Does the necrotic damge from the wound effect also need to be healed via short/long rests? Or can that damage be healed via magic?

The way I ruled it when using a homebrewed weapon bases heavily on this is that all damage done by this weapon can't be healed through magical means period, it can only be healed via rests. Now damage done by other weapons can be healed so when using this the DM should keep a count of what damage is done by what weapon so they know if it can or cannot be healed.

It sounds like a decrease to hit points maximum that can be removed only with a rest. I think the wounds' damage is not included in this effect.

It isn't a hit point max reduction only because in all other instances of hit point reduction if you lose all your max you die, it simply states it cannot be healed.

Would you rule that if a rogue used a short sword of harming and got sneak attack damage that the “only he’s on a short/long rest” effect would also be for all the damage? Not just the sword damage?

Quote from DacorTheBarbarian >>

Would you rule that if a rogue used a short sword of harming and got sneak attack damage that the “only he’s on a short/long rest” effect would also be for all the damage? Not just the sword damage?

  Yes. Sneak Attack damage is defined as extra damage dealt by the weapon, so sneak attack damage is sword damage.

Quote from lexgamer >>

Quote from DacorTheBarbarian >>

Would you rule that if a rogue used a short sword of harming and got sneak attack damage that the “only he’s on a short/long rest” effect would also be for all the damage? Not just the sword damage?

  Yes. Sneak Attack damage is defined as extra damage dealt by the weapon, so sneak attack damage is sword damage.

Thank you for this information, this seems important to know.

Would the effects of this weapon prevent a Druid from assuming the hit points of a beast when they wild shape? I’m not sure if that applies to “any other means” or not. 

Quote from AlatarCuthalion >>

Would the effects of this weapon prevent a Druid from assuming the hit points of a beast when they wild shape? I’m not sure if that applies to “any other means” or not. 

 I would say no. When a druid wildshapes they take on a different pool of hit points all together. So if a Druid had 25 hit points and got wounded for 10 damage before they wildshaped they would have 15 hp left. If they then wildshaped into a bear the bear form would have full hp.
For the sake of simplicity I'd say that the druid wouldn't suffer the effects of their wounds while wildshaped, at least not the ones they took in their normal form.

Does “for each time you've wounded it” include wounds that have ended on the creature?

Since all wounds are ended with only one success, Imma say no, cured wounds don't count as times you have wounded it.

What about a paladin's smite done with this weapon? Is that smite not considered the weapon's damage?

Quote from Pithon86 >>

What about a paladin's smite done with this weapon? Is that smite not considered the weapon's damage?

 While a rogue's Sneak Attack deals extra weapon damage (using distractions to hit weak spots and thus have the weapon deal more harm), a paladin's Divine Smite is extra radiant damage (magical energy channeled via your patron, an external source, not the weapon itself) means it doesn't apply.

Paladin smite is the same as sneak attack - extra damage dice tacked on to a weapon attack.  In both cases they're doubled on crits.  Looking at the rules text of the abilities I see no reason to treat them differently, other people's head-cannon notwithstanding.

 

Quote from StormbringerTheStormbringerest >>

Paladin smite is the same as sneak attack - extra damage dice tacked on to a weapon attack.  In both cases they're doubled on crits.  Looking at the rules text of the abilities I see no reason to treat them differently, other people's head-cannon notwithstanding.

Paladin's smite reads "you can expend one spell slot to deal radiant damage to the target, in addition to the weapon's damage". This explicitly states that the smite damage is NOT part of the weapon's damage, but in addition to it.

Rogue's sneak attack just says "Once per turn, you can deal an extra 1d6 damage to one creature you hit with an attack...". It does not explicitly state whether it is extra 'weapon' damage or not, but given the lack of a given damage type, we can assume that the damage is of the weapon's type and is being done by the weapon.

You could make an argument that sneak attack would not qualify for this weapon's property, although personally I think it probably should. Smite, however, definitely does not.

This looks like a fun wrench in the plans of parties that casually bounce back from having zero hit points.  Have the main villain focus down a player, and they're out for a hour.

People brought up paladins & rogues, but how about when a barbarian crits?  A Greataxe of Wounding could turn any day into a Monday real quick.

How would you rules this damage from a PC against say a troll w/ natural health regeneration? As I’m typing this  magic isn’t natural to an extent?

Quote from Shelma1421 >>

How would you rules this damage from a PC against say a troll w/ natural health regeneration? As I’m typing this  magic isn’t natural to an extent?

  As I read it, it says "rather than by regeneration, magic, or any other means." It doesn't matter if its magical regeneration, or a natural ability of the creature, so it would not regenerate that damage. I would also think this could impede a Hydra's ability to regrow heads and heal if the head was severed by a weapon of wounding.

Can the wielder of the sword end the wounding effect on enemies at will?

I ask because in my current campaign, an ally was mind-controlled and I ended up downing them with the wounding damage. The sword description doesn’t specify if the person wielding the weapon can end the effect, so I wondered how that would be ruled for future reference.

This is exactly why I'm looking into bleeding effects