Back in the good old days, one extremely iconic weapon (since Drizzt wielded the scimitar verson of it) was
Sword +3, Frost Brand, +6 vs. fire-using/dwelling creatures only glows when it’s below 0 degrees Fahrenheit (about -18C). It also acts as a Ring of Fire Protection, and has a 50% chance of putting out any continuous fire within 10’, such as a Wall of Fire or a torch, but not a fireball.
So I understand in 5e that they defined the Frost Brand as something that adds 1d6 cold damage but doesn't have the bonus to hit (plus other stuff). That is a little lame, so I considered whether I should add the +3 so it is +3 to hit, +3 damage AND 1d6 cold damage. Now maybe it is getting overpowered and not intended so googling I find Jeremys post
Now key words in "A bonus to hit and damage is no longer a defaultproperty of magic weapons, which can have a varietyof desirable properties"
Ok fine so he is indicating you could have the "Frostbrand" added to a "+3 scimitar".
------------------------
Now the question what you have you done/seen. Have official modules been adding +blah to weapons with this strong properties like "frost brand". Did they add both +3 to hit and +3 dmg. Do you or do you think that is OP?
Bounded Accuracy makes both attack bonuses and defensive bonuses (to AC or saves) quite a bit more powerful than they were in previous editions. Whether they are overpowered however depends a lot on the context - in other words, the campaign. I wouldn't suggest not touching this in any way ever, but you should arguably be aware the impact of such weapons can be significant.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Now key words in "A bonus to hit and damage is no longer a defaultproperty of magic weapons, which can have a varietyof desirable properties"
Ok fine so he is indicating you could have the "Frostbrand" added to a "+3 scimitar".
I don't think that's what he was saying at all. Enchantment stacking is prevented in cases like Artificer infusions. What he was saying is that there are a variety of possible properties on magic items that determine their power/rarity and +1/2/3 are among them.
When he's saying "no longer" he's referring to older editions. For example in 4e you literally could not have a Frost Brand sword without a + to hit/dmg - every magic weapon had that baked in. With bounded accuracy this is no longer needed.
As mentioned above, I think this is to keep items competitive with each other. You choose the extra damage and abilities of an elemental weapon or you choose a big bonus to hit. If you just threw everything onto one weapon then everyone would want that one weapon and other weapons would all be inferior. That's not what they're going for here.
I would argue that a frost brand is a bit underpowered for Very Rare and needs attunement; +3 to hit and damage will almost always be more valuable than +1d6 damage, and the fact it grants cold resistance is balanced by it needing attunement; extinguishing fire and glowing are mostly cosmetic benefits. Flame tongue is more damage and lower rarity, though it doesn't grant resistance. I certainly wouldn't set it to +3/+3, though; giving it +1/+1, or bumping the damage bonus to 2d6, would be plenty for its rarity.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Back in the good old days, one extremely iconic weapon (since Drizzt wielded the scimitar verson of it) was
Sword +3, Frost Brand, +6 vs. fire-using/dwelling creatures only glows when it’s below 0 degrees Fahrenheit (about -18C). It also acts as a Ring of Fire Protection, and has a 50% chance of putting out any continuous fire within 10’, such as a Wall of Fire or a torch, but not a fireball.
So I understand in 5e that they defined the Frost Brand as something that adds 1d6 cold damage but doesn't have the bonus to hit (plus other stuff).
That is a little lame, so I considered whether I should add the +3 so it is +3 to hit, +3 damage AND 1d6 cold damage. Now maybe it is getting overpowered and not intended so googling I find Jeremys post
https://www.sageadvice.eu/2015/06/10/frostbrand-and-flame-tongue-bonus/
Now key words in "A bonus to hit and damage is no longer a default property of magic weapons, which can have a variety of desirable properties"
Ok fine so he is indicating you could have the "Frostbrand" added to a "+3 scimitar".
------------------------
Now the question what you have you done/seen. Have official modules been adding +blah to weapons with this strong properties like "frost brand". Did they add both +3 to hit and +3 dmg. Do you or do you think that is OP?
Bounded Accuracy makes both attack bonuses and defensive bonuses (to AC or saves) quite a bit more powerful than they were in previous editions. Whether they are overpowered however depends a lot on the context - in other words, the campaign. I wouldn't suggest not touching this in any way ever, but you should arguably be aware the impact of such weapons can be significant.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
So not the norm to add more bonuses, got it.
I don't think that's what he was saying at all. Enchantment stacking is prevented in cases like Artificer infusions. What he was saying is that there are a variety of possible properties on magic items that determine their power/rarity and +1/2/3 are among them.
When he's saying "no longer" he's referring to older editions. For example in 4e you literally could not have a Frost Brand sword without a + to hit/dmg - every magic weapon had that baked in. With bounded accuracy this is no longer needed.
As mentioned above, I think this is to keep items competitive with each other. You choose the extra damage and abilities of an elemental weapon or you choose a big bonus to hit. If you just threw everything onto one weapon then everyone would want that one weapon and other weapons would all be inferior. That's not what they're going for here.
My homebrew subclasses (full list here)
(Artificer) Swordmage | Glasswright | (Barbarian) Path of the Savage Embrace
(Bard) College of Dance | (Fighter) Warlord | Cannoneer
(Monk) Way of the Elements | (Ranger) Blade Dancer
(Rogue) DaggerMaster | Inquisitor | (Sorcerer) Riftwalker | Spellfist
(Warlock) The Swarm
I would argue that a frost brand is a bit underpowered for Very Rare and needs attunement; +3 to hit and damage will almost always be more valuable than +1d6 damage, and the fact it grants cold resistance is balanced by it needing attunement; extinguishing fire and glowing are mostly cosmetic benefits. Flame tongue is more damage and lower rarity, though it doesn't grant resistance. I certainly wouldn't set it to +3/+3, though; giving it +1/+1, or bumping the damage bonus to 2d6, would be plenty for its rarity.