Does my longsword +1 add bonuses to casting, if swords are my holy symbol?

Question

So I am playing a Paladin and with help from the DM a suitable god was chosen for the setting. Swords of all kinds are of particular importance to the god, so I was told any type of sword would double as my holy symbol, great!

With this in mind and after reading this question: Are there generic enchanted implements in D&D 5e?

If I find a longsword +1, would I also get the +1 bonus to spellcasting using it as my holy symbol?

Is that at all broken?

Answer 1

As @KhadaKuraki mentions, +X foci don’t really exist, but it seems sensible that a paladin, especially one worshiping a god who is centered on swords, might have their sword function as the holy symbol equivalent of a wand of the war mage.

Personally, I would do that – but it’d be a +X weapon and a +Y holy symbol, not necessarily the same value for each. So when you first got it, it would be a +1 weapon, and count as a holy symbol but with no extra frills. Then, “instead” of an uncommon item I might have otherwise given you, I’d have the sword become a +1 holy symbol as well, so at that point it’s +1 for both. I’d then probably alternate between improving the weapon aspects and the holy symbol aspects of the sword.

This is useful because it means I don’t have to worry about “doubling up” on the rewards you get. If both increased together, I might hesitate to give you an increase, where I would if it was just the weapon improving. It also allows me to give different bonuses to the holy symbol, rather than the one offered by wand of the war mage, without basically making it a combination wand of the war mage and whatever other bonuses I put on it.

Answer 2

Maybe.

Using a sword as a spell foci is a house ruling by your DM and so the answer to this question ultimately falls to him/her, but to try and get as close to RAW as possible...

If the sword is your holy symbol, then it can be used as your spell foci. PHB 151:

[...] A cleric or paladin can use a holy symbol as a spellcasting focus [...]

There is no entry in the DMG for +X generic spell foci, staffs, or wands (see relevant question here). The closest entry I can find along these lines is Wand of the War Mage (DMG 212) which states:

Wand, uncommon (+1), rare (+2), or very rare (+3) (requires attunement by a spellcaster)

While holding this wand, you gain a bonus to spell attack rolls determined by the wand's rarity. In addition, you ignore half cover when making a spell attack.

So there is at least a precedent for +X spell foci granting +X to attack rolls.

You DM would likely rule that you get +X to attack rolls for spells once you are level 2 (which is when a Paladin receives spellcaster status). Or they might rule that you have to acquire a separate +X holy symbol to get +X to attack rolls for spells (though this would make less sense in my opinion).

Would it be broken for you to get +X to attack rolls? I wouldn't say so, though it's very convenient for you. It's the same statistical advantage as having a +1 sword and a +1 holy symbol (necklace), but without the time/effort of acquiring two magical items (which isn't trivial). Any bonuses beyond the attack roll and I'd say it's giving too much. I would want a Wizard PC with a Wand of the War Mage to at least think 'my spells get to ignore half cover, yours don't' when comparing their wand to your sword (don't laugh, don't laugh, don't laugh...)

Answer 3

If I find a longsword +1, would I also get the +1 bonus to spellcasting using it as my holy symbol?

No.

Paladin has Spellcasting Focus which states: "You can use a holy symbol as a spellcasting focus for your paladin spells."

The focus has a very specific use (PHB 203):

A character can use a component pouch or spellcasting focus in place of the components specified for a spell.

Using your sword as a holy symbol simply means that you don't need to use any specific material components for spells as long as you have your sword in hand. Regardless of that swords "magicness".

Is that at all broken?

As an uncommon weapon? Yes. As a rare weapon? No.

• A +1 Weapon (uncommon) grants a +1 to attack and damage with that weapon. (DMG 213)
• A +1 Wand of the War Mage (uncommon) grants a +1 to spell attacks and allows those attacks to ignore half cover. (DMG 212)

As you're describing the Sword, you're kind of mushing these two items together to make something more powerful than just an Uncommon item. So it technically is overpowered.

Work arounds

• If you wanted a "Sword of the War Mage": +1 atk/dmg & +1 spell atk & ignore half cover, that would be a legitimate Rare weapon.
• If your sword granted a +1 to both regular and spell attacks but you dropped the bonus to damage and the "ignores cover" ability, I think this would be a fair Uncommon weapon. It might be a little strong in the right hands, but definitely sub-optimal for others.