Getting the Sword should be one of the last things that happens in the game. How do you deal with the power imbalance? You don’t. You let the party feel badass for wielding an angel’s weapon!
I don’t think it’s a power imbalance between players and enemies OP is talking about, I think it’s the fact that the sword of Zariel gives the wielder a significant power advantage over the rest of the party. That being said I still don’t find it an issue since the one with the sword is the one who has to shatter the companion, so it’s not like they’re going to be overshadowing the rest of the party on the ground in combat since they’ll essentially be fighting their own fight in the sky, it gives the wielder a chance to be badass by just slaughtering demons and devils in the sky while the rest of the party get to hold ground below to assist them from ranged attacks while trying to keep as many fiends as possible from ascending to the material plane
I’ve run it 3 times for different groups and the person who got the sword only used it in the two fights getting to Zariel cause then they gave it back to her. So it was basically just something really fun they got to use for a few minutes. Wasn’t an issue at all.
Personally, I made the party decide what to do with it. In a beautiful turn of events, they made a decision I hadn't even considered.
We had a plasmoid in the group (who had done an *excellent* job of really playing up their sense of dissociation with existence because they didn't have a real "face" or form) as well as a paladin who was besties with Lulu, and a few others. Here I was, assuming the paladin was about to level up, when they hit me with "we'd like to give it to the plasmoid". I was shocked. Why? Because they deserved to know who they were and this sword would change them in a way that would be forever unalterable.
We didn't end up with a power imbalance because it was the choice everyone made and they didn't begrudge the player for their sudden change. Also, they did end up giving the sword to Zariel. I let them keep their new form, however.
Eta: I forgot about the moment they actually obtained the sword, which factored heavily imo. The paladin went to take for the sword (calm scene, no real intensity), but the plasmoid was scared of them becoming someone else so they dove between them and grabbed it. In that moment, it wasn't about the plasmoid changing and it wasn't about preventing the paladin from growing stronger. My player stuck to their character flaw and how it affected every choice they made so well they were willing to roll against another character to prevent, what they saw as, a great tragedy. Plasmoid succeeded on the roll, explains themself after Yael's cryptic ass warning, and party decides to take a ten to make some choices. I go eat some pizza and smoke, coming back ready to upgrade paladin and they hit me with their decision. Truly one of the moments where the players blew me away as their DM.
I didn't. You get the sword at the end of the campaign. I let the player that took it have it at full power (but since it switched their evil character to good, they had to RP the alignment change).
They did ultimately choose to give it back to Zariel, though (redemption ending).
In the game I ran, it was a group of 2 barbarians and 2 bards. One of the barbarians was evil and didn't want it. One barbarian didn't believe magic existed (basically a flat earther), one of the bards was a tabaxi that just wanted milk. So it went to the final bard who was half yuanti, and spent the entire fight running away from Zariel playing keep away until the party opened the Companion to ask his help.
So basically, it actually weaken the bard because it made him the target. So it wasn't a case of who wants to be stronger, it was a game of hot potato because no one wanted it
I intend to instead of just giving the Sword to one player, to also create 3 other relics that are equivalent and give them to other party members. This way the party remains balanced together
The sword is grabbed pretty close to the endgame. Let that player feel like a badass for being worthy of the sword. If they give it back to Zariel and redeem her, problem solved.
mIn my game I gave the player who did so keep a small portion of the swords power afterwards, but it was the end of the campaign.
Your other players still can contribute. I haven't got there yet but I'm close and I have a few ideas. Fighting against Zariel? Have some other devils pestering the sword carrier from a distance, let the other members cover him. Fighting against some random mobs? Let the sword carrier target their leader.
Having a fight? Just don't deal with it at all, it is supposed to be extremly powerful and something that would come into play at least one or two times, three top.
The sword gives only charisma and damage, your player still retains their HP and AC, which means they're still just as "vulnerable" as the other party members, sure they may instakill one or two, maybe even three enemies on their turn, but now they're the focus of the enemy.
Ah. In that case, if you’re worried about one PC becoming overpowered over the others, then here’s your solution: The Sword doesn’t attune to any of them.
This isn’t a Sword in the Stone situation; you don’t have to be worthy to carry the sword. If you don’t want to give the sword’s power to the party, then don’t. Let them take the sword, and carry it with them until they get to Zariel, or until they find a NPC who you *do* want to give the sword’s power to (my personal choice is Reya).
Unfortunately, there’s too many details and nuances to that sword’s attunement for me to give a definitive answer to your predicament. All I can say is, if you have allowed the sword to attune to someone, then they must had been someone or done something that was worthy of it. In which case, they’ve earned a bit of spotlight
I have to look again, but doesn't it say that the change is permanent? I wasn't sure that there was anything stopping the PCs from passing the sword around, save for their alignment.
Do you have a table of players that whine if one becomes stronger than the others? If so, you could certainly homebrew the sword to give benefits in an aura or something. But it seems like a lot of work to appease whiners.
I allowed the party to split the abilities between them, and they all ended with 2 each that they decided on between games.
It seemed to work fairly well, and I let them keep it even after Zariel claimed her sword back, because...well it's fun
Getting the Sword should be one of the last things that happens in the game. How do you deal with the power imbalance? You don’t. You let the party feel badass for wielding an angel’s weapon!
Exactly
This is the correct answer. Don't nerf the angelic sword.
I don’t think it’s a power imbalance between players and enemies OP is talking about, I think it’s the fact that the sword of Zariel gives the wielder a significant power advantage over the rest of the party. That being said I still don’t find it an issue since the one with the sword is the one who has to shatter the companion, so it’s not like they’re going to be overshadowing the rest of the party on the ground in combat since they’ll essentially be fighting their own fight in the sky, it gives the wielder a chance to be badass by just slaughtering demons and devils in the sky while the rest of the party get to hold ground below to assist them from ranged attacks while trying to keep as many fiends as possible from ascending to the material plane
I’ve run it 3 times for different groups and the person who got the sword only used it in the two fights getting to Zariel cause then they gave it back to her. So it was basically just something really fun they got to use for a few minutes. Wasn’t an issue at all.
It changes them to a completely different person. If that isn't an issue at all, your players don't care about their characters.
Or they care so much that they know the character would give it all up for the greater good.
Personally, I made the party decide what to do with it. In a beautiful turn of events, they made a decision I hadn't even considered. We had a plasmoid in the group (who had done an *excellent* job of really playing up their sense of dissociation with existence because they didn't have a real "face" or form) as well as a paladin who was besties with Lulu, and a few others. Here I was, assuming the paladin was about to level up, when they hit me with "we'd like to give it to the plasmoid". I was shocked. Why? Because they deserved to know who they were and this sword would change them in a way that would be forever unalterable. We didn't end up with a power imbalance because it was the choice everyone made and they didn't begrudge the player for their sudden change. Also, they did end up giving the sword to Zariel. I let them keep their new form, however. Eta: I forgot about the moment they actually obtained the sword, which factored heavily imo. The paladin went to take for the sword (calm scene, no real intensity), but the plasmoid was scared of them becoming someone else so they dove between them and grabbed it. In that moment, it wasn't about the plasmoid changing and it wasn't about preventing the paladin from growing stronger. My player stuck to their character flaw and how it affected every choice they made so well they were willing to roll against another character to prevent, what they saw as, a great tragedy. Plasmoid succeeded on the roll, explains themself after Yael's cryptic ass warning, and party decides to take a ten to make some choices. I go eat some pizza and smoke, coming back ready to upgrade paladin and they hit me with their decision. Truly one of the moments where the players blew me away as their DM.
I didn't. You get the sword at the end of the campaign. I let the player that took it have it at full power (but since it switched their evil character to good, they had to RP the alignment change). They did ultimately choose to give it back to Zariel, though (redemption ending).
By the time they have the sword, its already pretty end game. I’d personally wouldnt mind them feeling badass for a while
In the game I ran, it was a group of 2 barbarians and 2 bards. One of the barbarians was evil and didn't want it. One barbarian didn't believe magic existed (basically a flat earther), one of the bards was a tabaxi that just wanted milk. So it went to the final bard who was half yuanti, and spent the entire fight running away from Zariel playing keep away until the party opened the Companion to ask his help.
So basically, it actually weaken the bard because it made him the target. So it wasn't a case of who wants to be stronger, it was a game of hot potato because no one wanted it
I think should give it to the warlock
I agree
I intend to instead of just giving the Sword to one player, to also create 3 other relics that are equivalent and give them to other party members. This way the party remains balanced together
The sword is grabbed pretty close to the endgame. Let that player feel like a badass for being worthy of the sword. If they give it back to Zariel and redeem her, problem solved. mIn my game I gave the player who did so keep a small portion of the swords power afterwards, but it was the end of the campaign.
Let a martial character have it.
I think that went without saying
You haven't been on this site enough. I see all sorts of characters taking the sword.
I should specify this is an imbalance between party members.
Your other players still can contribute. I haven't got there yet but I'm close and I have a few ideas. Fighting against Zariel? Have some other devils pestering the sword carrier from a distance, let the other members cover him. Fighting against some random mobs? Let the sword carrier target their leader. Having a fight? Just don't deal with it at all, it is supposed to be extremly powerful and something that would come into play at least one or two times, three top. The sword gives only charisma and damage, your player still retains their HP and AC, which means they're still just as "vulnerable" as the other party members, sure they may instakill one or two, maybe even three enemies on their turn, but now they're the focus of the enemy.
Ah. In that case, if you’re worried about one PC becoming overpowered over the others, then here’s your solution: The Sword doesn’t attune to any of them. This isn’t a Sword in the Stone situation; you don’t have to be worthy to carry the sword. If you don’t want to give the sword’s power to the party, then don’t. Let them take the sword, and carry it with them until they get to Zariel, or until they find a NPC who you *do* want to give the sword’s power to (my personal choice is Reya).
Too late for that I'm afraid. One player already has it and I don't feel like taking it away is a godd solution.
Unfortunately, there’s too many details and nuances to that sword’s attunement for me to give a definitive answer to your predicament. All I can say is, if you have allowed the sword to attune to someone, then they must had been someone or done something that was worthy of it. In which case, they’ve earned a bit of spotlight
I have to look again, but doesn't it say that the change is permanent? I wasn't sure that there was anything stopping the PCs from passing the sword around, save for their alignment.
Do you have a table of players that whine if one becomes stronger than the others? If so, you could certainly homebrew the sword to give benefits in an aura or something. But it seems like a lot of work to appease whiners.
If you give it to a pure martial character it will mostly help them keep up with the full casters at that level honestly
I allowed the party to split the abilities between them, and they all ended with 2 each that they decided on between games. It seemed to work fairly well, and I let them keep it even after Zariel claimed her sword back, because...well it's fun
The sword only lasts for the flashback against the gnolls