Weapon Upkeep

[Ambaryerno]

Before you start flaming, please bear in mind I'm posting this as someone who plays a pure warrior that must rely entirely on his weapons and doesn't have the handy ability to turn slavering monsters into piles of ash with a simple gesture.

ANYWAY, I've seen the concept of Weapon Upkeep being introduced as a Gold Sink before, and randomly did some brainstorming on the possibilities:

1) After a successful attack, melee weapons lose one "hit point." After losing so many hit points, the weapon incurs a -1 penalty to attack. IE, a longsword with no enchantments or enhancement bonus made of iron has 100hp. A -1 penalty to damage is incurred ever 25pts lost.

2) ANY weapon with magical properties, (Enhancement Bonus, On-Hit Effects, Keen, etc.) or made of a material other than basic (so, Alchemical Silver, Mithral, etc.) would increase the number of "hit points" for the weapon, and the number of hit points that must be lost before a penalty is incurred. This could be made to vary on the property. IE, a regular greatsword has 150hp and loses 1 damage every 30pts lost. A greatsword +1 has 180hp, and loses 1 damage every 36pts. +2 has 210, and loses 1 damage every 42pts, etc.

3) This will NOT extend to the weapon breaking. We don't want players who spent 20,000 gold on that +3 Greatsword having an aneurism when it breaks. Furthermore, the weapon should never be rendered completely unusable. The amount of "hit points" to the weapon, and how far it can be degraded can vary by the type of dice used for the damage roll. IE, a longsword--1d8--has 100 hit points and can incur up to a -4 penalty (or 1 point every 25 damage). A shortsword--1d6--has 60 hit points and can uncur up to a -3 penalty (1pt every 20).

4) Any of the smithies (IE, Maltz, Thunderhammer, and the Nashkell smithy) can instantly restore the weapon to its normal state for a fee. This fee can scale based on the amount of repair work needed, and the number and type of enchantments on the weapon (IE, a regular longsword will be less expensive to maintain than a +2 Mithral longsword with +1d4 lightning damage).

5) Characters can buy a whetstone to use on weapons that inflict slashing or piercing damage. This would be a usable that functions like a Heal Kit, repairing X amount of damage to the weapon when used. The amount can be modified by the character's Craft Weapon skill (Hey, a use for Craft Weapon!) IE, a sword is at 70pts. A whetstone by itself repairs 10pts of item damage. The character has a Craft Weapon skill of 15. When using the whetstone, he would repair 25pts of damage on the weapon.

6) A similar usable can be designed for bludgeoning weapons.

7) Whether a weapon can be maintained by the character can be determined by his Craft Weapon skill. IE, a basic weapon could be repaired at 5 ranks, but a weapon with particularly powerful enchantments may require ranks of 25 or more.

[catcher]

all hail greater magic weapon

[Bulldog241]

I would up those numbers dramatically. At 3 attacks per round, 25 hp would take 8 rounds to burn through. 4 rounds for a 6 attack per round epic fighter. I personally would hate to have to stop every monster to re-sharpen my sword, it would become tedium incarnate.

1,000 hp would be far more reasonable for a basic weapon.

Though personally, I wouldn't be a big fan of this idea. I give it a "meh".

[Hydrocarbonated]

Maybe it's just me, but I don't see that this is actually going to add anything to RP... it's just another kick in the nuts for people who don't play casters.

[Molag__Bal]

*Holds his nuts, and nods*

[Bulldog241]

*Holds his nuts, and nods*

bah! We all know you where holding them even before you read Hydro's post.

[Ambaryerno]

Maybe it's just me, but I don't see that this is actually going to add anything to RP... it's just another kick in the nuts for people who don't play casters.

Personally, I'd LOVE to see Mages and Sorcerers have to actually RESEARCH spells and write them into their spell books, rather than automatically gaining them on level up (IE, how the original Baldur's Gate worked: You had to find a scroll and scribe it into your spell book to learn it). I'd like to see Clerics who have to RP learning a new spell from their Deity, and Warlocks learning invocations from whatever fiend they made their pact with rather than automatically gain them on level up.

For that matter, I'd absolutely LOVE it if Warlock wasn't allowed as a starting class, and players had to actually RP seeking out a demon and making the pact before they were able to take Warlock levels (IIRC, Stormlord is already handled this way, isn't it?).

But I'm sure there's never a chance in hell of seeing such tweaks.

[Xanfyrst]

Don't like any of your ideas. I'm playing this game for recreation, not getting more stressed than I already am.

[Thorsson]

Couldn't agree more. More rules and goldsinks are not what we want or need. These are magical weapons, kept magically sharp. It's a Fantasy, not a Medieval Reality, RPG. Those who want the latter should go and find a suitable game instead of trying to turn D&D into some sort of quasi-realistic mish-mash.

[FallzQuick]

magical weapons are hard to break... this might work for mundane and only if they had 1000 hp.

[magus_taliesin]

Even mundane weapons are hard to break when used for their intended purpose. Well crafted weapons need very little upkeep, except for sharpening. They break on rare occasions when used improperly (a sword to bash down a door) and don't suffer much damage under normal use. If realism is the OPs intent then this isn't it.

As for spellcasters, clerics don't learn spells, I hate warlocks, and wizards learning two new spells at a new level is how D&D pretty much always worked. If Baldur's Gate didn't do that then they were off (I thought they did but it's been awhile). It is explained like this. Wizards are usually given a spellbook by their teacher or mentor, full of spells from which they can only cast a few. When they study they aren't only memorizing their spells, but they are studying the other spells in the book. As they study, and gain experience, from time to time (when they achieve a new level) they suddenly have an aha moment. That spell they have been trying to understand finally clicks, it makes sense, and they can now add it to their repertoire.

We can get into all kinds of custom rules and such that would be much more useful and add to the world. I personally don't think this would be it. Why not push for recoverable missiles, arrows don't always break, and thrown weapons rarely do. Couple ways it could be handled, percentage chance that the missile is in the drops from the monster they killed, or percentage chance that the inventory number is adjusted on the attacker's end.

[Amal'launim]

Why do you hate the DnD rules?

Page 178-179 in the Player's Handbook doesn't seem to agree with you. I'm not sure what rules you are looking at but here's a quote:

Spells gained at a new level: Wizards perform a certain amount of spell research between adventures. Each time a character attain a new wizard level, she gains two spells of her choice to add to her spell book

Source: Player's Handbook, page 178-179

Mentors does 'not' provide a spell book to their apprentices, they're darn well expensive those books. It costs "Spell Level x 100gp" to scribe a spell. 100gp is a lot in the setting of DnD, what you're talking about is providing a book worth several thousand gold pieces. I don't believe any sane mentor would just 'hand' that to their apprentice on the first day. Or the second day. They'll get to write their own book over the course of several years where the mentor provide the material costs bit by bit as they work to earn their keep.

[magus_taliesin]

What about my post indicates that I hate DnD rules? What about the quote provided disproves what I said about how wizards gain new spells? I don't remember where I read it, nor do I have a handy quote at hand. It is a viable explanation, especially if playing in a campaign where wizards do not have access to magical research. The party I am running right now is on a world spanning adventure with no time to stop and study spells.

The idea that cost would prohibit this holds no water, based on real world examples as much as fantasy world anecdotes. It costs tens of thousands of dollars to train a U.S. Soldier, and some of them are given equipment that costs Billions. Some companies spend thousands training new employees, with no indication that they will see a return on that investment.

As for wizards and their training, it is assumed that they start with a certain number of spells, spells they had to learn from something. This makes the assumption that teachers have books, scrolls, time, and money to invest in said teaching. It is not a far leap to think they might have a dusty old spellbook laying around that they teach from, and when the wizard leaves the tutelage it could easily be gifted to the young mage.

It is a reasonable explanation for a vague paragraph in the PHB. It doesn't say that the 'research between adventures' doesn't come from books they already have with them, or books that were given to them. Either way both our arguments knock down the notion that wizards SHOULDN'T gain new spells at new levels as proposed by an earlier poster.

[c2k]

In regards to weapons upkeep, if you want to go down this route, forget weapon durability and just add Sunder. You would accomplish the same thing.

[Bulldog241]

I say monk hands should have a durability too! And when they get worn down, they go into a blacksmith to have their hands "re-sharpened".