Magic weapons with no "bonus"

[Jenka]

Is it possible to have a "+1" weapon that has no actual +1. I.e. a magical flaming sword. Master crafted Long sword + Flaming magic ability (+1 value). No bonus to hit and 1D8 +1d6 Fire for damage. Is that a legit design or must an item have a "True" +1 before special abilities can be added?


As a second question should I just report for power gamer reeducation for considering a Flaming Composit Longbow as a magic Weapon? For a 4ranger/2rouge *cough*. Or is that a "reasonable" item at 6th lvl.


Jenka "the slightly Guilty" Tamar

 

[MerakSpielman]

I might allow a "no bonus" magic weapon, but it wouldn't count as a magical weapon for purposes of bypassing damage reduction.

 

[Corlon]

Nope, you have to have the +1 before anything can be added.

Once in a very low magic campaign I made magic items cost twice as much, and allowed an ability enhancement without the magical enhancement for an extra 500 or 800 gold or something.

 

[RigaMortus]

If you are the DM, anything is possible.

 

[TheYeti1775]

I like the concept...

I like the concept of not having to have the +1 on top of the magical ability for a weapon.
I think you would get more creative weaponry from your players in turn, just keep the Masterwork requirements.

 

[kenobi65]

1) By the RAW, it's not possible. A weapon has to have at least a +1 magical enhancement before it can receive any other enhancements.

2) In the games I play in and DM, it's pretty common for players to look to get +1 and energy weapons (e.g., +1 flaming, +1 shock) weapons before they look to improve the "plus" further. And, actually, that's not even true...it's become more common now for them to look to add "holy" to their weapons next.

A +1 flaming composite longbow would have a value of 8400gp (8000 for an effective +2 weapon, 400 for a masterwork composite longbow; if you're adding any Str bonus to the bow when it's made, add 100gp for each +). I don't have my DMG in front of me, but I don't think that that value is entirely out of line for a 6th level PC...though, IMC, a 6th level PC that has such a weapon probably wouldn't have any other particularly meaningful magic items. It's really up to your DM.

 

[Insight]

I allow weapons to have "+1" features without having a magical bonus. I figure that, by the rules, this is the same "cost" as having a +1 weapon, so I don't see much harm in allowing it. In terms of passing thru DR, a magic weapon is a magic weapon as far as I'm concerned. The technicality of whether or not the weapon gives you a bonus to hit or damage is pretty meaningless - it's either magical or it's not.

Now, if you are using 3.0 DR, with different levels of magic passing through a given DR, I think this becomes more of an issue. 3.5 DR is boolean - you either have the right 'effect' to get thru the DR or you don't. So whether a magic weapon has a bonus to hit or not doesn't seem to matter any more, since the bonus itself doesn't matter.

But for those rules laywers out there, yes, I will admit that, but the strict reading of the rules, you have to apply the +1 bonus first. I just don't happen to agree with that stance.

 

[Mouseferatu]

As others have said, you can't do it by the RAW, but a lot of us allow it. I love the idea of a flaming sword that's only considered magical when aflame, and is otherwise simply a really good-quality sword. Or a bane weapon that's only magical against its designated foe, and not under other circumstances.

 

[Crothian]

It is also nice for lower magic games, so the magic weapons are not useful against everything all the time.

 

[Darkness]

It is also nice for lower magic games, so the magic weapons are not useful against everything all the time.

I agree, but in 3.5, the magic weapons aren't useful against everything by default.