More On Magic Swords

After writing my previous post, I knew I was going to have to look at one of the more infamous magic items in D&D: the Cursed Sword.

Cursed Swords are a necessary staple of the dungeon delving genre, because it keeps players cautious about using any sword they find with a magical aura. Testing such swords against target dummies and in mock combat will reveal only that they are magical, and perform to expectations. When used in combat, however, they reveal their true natures (which is the least convenient time for them to do so).

In the Rules Cyclopedia, Cursed Swords are a result of a normal enchanted sword being generated, and then rolling a 1 or 2 on an additional d20 roll. This more or less means that the sword's +X becomes a -X to attack rolls and damage.

The 1e DMG takes a different approach to Cursed Swords, as there are three varieties:

1. The Sword +1, Cursed - This sword compels the wielder to fight opponents to the death. They cannot retreat or break off from combat. Worse, they cannot be rid of the sword by any mundane means. It cannot be dropped, and when combat begins, the sword teleports into its owner's hand. A cleric must exorcise the sword in order for the curse to lift.
2. The Sword -2, Cursed - Functions like the RC Cursed Sword, but is limited to -2 to attack rolls and damage. Like the Sword +1, Cursed, this one teleports into the users hand and forces them to wield it against all opponents. Only limited wish, wish, or alter reality can rid the unfortunate owner of this sword.
3. The Sword, Cursed Berserking - Probably the most dangerous cursed weapon, the Berserking Sword compels the wielder to attack the closest living creature and continue to fight until dead or until nothing lives within 60' of the wielder. It has a +2 bonus instead of +1, and acts in all other respects as a Sword +1, Cursed. It can only be gotten rid of through exorcism or wish.

What does this all have to do with my previously doing away with the +X bonuses? Well, if a normal enchanted sword can't have a bonus to attacks and damage, a cursed sword shouldn't have penalties to such either. Instead I propose the following:

• Cursed Swords roll two dice for damage, taking the lesser of the two results. On critical hits, Cursed Swords roll no additional dice. Cursed Swords compel their owners to prefer* them over other weapons, and their owners cannot bear to parted with them, and will try to recover the sword by any means should they be parted with it. As it is unlikely that the owner would give up the weapon willingly, they will fight anyone who tries to take it from them.
• Swords of Aggression function like normal enchanted swords, but they have the compulsion property of Cursed Swords. Swords of Aggression further compel their owner to fight opponents to the death, and they may not voluntarily break off or retreat from combat.
• Berserking Swords function as though a Sword of Aggression, but the owner is compelled to attack the closest living creature, and fight until death or until all living creatures within 60' are dead.

*By prefer, I mean that they will use the weapon to the exclusion of all others. They cannot be persuaded to use a different weapon (such as a crossbow if the party will be attempting an ambush from range), nor will they use a superior weapon if they posses one.

Depending on what version of D&D you're using, it might be necessary to use exorcism, limited wish, wish, or alter reality to free an owner of a cursed sword from the weapon. The RC uses dispel evil and remove curse for this.

There are some magic items that defy my previous post's injunction against multiple Bane properties (AD&D 1e):

1. Sword +1, Flame Tongue, +2 vs. regenerating creatures, +3 vs. cold-using, inflammable creatures, +4 vs. undead. Personally, I think the weapon is too complicated to be used "at a glance" in combat, and it should be reduced to down to something like "Flame Tongue".
2. Sword +3, Frost Brand, +6 vs. fire-using /dwelling creatures. Same deal here, and should probably be reduced down to "Frost Brand".
3. Sword +4, Defender. It's fairly straightforward, but it would be better I think to make a "Defender" property, and leave it at that.
4. Sword +5, "Holy Avenger". I think these swords are going to be complicated no matter what if one is trying to preserve their flavor and intent.
5. Sword of Dancing. This version is very complex, and I think the "Dancing" property would be more like 3.5's version (I know, I know, boo).

 So, how would I change these to simpler, less complex versions?

• Flame Tongue: Flame Tongue swords grant an additional die of fire damage. On a critical hit, this damage is doubled (so, two dice of fire damage). Can be caused to burst into flame with a command word or phrase, shedding light like a torch. The aura of flame can ignite oil, burn webs, or set fire to paper, parchment, and dry wood.

Personally, I think that's better, more succinct, and since creatures like trolls already can't regenerate fire or acid damage, the Flame Tongue retains its usefulness against them. Creatures immune to fire damage simply ignore the extra die of fire damage.

• Frost Brand: A Frost Brand weapon grants an additional die of frost damage. On a critical hit, this damage is doubled (two dice of frost damage). It sheds no light, but the weapon is cold to the touch, and ice crystals may form on it. It acts as a ring of fire resistance and can extinguish fire in a 10' radius when thrust into them (this includes walls of fire).

Originally, the fire extinguishing power was a 50% chance, but all that really does is make players try it twice or even three times before it works. Simpler just to say the sword can and does extinguish fires.

• Defender: Defender weapons can be used as normal magic swords, or they can be used to defend their owner, sacrificing their "best of two" property. When Defending, the extra die is rolled on the owner's turn and counts as damage negation until their next turn when the die is rolled again. For example, if a 5 was rolled, 5 damage would be potentially negated that round. If a goblin attacks the example wielder and scores 3 damage, the damage negation would come into effect, and there would be 2 damage negation points remaining. If another foe attacked the wielder and scored 4 damage, only 2 points would be negated. The remaining 2 would go straight to HP, and any further successful attacks would also go straight to HP.

This might be more complicated than I meant to make it, but I felt damage reduction was too strong. What we have now is something like ablative armor or temporary hit points instead

• Holy Avenger: In the hands of ordinary warriors, Holy Avengers function as normal enchanted swords. In the hands of a paladin (or cleric, if you don't use paladins) Holy Avengers grant an additional die of damage against creatures of chaotic alignment (or chaotic and evil alignments, if you're using the 9 alignments). Additionally it grants its wielder 50% magic resistance and they can dispel magic in a 5' radius as a spellcaster of their experience level.

It's not really any different, the only changes are to account for games that are derivatives of Basic, since they don't generally use paladins or the 9 alignments. Yes, I know that name-level fighters in  the RC who are lawful become paladins.

• Dancing: A dancing weapon will fight on its own for five rounds and then return to the wielder. It must then be used in melee by the wielder for five rounds before it can fight on its own again. It fights at the same level and class as its owner.

The description in the 1e DMG is far, far more complex.

I may revisit this in another post. There's a lot of weapons that could benefit from simplification, but these are the "big" ones that commonly found and used by player characters.