D&D 4th Edition RulesAsk questions about 4th-Edition rules and the like in here. General discussion about 4E or any other game belongs in General RPG Discussion, above.
So there is really no reason to hold a holy symbol in one's hand? It seems that wearing it frees up the hand for other things.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nail
Exactly.
As has been pointed out, the RAW specifically says Holy Symbols are worn (unlike other implements, which must be carried in your hand to function). Since the RAW does not specify where you must wear your holy sysmbol, holy symbols do not occupy one of the standard "item slots".
I'd like to add that the reason the rule is written in this vague, confusing way, is of course that clerics presenting their holy symbol (read cross) to the baddie (read vampire) is a strong cultural icon.
It wouldn't make sense to institute a "holy symbol slot" if that prevented clerics from occasionally using their hand to hold their holy symbol.
That, and the fact such a slot would be the only "abstract" slot with no specific physical location. All other slots have a place on the body; holy symbols are much more freely held or worn.
So while, yes, in practice, there is a holy symbol specific "slot", this is not official...
...regardless of how the CB programmers implemented it.
So while, yes, in practice, there is a holy symbol specific "slot", this is not official...
...regardless of how the CB programmers implemented it.
Agreed. There is no such slot, but it works exactly as if there were.
In fact, it is more restrictive than weapons and implements, where you can carry one in each and and alternate between them. Depending on how you define carry and wear, you might have to have your allies carry your alternate holy symbol for you if you want one (i'd not go tat far; stowing it suffices by my reading).
__________________ Carl Cramér
Member of the Netbook of Feats review board.
Unlike other implements, you need only to wear a holy symbol for its property or power to function. If you are wearing or holding more than one holy symbol, none of your symbols function.
Talk about making things confusing. They should define "wear" for us so we know what that means. What if they phrased other magic items like that?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hypothetical Example
Unlike other magic items, you only need to wear a ring for its property or power to function
Or
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hypothetical Example
Unlike other magic items, you only need to wear armor for its property or power to function
__________________ Robots, assassins, hobgoblins, the Ashen Tower, polite beholders, land pirates, gnome genocide, the Corpse Ramp, artifacts, exploding zombie dragons, flying islands, dying heroes, blood feuds, vanished races, the Black City: Rise of Felskein.
Talk about making things confusing. They should define "wear" for us so we know what that means. What if they phrased other magic items like that?
They do phrase other items similar to that.
Polyglot Gem in Adventurers Vault: "If you carry more than one polyglot gem on your person, none of them function."
There you have yet another phrasing of just about the same type of rule, but this one is clearer that stowing it does not work. Now, is the "wear" in the holy symbol phrasing intended to be similar to, or different from this? Who knows...
And of course, with the polyglot gem you wonder if putting it into extradimensional storage, such as a bag of holding, still makes you "carry it on your person"...
Last edited by Tuft; 3rd June 2009 at 03:25 PM..
Reason: phrasing
Well, this issue hasn't come up at my table, but it's interesting.
The "wear" aspect got me thinking about two implements in particular: orbs and tomes (from Arcane Power). Clearly there's kind of a workaround for orbs, in that a character could just put it in a pouch and hang it form its belt (for example), but "wearing" a tome??? That not only sounds weird, but functionally bad too.. I mean, to me (as a DM) having to open a tome to use it would be a reasonable use of it.
I think that in the end, it comes to thinking of each implement invidivually, but I know that sucks. It would be something like this: Hands
-Staff/Wand
-Rods
-Daggers
Hands and/or Wear
-Holy Symbol: hands, neck, or hanging from your belt.
-Orb: hands, or wear them (e.g. belt pouch)
-Totems: just wearing sounds good to me, but could also be used in your hand.
In some of those case a slot would have to be used, but in others it sounds good to allow a character to have that slot available for a magic item (for example: if you wear a Holy Symbol hanging from your belt, it could be fine to let that character use his waist slot for a magic item, specially if it is a belt).
I can't really think of a ruling that is so general as to be applied to ALL implements without exceptions.
Location: Cedar Rapids, IA PCs now: Genasi Warlord 5 Human BRV Fighter 5
Posts: 8,000
Quote:
Originally Posted by CapnZapp
I'd like to add that the reason the rule is written in this vague, confusing way, is of course that clerics presenting their holy symbol (read cross) to the baddie (read vampire) is a strong cultural icon.
Agreed.
It's too bad that - although they have a "free hand", since they aren't carrying their holy symbol there - clerics aren't normally proficient with shields.
__________________ - Nail
Last edited by Nail: Today....just a few minutes ago
I did a Magic Item Record Sheet to use at the table I'm DMing, and I assigned a separate slot for Implements. Just thought it could be usefull for you guys.
Linear Mode
And yet another word from our sponsors
