Hello all, very new to posting but very old to playing 3.5 and Pathfinder.
"Arcane Bond (Ex or Sp): At 1st level, wizards form a powerful bond with an object or a creature. This bond can take one of two forms: a familiar or a bonded object. A familiar is a magical pet that enhances the wizard's skills and senses and can aid him in magic, while a bonded object is an item a wizard can use to cast additional spells or to serve as a magical item. Once a wizard makes this choice, it is permanent and cannot be changed."
"A wizard can designate an existing magic item as his bonded item. This functions in the same way as replacing a lost or destroyed item except that the new magic item retains its abilities while gaining the benefits and drawbacks of becoming a bonded item."
and per the way the Blade Adept's feature at level 3 states:
"Sentient Sword (Su): At 3rd level, the blade adept's bonded sword becomes a powerful, sentient black blade. The blade advances as a black blade using the blade adept's class level in place of the magus's class level and points from her arcane reservoir in place of the magus's arcane pool. A blade adept with this class feature cannot have a familiar of any kind, even from another class. This ability replaces the arcanist exploit gained at 3rd level."
Now I know that the +1 enhancements will not stack to make +2, but is there any reason that I could not "upgrade" the Lesser Blade of the Open Road to its increased versions? The next enhancement would be to make it a Blade of the Open Road, adding the Aspis Bane property to it (at the cost of 17,200 GP).
I appreciate any insights offered on this.
|
you wont be able to upgrade the sword you bought..
( At 3rd level, the blade adept's bonded sword becomes a powerful, sentient black blade)
so your sword turns into a ( black blade)
and then advances as the chart shows.
If you haven't played him yet ( since you rebuilt) i just see about selling it and getting you gold back
Thank you all for the input. I guess I found it rather confusing that if they specifically say in the bonded item section that it "retains all special abilities and qualities", where in the sentient blade section does it say that is no longer the case? As long as the abilities continue to remain under the +10 limit why would the Long Road properties become invalid?
I promise, I'm not trying to be difficult on this subject, I guess I'm simply having difficulty understanding the "It has to either be this or be that" when I'm not seeing anything in the wording that says it cannot be BOTH.
The Blade of the Open Road specifically states "Between scenarios, the wielder can enhance a lesser blade of the open road to become a blade of the open road and later into a greater blade of the open road by paying the difference in price between the two items"
EDIT: Found this in the Society FAQs:
"Upgraded versions of named magic items may appear on Chronicle sheets."
-and-
"A character with the arcane bond class feature may create a bond with any item he owns, either magical or mundane, as long as the item falls within the categories permitted by the arcane bond ability (the cost for bonding with a new item still applies). If a caster later wishes to upgrade an existing bonded item, he may do so for the cost (not price) of the final item as listed in the item's statblock."
I'm not a Magus. I'm an Arcanist with the Blade Adept archetype. I'm not using any feats to enhance the blade, I'm using it's own description.
So, for example, if I had a +1 Flaming longsword selected as my "Bonded Item" and I hit level 3, turning my Bonded Item into my Black Blade, does it lose the Flaming? Doesn't say anything about the item loses all other properties.
|
"Sentient Sword (Su): At 3rd level, the blade adept's bonded sword becomes a powerful, sentient black blade. The blade advances as a black blade using the blade adept's class level in place of the magus's class level and points from her arcane reservoir in place of the magus's arcane pool. A blade adept with this class feature cannot have a familiar of any kind, even from another class. This ability replaces the arcanist exploit gained at 3rd level."
The description of a Black Blade is very straight forward, it even has a chart in which it tells you what it stats are. The abilities of a Black Blade are not in addition to the base item. The Black Blade description is more specific form of bonded object. When judging between general vs specific, specific trumps general.
The stats page on the Black Blade tells me what it's Intelligence and special abilities it has access to based upon my level. It does not give any kind of primary identity stats (longword, rapier, kapesh, etc).
If you put a new Hendricks Motorsports engine into a Chevy Monte Carlo is it no longer a Monte Carlo?
I do not see any specific wording that says a Black Blade ignores any properties that it possessed before becoming a Black Blade. In this instance of an Arcanist Blade Adept, it specifically manifests within whatever weapon was chosen as the Bonded Item.
|
No, nor can you use that feat to add other properties (such as flaming) to the black blade. You can use your arcane pool to temporarily add abilities to your black blade.
PFS does not allow players to take item creation feats (for reasons of wealth balance) but does allow upgrading of items. Essentially you are giving it to an NPC to craft new abilities onto it. But a black blade can't be upgraded.
As for your other point
I do not see any specific wording that says a Black Blade ignores any properties that it possessed before becoming a Black Blade.
I agree that the wording isn't there. I think the intention is that it isn't a magical weapon beforehand but you are right that there is a grey area right there. However even if you could choose a magical weapon, it becomes a black blade when you reach 3rd level. At which point it can't be upgraded (per the FAQ above).
Also: flagged post for spoilers. When you're referring to something from a specific chronicle, please write it so you don't give away where it appears:
I retrained him into the Blade Adept archetype after purchasing a Lesser Blade of the Open Road from my Chronicle sheet forSpoiler:I selected that +1 longsword as my "Bonded Item":#6-16 Scions of the Sky Key Part 3: The Golden Guardian
Sorry for the spoiler, I didn't see the help tab for formatting below. This was my first time posting here.
I can't edit it now either because of the flag.
I guess I'm arguing against that FAQ because I'm not using a feat, I'm simply following the description of the item on my chronicle. Doesn't a Chronicle description override an FAQ rule?
|
You may not be using the feat yourself, but you're paying somebody to use the feat. That's how magical properties are added to items in Pathfinder.
So you couldn't upgrade it. Nothing about the Chronicle overrides that.
What I'm less clear on is whether something is preventing you from using your lesser blade as a Black Blade. Seems to me that you can, given the quotes of the ability.
|
|
You may not be using the feat yourself, but you're paying somebody to use the feat. That's how magical properties are added to items in Pathfinder.
So you couldn't upgrade it. Nothing about the Chronicle overrides that.
Agreed.
What I'm less clear on is whether something is preventing you from using your lesser blade as a Black Blade. Seems to me that you can, given the quotes of the ability.
Agreed again. I think the assumption was that the average character wouldn't have a magic weapon by level 3 (when the sentient sword ability is gained) but that doesn't take into account multiclassing or (especially) retraining.
Regardless a lesser blade of the open road is a +1 longsword with a glyph stamped on it. Since the +1 doesn't stack with the black blade's innate enhancement bonus I don't see anything power-level-altering from allowing it to be your sentient sword.
Let me try to make sure I use the spoiler function correctly as well as add to the discussion:
So I know I could use the lesser blade of the open road as my Black Blade, but because it is the Black Blade, being that destroys its ability to be upgraded as described? That seems a bit counterproductive and backwards.
If you put an AI system in a Firebird, it's still a Firebird, it just does more cool things (like ejector seats!).
|
|
You cannot upgrade a Black Blade, though.
Normally, under any general circumstance, you would be correct.
Nothing is "backwards", here.
Normally, you can upgrade a +1 weapon to a +2 weapon.
Normally, you can upgrade a +1 weapon to a +1 Flaming weapon.
Normally, you can upgrade a Lesser BotOR to a Greater BotOR.
But none of that is possible with a Black Blade.
|
|
If you put an AI system in a Firebird, it's still a Firebird, it just does more cool things (like ejector seats!).
I don't understand the references you're using, but let me try one of my own:
If you put the Lesser BotOR into a Black Blade, it's still a Black Blade, it just does more cool things (like hurting Aspis!).
|
|
So I know I could use the lesser blade of the open road as my Black Blade, but because it is the Black Blade, being that destroys its ability to be upgraded as described? That seems a bit counterproductive and backwards.
If you put an AI system in a Firebird, it's still a Firebird, it just does more cool things (like ejector seats!).
You could indeed describe it as "counterproductive" in the sense of "we don't want the ability to be more efficient than we expected." It could be more "productive" (we could get more advantage out of the class feature) if the black blade could be upgraded with a craft skill. But the Paizo designers have decided they don't want the black blade to have that advantage.
It all comes down to the power level expectations built into the design of the game. It may be cooler to have more features but it causes problems when those features make scenarios easier than intended.
And that's not the worst example. For the same price I could get a +1 agile, keen rapier.
Would the Aspis-bane property cause problems? Probably not. But if the PFS team says "OK, you can upgrade weapons you find on chronicles" then what happens when someone spots a +1 flaming, keen katana on her chronicle sheet? You end up having to make a case-by-case exception list, which is something PFS tries to avoid as much as possible.
So I know I could use the lesser blade of the open road as my Black Blade, but because it is the Black Blade, being that destroys its ability to be upgraded as described? That seems a bit counterproductive and backwards.
If you put an AI system in a Firebird, it's still a Firebird, it just does more cool things (like ejector seats!).
You could indeed describe it as "counterproductive" in the sense of "we don't want the ability to be more efficient than we expected." It could be more "productive" (we could get more advantage out of the class feature) if the black blade could be upgraded with a craft skill. But the Paizo designers have decided they don't want the black blade to have that advantage.
It all comes down to the power level expectations built into the design of the game. It may be cooler to have more features but it causes problems when those features make scenarios easier than intended.
** spoiler omitted **
I always got those two cars mixed up =( But I loved KITT as a kid!
I am gaining a much better understanding, Belafon. Thank you. I guess I would look at it like as long as they do not cross the +10 threshold on magic weapons, why can't it be legal?
Maybe one day it could get a proper step by step errata. I would think going from a caster into a melee type would be given as much opportunity to succeed as possible.
|
You can't spend gold to upgrade a Black Blade, this is balancing the fact that you don't need to spend gold to upgrade a Black Blade. This already puts a wobble into wealth by level, as that is gold that could be spent on armor, shields (mithril bucklers have no spell failure, or Armor Check Penalty), amulets, spells to your spell book, scrolls, potions, Pearl of Power, etc. If they allowed them to benefit from automatic upgrade + paid upgrades it could seriously unbalance class progression.
Well, just to satisfy my curiosity then, riddle me this:
What happens when I choose a Flaming +1 Longsword as my bonded item that later becomes my Black Blade? Does it lose the Flaming quality even though it had it before it became a Black Blade?
|
|
Well, just to satisfy my curiosity then, riddle me this:
... Does it lose the Flaming quality even though it had it before it became a Black Blade?
No but...
The Flaming +1 Longsword would remain but you find in your gear your new Black Blade, as the description states it just shows up one day.Bottom line a Black Blade does not gain any other features then what is listed in the archetype's description.
Well, just to satisfy my curiosity then, riddle me this:
... Does it lose the Flaming quality even though it had it before it became a Black Blade?
No but...
The Flaming +1 Longsword would remain but you find in your gear your new Black Blade, as the description states it just shows up one day.Bottom line a Black Blade does not gain any other features then what is listed in the archetype's description.
"Sentient Sword (Su): At 3rd level, the blade adept's bonded sword becomes a powerful, sentient black blade. "
It specifically says that the sword I make my bond with BECOMES a black blade. The Magus part of it "appearing in my gear" is not applicable to the Arcanist Blade Adept archetype. Yes, it borrows heavily from that class, but it is different in unique ways.
The bottom line question is: Does a magic weapon I select as my bonded item lose all special properties it had and stop being whatever it was before it became a black blade?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The bottom line question is: Does a magic weapon I select as my bonded item lose all special properties it had and stop being whatever it was before it became a black blade?
The special properties your bonded weapon had are not necessarily lost outright. However-
Magus, Black Blade: Can I use Craft Magic Arms and Armor to increase my blade's enhancement bonus?
No, nor can you use that feat to add other properties (such as flaming) to the black blade. You can use your arcane pool to temporarily add abilities to your black blade.
-said properties (pre-existing or not) cannot add to the abilities of your black blade in any way once it becomes a black blade. You could argue that said abilities are merely suppressed while your weapon is a black blade, ergo they would return if at any point your bonded item became not a black blade without being destroyed outright. However, falling short of convincing your DM to overrule the FAQ (via house rule), there is no way to have those abilities concurrent with your weapon being a black blade. This means those pre-existing abilities are either lost or otherwise rendered unusable.
I am in complete agreement with Azoriel's interpretation.
The bottom line question is: Does a magic weapon I select as my bonded item lose all special properties it had and stop being whatever it was before it became a black blade?The special properties your bonded weapon had are not necessarily lost outright. However-
-said properties (pre-existing or not) cannot add to the abilities of your black blade in any way once it becomes a black blade. You could argue that said abilities are merely suppressed while your weapon is a black blade, ergo they would return if at any point your bonded item became not a black blade without being destroyed outright. However, falling short of convincing your DM to overrule the FAQ (via house rule), there is no way to have those abilities concurrent with your weapon being a black blade. This means those pre-existing abilities are either lost or otherwise rendered unusable.Magus, Black Blade: Can I use Craft Magic Arms and Armor to increase my blade's enhancement bonus?
No, nor can you use that feat to add other properties (such as flaming) to the black blade. You can use your arcane pool to temporarily add abilities to your black blade.
By this logic, the blade would no longer be a bonded item either. The blade retains its bonded quality, why not other enhancements prior to becoming a black blade?
By this logic, the blade would no longer be a bonded item either. The blade retains its bonded quality, why not other enhancements prior to becoming a black blade?The bottom line question is: Does a magic weapon I select as my bonded item lose all special properties it had and stop being whatever it was before it became a black blade?The special properties your bonded weapon had are not necessarily lost outright. However-
-said properties (pre-existing or not) cannot add to the abilities of your black blade in any way once it becomes a black blade. You could argue that said abilities are merely suppressed while your weapon is a black blade, ergo they would return if at any point your bonded item became not a black blade without being destroyed outright. However, falling short of convincing your DM to overrule the FAQ (via house rule), there is no way to have those abilities concurrent with your weapon being a black blade. This means those pre-existing abilities are either lost or otherwise rendered unusable.Magus, Black Blade: Can I use Craft Magic Arms and Armor to increase my blade's enhancement bonus?
No, nor can you use that feat to add other properties (such as flaming) to the black blade. You can use your arcane pool to temporarily add abilities to your black blade.
I don't understand your argument. The weapon became a Bonded Item through a class ability, not through the use of Craft Magic Arms and Armor.
A bonded weapon can have additional abilities added to it by the user as if the user had CMAaA. If the bonded item is improved prior becoming a black blade, either the change to black blade overwrites all magic properties, or it doesn't.
|
|
In my opinion, if a bonded item becomes a black blade, it still functions as a bonded item just fine, since this is not reliant on the bonded item's properties at all (i.e. a bonded item can be magical, or it can be mundane - it doesn't matter, since the class ability is providing some extra functionality that happens to only work while you have the item). However, once it's a black blade, it has the extra restriction added of not being able to be altered magically at all. So, while the Bonded Item ability generally allows you to enhance your bonded item, the specific rule of the black blade prevents you from doing so in this case.
As to the Blade of the Open Road, I would also agree that changing the item to a black blade effectively throws out the existing enchantments, and replaces them with the capabilities of a black blade. If you really want to go down this road, don't start with an already-enchanted weapon.
A bonded weapon can have additional abilities added to it by the user as if the user had CMAaA. If the bonded item is improved prior becoming a black blade, either the change to black blade overwrites all magic properties, or it doesn't.
And by that logic, if a fighter takes levels in paladin, he must therefore lose all of his fighter abilities, because fighters can be of any alignment whereas paladins are only lawful good. Just because you lose the freedom to enchant your bonded weapon doesn't mean it's no longer a bonded weapon.
Bonded item is a class feature that is dependent upon a specific item, as opposed to being a mechanical feature of the item itself. Think of it like the caster allowing themselves to adopt the bonded item as a security blanket of sorts. They become more confident when they have it in their possession (to the point of being able to pull a spell basically out of memory from their spellbook) but become supremely lacking in confidence without it (requiring concentration checks for every spell cast). It's an attribute of the caster, not the item.
If you subsequently transform that bonded item into a black blade, your security blanket is now your little travelin'n'blastin' buddy. You still perform better with him, and worse without him, but now he can talk... back... hopefully not, you know, "talking back".
So yeah, I agree, RAW and RAI, I don't see any conflict between the bonded item and black blade rules.
That said, I *do* see where the confusion comes in and while I hesitate to call this a "trap" per se, I could easily imagine someone following the same line of logic. After all, one wouldn't normally expect a class or archetype feature to actually diminish your ability, particularly that of your items which represent part of your WBL. In effect, you are chucking gold out the window for your black blade.
If the abilities on your current weapon are things a black blade can't normally grant, you're missing out. If those abilities cost more as enchantments than the value of what a black blade could offer, you are definitely missing out. And even if the abilities are something a black blade could duplicate (i.e. +1 flaming), you could still make the argument since you now have to expend a resource for what was previously an always on ability. Granted, you have to consider it when balanced against the other nice features a black blade offers.
But still... yeah... I understand the confusion.
A bonded weapon can have additional abilities added to it by the user as if the user had CMAaA. If the bonded item is improved prior becoming a black blade, either the change to black blade overwrites all magic properties, or it doesn't.And by that logic, if a fighter takes levels in paladin, he must therefore lose all of his fighter abilities, because fighters can be of any alignment whereas paladins are only lawful good. Just because you lose the freedom to enchant your bonded weapon doesn't mean it's no longer a bonded weapon.
By this logic, a weapon that is enchanted, by virtue of being a bonded object, should keep those enchantments when it becomes a blackblade. It is likely the blackblade over writes the enchantment, but I can see a GM ruling the other way.
By this logic, a weapon that is enchanted, by virtue of being a bonded object, should keep those enchantments when it becomes a blackblade. It is likely the blackblade over writes the enchantment, but I can see a GM ruling the other way.
I fail to see how this differs from what was stated in my first post. My point (and a point that has been raised repeatedly by others) was that Paizo states on their website that you can't use Craft Magic Arms and Armor to add to a black blade; whether you do so before or after it becomes a black blade is irrelevant. Drawing from the earlier analogy, a chaotic good fighter who takes levels in paladin must now be lawful good. The fact that it was perfectly legal for him to be chaotic good prior to taking those levels is completely beside the point. If you enchant a bonded weapon before it becomes a black blade, that's all fine and dandy - it just can't "increase (your) blade's enhancement bonus" or "add other properties" without a DM's fiat per the FAQ.
I'm not disagreeing with you that the blackblade likely overwrites prior enchantments. The rules for blackblades were written before the introduction of Arcanist so they only talk about enchanting the blade after it has already been created. Since there is no discussion about enchanting prior to its creation I can see it being ruled either way.
We can agree to disagree if there is clarity.
We can agree to disagree if there is clarity.
I think you're refusing to acknowledge what's been written. It is true to say that the FAQ entry in question predates the blade adept archetype. However, the intention of the entry seems quite clear: Paizo doesn't want the black blade ability mixing with magic item crafting feats. If Paizo states you aren't allowed to use craft feats on a black blade, why do you think there would be any wiggle room to argue that you can now do so so long as it occurs prior to it acquiring black blade status?
Suppose a 1st level blade adept has a 5th level cleric friend, and said cleric uses Craft Magic Arms and Armor to turn the blade adept's bonded longsword into a +2 weapon. When the blade adept later reaches 3rd level (and the aforementioned longsword becomes a black blade), are you saying that this doesn't count as having "used Craft Magic Arms and armor to increase (that) blade's enhancement bonus" simply because it ocurred earlier? An increase has most certainly ocurred (legal), even if it was at 1st level (also legal), and it becomes an increase to a black blade the moment that weapon becomes a black blade (no longer legal).
Note that I've never said "Well, clearly X happens per the rules", as I think we are in agreement the rules never lay out a specific outcome. However, there is one thing the rules do specify here, and that is that crafting feats will not modify a black blade. That particular outcome is expressly verboten.
I agree with you. I would not allow someone to take an item that had been improved by CMAaA, turn it into a blackblade, and keep those CMAaA improvements. The primary reason I think I see potential ambiguity here is that a specific property of a bonded item is the ability to improve it without using CMAaA. The improvement is as aspect of the bond, and the bond survives being turned into a blackblade.
That seems very possible. I can see it read either way.
Consider:
A magus finds the weapon, there is no opportunity for them to add anything to the it prior to being created. A Magus can only have a base blackblade because they can't make their own. However Blade Adepts are more proficient casters and are bonded to their weapons. Maybe the enhancements generated by an Arcanist's bond only work for the Arcanist that bonded the weapon and when past on to magi they only have access to basic blackblades.
Once again. I'm not saying either is correct, I can just see it being read either way.
Consider:
A magus finds the weapon, there is no opportunity for them to add anything to the it prior to being created. A Magus can only have a base blackblade because they can't make their own. However Blade Adepts are more proficient casters and are bonded to their weapons. Maybe the enhancements generated by an Arcanist's bond only work for the Arcanist that bonded the weapon and when past on to magi they only have access to basic blackblades.
If you're talking about a pre-existing enhancement bonus, the FAQ explicitly states you can't use crafting feats on black blades; any possible outcomes that isn't a houserule must adhere to that. If you're only talking about the bonded weapon ability (no enhancement bonuses or anything else), that lies outside the scope of what the FAQ says (as well as any of my previous statements).
Edit: response from Melkiador came in before I was done answering. If you're only talking about the weapon bond ability remaining after the weapon becomes a black blade, then we have no disagreement.
I wonder what's the point of getting the sword as a bonded item at level 1, if you can't then benefit from that ability at level 3 when the sword becomes a black blade. I'd say in this case the FAQ is irrelevant. The magus sword is never intended to be a bonded object and so is playing under different rules, than the arcanist archetype.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Enchanting a bonded object IS NOT THE SAME as an item being improved by CMAaA. The effects are part of the bond, not the item. The items enhancements only work for the person who bonded the item. The effects are wholly different CMAaA.
"A wizard can add additional magic abilities to his bonded object as if he has the required Item Creation Feats ...
The magic properties of a bonded object, including any magic abilities added to the object, only function for the wizard who owns it. If a bonded object’s owner dies, or the item is replaced, the object reverts to being an ordinary masterwork item of the appropriate type."
Sounds like what would happen if an Arcanist passed his bonded item, which had additional enchantments while being held by the Arcanist, to a Magus.
It is very possible that an arcanist can improve his bonded item, prior to it becoming a BlackBlade, and have those improvements survive becoming a Blackblade. This is because improving a bonded object ISN'T THE SAME as using the CMAaA feat.
Not a stretch at all. However once again, I'm not saying that is how it works. I'm saying it makes sense being read both ways.
Edit: Azoriel you totally changed what you posted before. Are you saying you agree now that you have seen Melkiador's post?
I disagree that the post was completely changed - note the initial statement is still the same. ;) (I reread you earlier statement and realized you may have been talking about the weapon bond ability and not crafting feats. My first edit came across before I saw someone else had already responded, and so I put in another edit so Melkiador's post wouldn't seem out of place.) If there is no argument that crafting feats can be preapplied to a black blade (and still work), then we are in accordance.
This has always been about the weapon bond class ability. I think that is why this issue creates so much friction. The bond ability mimics CMAaA in many ways, but is definitely different.
It would be good to get an FAQ, because it can easily be ruled in either direction.
Maybe someone will see this chat and make it happen. Thanks!