Can one have a weapon made out of two special materials? As an example:
Can I have a Cold Iron and Wyroot Longspear with the spear head being made out of Cold Iron and the haft being made out of Wyroot?
What about a Mithrial bladed Bardiche with a Darkwood haft?
Living Steel and Whipwood Ranseur?
Darkwood and Cold Iron Tetsubo?
If this is allowed then do you pay the full price for both materials?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Weapons and armor can be crafted using materials that possess innate special properties. If you make a suit of armor or weapon out of more than one special material, you get the benefit of only the most prevalent material. However, you can build a double weapon with each head made of a different special material.
You can use as many materials as you like, but you only get the effects of one of them.
I am 99% sure that even if an item is said to have multiple materials you only get the benefit of one and that is what you pay for. I will see if I can find the quote.
edit:ninja'd by 4 seconds
You know I read over that line like 3 times and missed "weapon" each time?... Wow.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
"If you make a suit of armor or weapon out of more than one special material, you get the benefit of only the most prevalent material. However, you can build a double weapon with each head made of a different special material."
The quote makes little sense IMO. Take a spear once. The "most prevalent material" is always the haft. Then just a moment later you're told you can ignore that if you "build a double weapon with each head made of a different special material", suggesting it's the "head" that matters and not "most prevalent material"...
For myself I see the "most prevalent material" [of the head] being what benefits that attack but I don't see why the "most prevalent material" of the body of the weapon wouldn't have passive affects like 1/2 weight. I see no reason a darkwood spear with a silver head shouldn't weight less and hurt werewolves...
That quote is for simplicity. Darkwood would be fine to add to a silver/mithral spear (outside of PFS). They just know that if they left that off, people would want to make morningstars with an adamantine ball and mithral spikes for the effects of both. And if they said something like "if the composition of the weapon supports multiple materials, it can be combined, people (not necessarily the same ones) would complain about the rules not being clear enough on how much of a spear's weight is wood and how much is metal.
This is mechanically fairly clean and easy to make exceptions without building ambiguity into the RAW. I wish they had used a different word than "prevalent" to capture the idea of the active ingredient in medicines rather than the largest component, but I think the meaning is readily understood.
"If you make a suit of armor or weapon out of more than one special material, you get the benefit of only the most prevalent material. However, you can build a double weapon with each head made of a different special material."
The quote makes little sense IMO. Take a spear once. The "most prevalent material" is always the haft. Then just a moment later you're told you can ignore that if you "build a double weapon with each head made of a different special material", suggesting it's the "head" that matters and not "most prevalent material"...
For myself I see the "most prevalent material" [of the head] being what benefits that attack but I don't see why the "most prevalent material" of the body of the weapon wouldn't have passive affects like 1/2 weight. I see no reason a darkwood spear with a silver head shouldn't weight less and hurt werewolves...
Because its a game and not reality?
The design team team wants you to only benefit from one special material per item so that's what the rules say.
That's fine, but in that case they've done a poor job saying it. Head and prevalent material are normally different things and in one sentence one is used and the next the other as the baseline for that material benefits you gain. If a rule varies from reality it can at least make internal sense.
The context is pretty clear that "most prevalent" is most prevalent special material. An adamantine spearhead still works even if the actual most prevalent material is the wood of the haft. The double weapon line is just like how they are enchanted, each end is treated separately.That's fine, but in that case they've done a poor job saying it. Head and prevalent material are normally different things and in one sentence one is used and the next the other as the baseline for that material benefits you gain. If a rule varies from reality it can at least make internal sense."If you make a suit of armor or weapon out of more than one special material, you get the benefit of only the most prevalent material. However, you can build a double weapon with each head made of a different special material."
The quote makes little sense IMO. Take a spear once. The "most prevalent material" is always the haft. Then just a moment later you're told you can ignore that if you "build a double weapon with each head made of a different special material", suggesting it's the "head" that matters and not "most prevalent material"...
For myself I see the "most prevalent material" [of the head] being what benefits that attack but I don't see why the "most prevalent material" of the body of the weapon wouldn't have passive affects like 1/2 weight. I see no reason a darkwood spear with a silver head shouldn't weight less and hurt werewolves...
Because its a game and not reality?
The design team team wants you to only benefit from one special material per item so that's what the rules say.
yes, but add a darkwood haft and now which special material wins?
On double weapons, most of the places I looks say "ends", like the double weapon property or Dual Enhancement.
With the darkwood-shaft spear plus the mithril-speartip you could pay for it as a double weapon, and potentially (if that feat or ability exists) use the shaft as a quarterstaff or club.
Originally, in AD&D, these metals (mithril etc) were alloys with iron which made different kinds of steel. The cold iron concept was originally a means of forging iron, not a different substance. But its a game. There is no way it can ever be consistent with common sense. It only has to be consistent with the game rules.
If you just want the material and don't care if it has a weapon effect, pay by the quantity. If you want the weapon effect, pay for it by the double weapon rules.
The quote makes little sense IMO...It makes sense to me. It's entire purpose seems to be to stop:
I'm making a mithril adamantine cold iron frost and fire forged temple sword.
And that has something to do with a cold iron spear that has a darkwood haft how? I AGREED that the "most prevalent material" [of the head] being what benefits that attack". I just disagree that the "most prevalent material" of the overall weapon should then have no effect.
parsimony, "With the darkwood-shaft spear plus the mithril-speartip you could pay for it as a double weapon, and potentially (if that feat or ability exists) use the shaft as a quarterstaff or club.": Yes, but the cost is exactly the same as if you'd bought a non-double weapon spear so it seems like an extra step for nothing. It's also mean that a double weapon that's mostly wood loses out because of the tips material.
Note that the same thing is NOT true of the magic weapon paste Silversheen: it specifically says it replaces the properties of the underlying material.
"If you make a suit of armor or weapon out of more than one special material, you get the benefit of only the most prevalent material. However, you can build a double weapon with each head made of a different special material."
The quote makes little sense IMO. Take a spear once. The "most prevalent material" is always the haft.
the buisness end of the damage though is done by the head. That's the relevant material area.
The wooden haft however means that no pesky spellcaster is going rid you of the weapon by casting Burning Disarm at you.