Do magic bonuses stack with fine weapon bonuses?

[Petrovski101]

I've tried googling this answer and reading the rules but I haven't had much luck finding information about weapon enchantments on weapons crafted by a master armorer. Maybe I just missed it in the rules...

I'm aware of the rule of 5 as it pertains to the total magic bonus (DEX bonus + DMG bonus). Does this also apply if the weapon already has a DEX bonus and/or DMG bonus due to weapon quality?

If it is up to the GM, I'm inclined to allow it... but I'm not very experienced with TFT's game engine. I've only just started rereading the rules after a 40 year hiatus. Does anyone believe combining mundane and magic bonuses to be broken?

Any help appreciated...

Thanks,

Pete

[larsdangly]

This is a really good question. There is a passage in the rules on Attribute Enhancing Items (a greater magic item) that indicates total DX bonus from all magical sources can't exceed 5 (though, strictly speaking, it only clearly states that the total of an Attribute Enhancing enchantment + another source can't exceed 5, so no limit is placed on the total of 2 or more other sources). You can find another passage that says the highest bonus applies rather than adding, though I can't recall the context. Finally, it says you cant use attribute enhancers to raise final adjusted DX for an action above 14 (though this includes penalties from armor and perhaps other things). Frankly, it is all pretty confusing, and says nothing about adding fine weapon and magic enhancements. So, you will get answers that provide opinions, but they won't be definitive rulings.

Personally, I think magic and fine weapon bonuses should stack.

Edit: the magic item rules can 'break' a game if you permit one side to have very high bonus items and other side doesn't. Typically, that means Monty Haul distribution to players while NPCs and monsters go without. If you play TFT this way, PCs can be nearly invincible. But if this happens, the GM is to blame. The RAW governing the creation, prices and market availability of fine and magic weapons are actually pretty limiting. In my campaign, I don't hand out much in the way of magic items as treasure, little is available for direct purchase, and players often undertake their own enchantments to get the things they want. No one is going to bust open the rule of 5 very soon in a game like that. But, if you like games where PCs are extremely geared up, you can do it. And if that's fun for everyone, go for it!

[Axly Suregrip]

Hi Petrovski,
I would say there is nothing in the rules against it. I would say it is recommended. Let me explain.

Short answer: rule of 5 governs enchantments alone, not if the weapon is a fine weapon. So, yes they stack.

With armor enchantments, a +1 enchantment is in addition to the armor. If the armor is fine plate, it is in addition to that resulting in a -7 armor, not instead of it. There likewise for weapons. If an enchantment is cast upon a very fine +2 damage sword, it is raised to a +3. The rules for enchanting spell sites the rule of 5, but this is a rule that governs enchantment, not the quality of the materials that is enchanted. So, yes you can have a very fine +2 sword with a +5 enchantment.

The reasons I say it is recommended:

- the enchantments costs (time and money to do so) are all listed assuming the previous enchantment. That is, to cast a +3 enchantment on a sword, you must already have a sword with a +2 enchantment on it. So, getting to +3 or +4 by enchantment alone would take a lot.

- very fine weapons that do +2 damage are much harder to break. Given you (or some wizard) want to make the effort to enhance a weapon, he would want it to last and not just break on average after 216 swings. See ITL page 123.

[Petrovski101]

It seems there's nothing in the rules against combining enchantments with fine quality weapons.

As a new TFT GM, I'd like to know what is typically seen for weapon bonuses in your typical game (if such a thing exists). Is it common to see +1 to hit, +7 damage magic swords or is that merely the stuff of legends?

My primary concern is "breaking" the game by letting weapon bonuses get out of hand.

I haven't crunched the numbers yet so maybe the $ value of fine, enchanted weapons at this level of power make their existence exceedingly rare.

[Axly Suregrip]

I allow fine weapons and armor to be purchased and available. NPCs will also sometimes have fine weapons/armor.

I allow magic weapons and items to be created. No one has taken that up.

For purchase, only potions and scrolls are available. Or at the rare village with a wizard capable of weapon enchantments (no cities in my world, so even weapon enchanting is rare) this can be arranged but at triple the going rate. Bring your own weapon. BYOW. The locals in that case may have some +1 enchanted weapons. Oh and even if you had the cash for a +2,+3,etc you may not find a village with enough wizards capable as each additional +1 takes addition wizards capable of casting it. So, I keep a cap on it and magic weapons are rare.

[TippetsTX]

While it might be unclear from the rules, I would recommend caution in stacking too many bonuses. The range of possible die roll results in TFT are very sensitive to modifiers, much more than D&D and other RPGs. Excluding the occasional powerful monster, most of your common opponents won't have ST higher than 15 so a weapon with +7 to damage would be extremely powerful, certainly more powerful than I would want in my campaign.

[phiwum]

Originally Posted by Petrovski101

It seems there's nothing in the rules against combining enchantments with fine quality weapons.

As a new TFT GM, I'd like to know what is typically seen for weapon bonuses in your typical game (if such a thing exists). Is it common to see +1 to hit, +7 damage magic swords or is that merely the stuff of legends?

My primary concern is "breaking" the game by letting weapon bonuses get out of hand.

I haven't crunched the numbers yet so maybe the $ value of fine, enchanted weapons at this level of power make their existence exceedingly rare.

It seems to me most of the folks here are loathe to introduce powerful magic, since it becomes a problem of inflation. The next scenario, the opponents have to be buffed and the easy way to do that is give them magic goodies.

In the labyrinth I'd like to play next, there's one magic dagger (+1DX, +1dam) that applies its bonus only in HTH and there's one fine Broadsword. I included one arrow with Clumsiness on it. I think that's it for special weapons.

I've tried to add useful but not overpowering magic. One treasure (that will likely be overlooked) is a bag of softly glowing powder and a brush. When the brush is dipped in the powder and painted on a wall, you're left with a softly glowing wall. There's not enough powder to light up a room, but plenty to track where you've been and leave messages. (In fact, there's no reason this has to be magical at all, but I've decided it is, partly so the delvers recognize it's worth investigating.)

[Skarg]

Originally Posted by Petrovski101

It seems there's nothing in the rules against combining enchantments with fine quality weapons.

As a new TFT GM, I'd like to know what is typically seen for weapon bonuses in your typical game (if such a thing exists). Is it common to see +1 to hit, +7 damage magic swords or is that merely the stuff of legends?

My primary concern is "breaking" the game by letting weapon bonuses get out of hand.

I haven't crunched the numbers yet so maybe the $ value of fine, enchanted weapons at this level of power make their existence exceedingly rare.

* Fine and enchanted weapon effects do stack.

* Since enchantments are expensive and rare, it tends to makes sense to enchant fine weapons rather than ordinary weapons (assuming fine weapons are available).

* Magic weapons and other magic items can easily overshadow the abilities of characters if they become common in a campaign.

* Magic items can tend to get out of control in a lasting campaign unless they are rare and access to them is limited by much more than the base listed prices. PCs will tend to accumulate them, never let go of them, and if they can buy new ones, cash in the ones they accumulate to get really powerful ones. So even if you think you're "only" making a few limited items available to loot, if the PCs keep surviving and can easily cash them in and buy whatever they want, for the listed prices, their equipment will soon make them able to fairly easily overpower most normal people in the game world. The balance and focus can shift away from tactics, numbers, and hard-earned abilities, to who has the best toys getting more and more powerful.

* +4 and +5 enchanted weapons shouldn't be common at all. They're expensive and require a lot of enchanter time to make. The demand for them from wealthy and powerful people would tend to be high, driving up the price and rarity further.


After a couple of years experiencing playing with magic items pretty available, I adjusted the expense and availability of magic items a lot.

I reinterpreted the costs so that the base cost for W/A Enchantment, taking into account for example that getting more than one or two enchanters at a time to be available to work on an adventurer's project is probably not often available, and since if you don't have enough enchanters available, that multiplies the time to enchant, and there may only be so many labs available, which the enchanters may wish to charge for, then even if you can find some enchanters, the lab costs should probably be added in.

Also because of market forces, enchanters would realize that magic items, especially ones that appeal to many powerful people, such as enchanted weapons and armor, are no doubt sellable for rather more than the listed price, and in terms of both money and favor from powerful people (see the Selling Magic Items section of ITL for a taste of that, but I take it further for something like magic weapons, since princes and governments are in the market for them).

That is, if a enchanters make a rare and desirable magic item, and could either charge the minimal list price for it, or auction it and let the most powerful and wealthy people in the community know it was available, which would they logically do?

Can't the PCs do exactly the same thing with all the looted magic they have? If the GM wants to indulge that fantasy, sure. But I don't think it should tend to work, both for balance and play/fun reasons, and also for logical and cultural reasons. Partly because adventurers aren't merchants, and even if a PC has Business Sense, and they probably don't have the same established business and social connections that the Wizard's Guild does, and in fact the Wizard's Guild and the local government may well use its legal/social/market/actual powers to regulate/dominate magic item sales. And even if the PCs do have an accepted trade position to sell magic items not at a market disadvantage, someone like a prince or guild master is in a position to bid not just money but money and other types of favor that can't be bought but that has great real value to sellers.

For example, if you're a respectable established magic item trader who as something for sale, and you can sell it either to a scruffy adventurer, or to a Guildmaster or local prince or high priest or other local high-status person with the ability to ongoingly make your life either much more or less pleasant/profitable/safe, which are you liable to prefer?

So not only would PCs find themselves at a disadvantage in buying and selling magic items, but when they do sell magic items, they might find that part of the reward is not cash but some sort of in-kind favors from powerful people. Which not only helps avoid a Monty Haul revolving door arms race situation, but also can lead to rather interesting adventure/campaign situations.


And even with all that in play, after a few more years' play, magic items were still dominating play, which we didn't like because the PCs and their allies and worthy foes were so much more powerful than others and none of us liked the results. Magic items were overshadowing the rest of the game and making the game balance more about comparing magic toy collections than people, situations and tactics.

So we came up with elaborate magic item breakdown house rules that had people carefully choosing when to use magic items or not, instead of always using everything.

[Petrovski101]

I don't want magic items to eclipse other aspects of the game... I plan to keep them on a short leash.

I don't have the play experience to revamp magic item creation costs. Instead, I will rely on GM "hand-wavium" to manage it.

Thanks all for the great feedback.

Pete

[Dominator]

Originally Posted by Skarg

...
After a couple of years experiencing playing with magic items pretty available, I adjusted the expense and availability of magic items a lot.
...

Thank you for these considerations, good stuff.