Vicious weapon property

[Magus Coeruleus]

I have some questions about the magic weapon property known as...

Vicious

When a vicious weapon strikes an opponent, it creates a flash of disruptive energy that resonates between the opponent and the wielder. This energy deals an extra 2d6 points of damage to the opponent and 1d6 points of damage to the wielder. Only melee weapons can be vicious.

Moderate necromancy; CL 9th; Craft Magic Arms and Armor, enervation; Price +1 bonus.

1) Is it fair to assume this damage is of the negative energy type, given the prereq spell enervation? if not what kind of damage is it?
2) Would deathward protect against this extra damage?
3) Does it seem reasonable to assume that if the wielder or target is unaffected by the damage that neither takes damage since there is no "resonance" between them?
4) Would striking an undead creature actually heal it while hurting the (presumably living) wielder, and vice versa for an undead wielder and living opponent?
5) Can/should the wielder be able to suppress the vicious effect or should it be obligatory on every hit?

 

[Kraydak]

I have some questions about the magic weapon property known as...
1) Is it fair to assume this damage is of the negative energy type, given the prereq spell enervation? if not what kind of damage is it?
2) Would deathward protect against this extra damage?
3) Does it seem reasonable to assume that if the wielder or target is unaffected by the damage that neither takes damage since there is no "resonance" between them?
4) Would striking an undead creature actually heal it while hurting the (presumably living) wielder, and vice versa for an undead wielder and living opponent?
5) Can/should the wielder be able to suppress the vicious effect or should it be obligatory on every hit?

1) RAW, untyped. As such:
2) No
4) No

3) It would be a reasonable house, in part because it is unlikely to come up as the damage is untyped.
5) The Flaming/Shock etc... line of enchantments mention activation/deactivation. Vicious doesn't. Hope you can take it.

 

[Thurbane]

1) Is it fair to assume this damage is of the negative energy type, given the prereq spell enervation? if not what kind of damage is it?
2) Would deathward protect against this extra damage?
3) Does it seem reasonable to assume that if the wielder or target is unaffected by the damage that neither takes damage since there is no "resonance" between them?
4) Would striking an undead creature actually heal it while hurting the (presumably living) wielder, and vice versa for an undead wielder and living opponent?
5) Can/should the wielder be able to suppress the vicious effect or should it be obligatory on every hit?

1) I rule that the damage inflicted is of the same type as the base weapon (slashing, bludgeoning etc.) and the damage inflicted to the wielder is untyped.
2) As above, no.
3) I would say the wielder takes damage regardless of the effectiveness of the vicious weapon on the foe.
4) No, as above.
5) Interesting question - I'd be inclined to say that like the Merciful enhancement, it can be turned off at will.

 

[Thurbane]

One of the main problems of making the damage negative-type is that if you have an undead wielding the weapon, he is suddenly gaining 1d6 healing every attack.

Imagine a high level vampire fighter getting 3d6 damage back every round in addition to his fast healing!

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

I'd say RAW its untyped, but as a HR, the DM could have as many variants of it as he wants...flaming, force, sonic, negative energy, etc., with all appropriate side effects & defenses each type connotes.

Even if that did mean that the vampire fighter was getting HP by using it.

As for turning it off...I'd say that's a hard "No"- "Merciful" may be merciful, but "Vicious" is vicious!

Kind of like playing Black in M:tG- No pain, no gain!

 

[Arkhandus]

I have some questions about the magic weapon property known as...
1) Is it fair to assume this damage is of the negative energy type, given the prereq spell enervation? if not what kind of damage is it?
2) Would deathward protect against this extra damage?
3) Does it seem reasonable to assume that if the wielder or target is unaffected by the damage that neither takes damage since there is no "resonance" between them?
4) Would striking an undead creature actually heal it while hurting the (presumably living) wielder, and vice versa for an undead wielder and living opponent?
5) Can/should the wielder be able to suppress the vicious effect or should it be obligatory on every hit?

1) No. The weapon ability doesn't specify. It's just 'disruptive energy'. Every effect in D&D that channels negative energy specifies the NE aspect somewhere in its' description, but Vicious does not, so it uses no negative energy. The prerequisite does not directly affect the magic weapon ability.
2) Nope. The weapon quality doesn't say it's negative energy, so Death Ward is no help against it.
3) No. It says nothing about that, and the resonance between them just means that the flash of energy strikes both attacker and defender. It doesn't say the energy is drawn from either or that it goes from one to the other. So no dice.
4) Nope. Not negative energy, so no difference with undead or living targets.
5) You can't choose. Unlike Flaming or similar properties, Vicious does not mention having an activation or using a command. Therefore it's just automatic. You don't wanna get zapped by your Vicious weapon, you use a different weapon.

 

[eamon]

It's not negative energy, the damage cannot be suppressed or prevented by any means - certainly not deathward. Undead are damaged (also if wielding the weapon) normally. If nevertheless somehow the wielder cannot take the damage, then the extra damage is also not dealt to the opponent (but I can't see how this can happen). This extra damage is not reduced by any damage reduction (but probably would be by hardness for those very,very few creatures that have that, should you choose to allow that) or energy resistance.

 

[Sejs]

The whole point of a vicious weapon is that while it deals a great deal of harm to your foe, you can't avoid being injured as well.

The 'disruptive energy' damage it deals is untyped.

That is intentional.

 

[Magus Coeruleus]

The whole point of a vicious weapon is that while it deals a great deal of harm to your foe, you can't avoid being injured as well.

The 'disruptive energy' damage it deals is untyped.

That is intentional.

Of course. The questions really centered around whether it implicitly has a type such that some targets would be unaffected or affected differently. The point wasn't to come up with a way for the wielder to avoid damage since I don't think it could work in any event unless both are affected.

 

[Magus Coeruleus]

Thanks to all for your thoughts. Very helpful. One of my players wants to get that enchantment placed on his sword so I wanted to consider all of the ramifications before saying yes.

Cheers,
MC