27
\$\begingroup\$

I've got a character in my campaign who was lucky enough to snag a Rod of Lordly Might.

The snag is that she's a Hexblade Warlock, and she wants to use the Hex Warrior ability on the rod (basically get her CHA bonus on attack rolls)

Rod of Lordly Might

If you press button 1, the rod becomes a Flame Tongue as a fiery blade sprouts from the end opposite the rod's flanged head.

If you press button 2, the rod's flanged head folds down and two crescent-shaped blades spring out, transforming the rod into a magic Battleaxe that grants a +3 bonus to Attack and Damage Rolls made with it.

If you press button 3, the rod's flanged head folds down, a spear point springs from the rod's tip, and the rod's handle lengthens into a 6-foot haft, transforming the rod into a magic spear that grants a+3 bonus to Attack and Damage Rolls made with it.

My answer was, "No. It's a rod, not a weapon."

Her counter was, "What if I activate a form of the rod, then attune?"

My return answer was... "Uh, let me think about it."

My gut says, "Allow this, but as soon as the form of the rod changes, it's no longer a pact weapon."

But really the question is what's RAW?

(and yeah, I looked at Can the Rod of Pact Keeper +1 be selected as a pact weapon by a Pact of the Blade warlock?. Not exactly the same. This is a basic question of the primary Hex Warrior feature - XGE: page 55)

Improve this question
\$\endgroup\$
3
  • \$\begingroup\$ Is your question about turning the Rod into a pact weapon or about using the hex warrior feature on it? Your wording is a bit confusing. \$\endgroup\$
    – Szega
    Dec 21, 2018 at 9:50
  • 5
    \$\begingroup\$ It’s confusing as anything, but please note that the weapon you choose with Hex Warrior is not a pact weapon! See this answer for all the gory details. \$\endgroup\$
    – KRyan
    Dec 21, 2018 at 15:52
  • \$\begingroup\$ give your player a fist bump, this is an awesome idea :). \$\endgroup\$
    – CaptainBumbleFudge
    Aug 3, 2020 at 0:36

4 Answers 4

Reset to default
37
\$\begingroup\$

A rod can be a weapon too...and the Rod of Lordly Might is in fact a magic weapon

The Rod of Lordly Might has this text in its first paragraph:

This rod has a flanged head, and it functions as a magic mace that grants a +3 bonus to attack and damage rolls made with it.

So in it's "natural" form it is a weapon, and thus a target for the Hex Warrior ability.

Additionally there is another rod which is explicitly a weapon:

Tentacle Rod

Made by the drow, this rod is a magic weapon that ends in three rubbery tentacles.

So just because something is a Rod does not preclude it from being a weapon (or indeed a magic weapon)

If it's chosen as the Hex Weapon in its base form, is it still considered the Hex Weapon in its other forms?

The relevant text of Hex Warrior we need to consider is:

The influence of your patron also allows you to mystically channel your will through a particular weapon. Whenever you finish a long rest, you can touch one weapon that you are proficient with and that lacks the two-handed property.

So we have three possible questions to answer here:

  1. Is it still the same named weapon? (i.e. is it still the Rod of Lordly Might in its other forms)
  2. Is the user proficient with the new forms?
  3. Do the new forms lack the two handed property?

Is it still the same named weapon? (i.e. is it still the Rod of Lordly Might in its other forms)

Yes, it is still a weapon and it is still a Rod of Lordly Might. As such I'd rule that it is still the same weapon for the purposes of the Hex Warrior feature in each of its forms.

Is the user proficient with the new forms?

Yes the Hexblade warlock is proficient with martial weapons and as such is proficient with all the weapon forms the rod can take.

Do the new forms lack the two handed property?

None of the new forms have the two-handed property so they are all still valid Hexblade weapons.

So the answer to the final part of the puzzle is that yes it is still the same weapon for the purposes of the Hex Warrior feature in each of its weapon forms.

What about it's non-weapon forms?

In the event the warlock uses it's non-weapon forms, this DM wouldn't, from a fun in the game perspective, cause the ability to drop altogether from the item, but merely suppress it's effects. So the warlock wouldn't gain the benefit of their ability if they tried to use the ladder or battering ram options as a weapon, but they wouldn't have to reapply it after they changed it back either.

Improve this answer
\$\endgroup\$
11
  • \$\begingroup\$ It may—or may not—be worth noting that if the rod of lordly might did change into a two-handed weapon or some weapon that the warlock wasn’t proficient with, we would be left with an ambiguous case: it is not at all clear that effects stop on targets that become invalid after they’re targeted, and the requirements on Hex Warrior are only on what the weapon must be to choose it. It may well be that you could continue using it in such a case. But that’s purely hypothetical as far as I know; I don’t think there are any weapons that can do that. \$\endgroup\$
    – KRyan
    Dec 21, 2018 at 18:09
  • 4
    \$\begingroup\$ @SumofeDpi In the case of it turning into a non-weapon is a case I (intentionally) didn't deal with as in those case I would presume the warlock isn't going to be trying to use it as a weapon. I certainly wouldn't (from the perspective of fun in the game) rule that they had to reapply the feature to the Rod of Lordly Might each time they used a non-weapon form as that would just make the player never use those non-weapon forms (which takes away from the game imo) \$\endgroup\$
    – illustro
    Dec 21, 2018 at 19:43
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @enkryptor while it's can certainly be used as a contraction of it is, it doesn't have to exclusively be so (as pointed out in that link towards the end that it became non-standard). English as a language isn't a proscriptive one (vs French which is), it is descriptive, so there isn't a "correct" way to write all things or apply all rules of grammer. Where I grew up, "it's" was (and is) a perfectly acceptable way to indicate possession by an object. \$\endgroup\$
    – illustro
    Aug 24, 2021 at 10:45
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @Illustro Just a linguistics major here to friendlily point out that French is also not prescriptive (no language is). Casual speech and writing are full of "grammatical errors" according to what is taught for use in formal and academic settings, just like with English. It's an all but unavoidable fact of language use \$\endgroup\$
    – Exempt-Medic
    Aug 24, 2021 at 11:58
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @illustro Yes the Académie exists but it it wholly unable to enforce its rules, especially given the internet existing. English, similarly, has tried to have official institutions on how to properly use the language, though they failed outside of modern things like style guides and some rather out there dictionaries. There's will pretty much always be prescriptivists in English nonetheless telling you, supposedly with authority, that contractions are sin, that ending sentences with prepositions is a grave mistake, and that the passive voice should be taught solely so it can be avoided \$\endgroup\$
    – Exempt-Medic
    Aug 24, 2021 at 12:17
10
\$\begingroup\$

Why not let them have it?

RAW, the Rod functions as a magic mace. If the Hexblade wants to use it as the target of his hexblade effect, then it can function as a magic mace for that effect (ref: illustro's answer). Additionally, you can push buttons and transform it into other weapons, which are all valid targets. That part is pretty straightforward.

The real question is whether attaching the effect to the mace form lets you then use the other weapons without changing the effect target. It's not clear, as the Hexblade rules don't account for targeting a weapon that then transforms into a different weapon. It's going to have to be your call. I would suggest that you allow it, though.

Doing otherwise strips away some of the awesome that the Rod of Lordly Might is supposed to have. The intent of the rod is that it's a magical item that lets you swap between weapon forms as needed. Having the Hexblade thing work poorly with that effectively removes a chunk of that.

Letting them have the full range doesn't lead to any major balance issues. They still don't get more than one weapon at a time (and therefore can't dual wield). It doesn't let them have access to any weapons that are more powerful than the weapons they'd have access to anyway. At that point, it's basically a ribbon. If they were overpowered with it, they'd be overpowered without it.

So, if they get to have more awesome to play with (good!) and it doesn't really make them notably more powerful (potentially important) then the only thing left to worry about is the potential spotlight distribution issues. It's true that having access to a fully operational Rod of Lordly Might is likely to give them a bit more spotlight, and that's something to watch out for... but it's also something you can fix by consciously adjusting who get's the attention, without having to limit a PC's Awesome Thing.

Improve this answer
\$\endgroup\$
2
  • 4
    \$\begingroup\$ Absolutely agreed, and the most important point. But it might be worth pointing out that despite changing form, the rod of lordly might is still the same object you chose with Hex Warrior in the first place, so there is no real reason to suspect that changing form would break the effect. (Also, probably should avoid the word “attune”—Hex Warrior doesn’t use it, and it means something rather different in the context of magic items.) \$\endgroup\$
    – KRyan
    Dec 21, 2018 at 15:55
  • \$\begingroup\$ @KRyan Valid point. Wording changed. \$\endgroup\$
    – Ben Barden
    Dec 21, 2018 at 18:04
8
\$\begingroup\$

Your gut is correct.

Per the Hexblade's "Hex Warrior" skill:

The influence of your patron also allows you to mystically channel your will through a particular weapon. Whenever you finish a long rest, you can touch one weapon that you are proficient with and that lacks the two-handed property. When you attack with that weapon, you can use your Charisma modifier, instead of Strength or Dexterity, for the attack and damage rolls. This benefit lasts until you finish a long rest.

The Rod itself is a weapon, and clicking buttons makes it into a completely different weapon. Every day, the Hexblade can channel, or otherwise declare, the specific form of the weapon as their hex weapon.

So wake up and say, "Flame Tongue, I choose you." Then so long as the Rod is in Flame Tongue form, it works as a Hex weapon. But the other forms act as normal.

The caster just can't change on a whim. It has to be after a long rest.

Improve this answer
\$\endgroup\$
2
  • 5
    \$\begingroup\$ The Rod itself is a magic weapon (explicitly by its text). Additionally, just because something is a Rod doesn't mean it is not a weapon. See my answer for more details. \$\endgroup\$
    – illustro
    Dec 21, 2018 at 13:39
  • 3
    \$\begingroup\$ And in any event, you act as though transforming the rod of lordly might results in an entirely separate object, which is preposterous. This is still the same object, the same weapon, that was originally chosen with Hex Warrior. Of course the benefit would still apply. \$\endgroup\$
    – KRyan
    Dec 21, 2018 at 15:56
-8
\$\begingroup\$

No

You can transform one Magic Weapon into your pact weapon …

No matter how you use it the Rod of Lordly Might remains a Rod, not a Magic Weapon.

Or ...

The influence of your patron also allows you to mystically channel your will through a particular weapon.

A rod is a rod, not a weapon.

Improve this answer
\$\endgroup\$
2
  • 7
    \$\begingroup\$ I would beg to differ. The wording of the item states that the rod "becomes a Flame Tongue" and "transforms" into the other weapons. That would indicate that it is no longer a rod, but one of the three weapons. \$\endgroup\$
    – MivaScott
    Dec 21, 2018 at 8:39
  • 11
    \$\begingroup\$ As pointed out in my answer the Rod of Lordly Might is explicitly a magic weapon in its base form. So your first paragraph is wrong. \$\endgroup\$
    – illustro
    Dec 21, 2018 at 13:37

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .