the weapon was an heirloom passed down in the family starting with a general named 'Shinkuro' or 'black death'. he was reffered to as the 'Abyssal Tiger of the South' and he dressed in black with sparsesly placed thin pale orange tiger stripes. the sword had a blackened steel blade with a scabbard and handle designed to match it's original wielder's garb. a tigerseye on either side of the pommel. below the guard. the hilt's tip formed a design like a tiger in shape. this blade was mostly Ceremonial, but the swordsage descendant was the first to use this weapon in combat since the daughter she was named after. Nekogami Shuriken, was also named after Shinkuro's youngest daughter and the one who brought glory to the family. she was also her father's youngest daughter. but Irori had decreed to the nekogami family that the youngest daughter of every generation within the family is to be named Shuriken after she who brought the family glory.
not only was this weapon merely masterwork and not magical at all.
it had a prestigious name, a 5 page backstory and an elegant design.
and it was a truly unique weapon.
this blade should have become a legacy weapon or minor artifact.
You have just made me aware that, apparently, people DO read the original post. Thank you, and thank you also to everyone who understood the point of the thread.
People, pay close attention. I am going to ask slowly.
"What was your favorite magic weapon? Did it have a name? Did it have a theme? What were the mechanical qualities? Was it optimal?"
I did not, however, ask, "How should I deal with the proliferation of throwaway magical items so that my characters can have the same weapon throughout their careers?"
Do you see the difference? It's not a complicated question.
Well now that you have finally asked that question...
As I often GM I seldom have named weapons for my NPC (unless its a very special NPC) although I do tend to hand them out quite often.But...
There was my Longbowman character (2e; specialized fighter) Who had 2 named items (i ended up naming them as the GM was not very descriptive) The first was his quiver of holding found in a hoard. Weird story behind it too: The GM hated keeping track of ammo and assumed that everyone else did too (I actually designed the character around the concept of limited ammo) so he handed me an Endless Quiver for treasure. When I went to trade it at the local weapon smiths for other items I deemed necessary The GM threw a fit, and demanded to know why I would rid myself of such an item. When I explained I felt the item violated my character concept he changed how the item worked (in a fit of pique) to one of holding (200 arrows). Well once he did that I no problem using it and kept it.
My character named it Greysky the Storms Promise. He also (later in the campaign) commissioned a special composite re-curved longbow That only one of his blood could string and draw (it would adapt to the STR of the character) and once per day per every 3 class levels it would allow him to fire 10 arrows per round (rain of death). This he named Darksky the Storms Herald.
the sword i mentioned was an heirloom (as per the trait) and i had to name it. the DM ruled at the time that heirlooms had to be unique.
the sword i mentioned was an heirloom (as per the trait) and i had to name it. the DM ruled at the time that heirlooms had to be unique.
I too insist on heirloom items being named.