This product is 56 pages long and free. Cover, credits, intro and ToC take up 4 pages. I counted 17 pages of adds many of them for other Rite... [Read More]
Evocative City Sites Lorn's Entrepot (Abandoned Warehouse) by Rite Publishing. I was given this product for the purposes of this review. This product is 47 pages long. Cover, Credits, two pages of... [Read More]
Feats 101 by Rite Publishing. I was given this product for the purposes of this review. I have not yet played using these feats my review is based on reading the feats and checking a few against... [Read More]
The Plane Below: Secrets of the Elemental Chaos is a 4e D&D product describing some of the different planes in the 4e Cosmology. The book is a typical hard bound book that Wizards of the Coast... [Read More]
My counterpoint to this would be the winterfrost combo. Combat advantage and +5 damage all the time and it's allowed now.
Great potential, but not automatic. The first hit isn't subject from the CA and Cold Vulnerability (unless it come from another source) and if you miss, you will lose those advantage. Also, you need to be paragon. But for a Rogue, I agree it is a welcoming way to place your sneak, and when you miss, you'll have other ways to get your CA anyway.
__________________ Living ENWorld di Senzio's Magical Shop, the best place to buy and sell magical items in Orussus
Characters
Jarel-karn - Male Genasi Swordmage 4 [LEW] Gloom - Male Shifter (Longtooth) Paladin 2 [LEW] River - Male Shifter (Longtooth) Cleric 6 [LEB] River - Male Half-Orc Rogue 4 [LEB]
"Experience is that great thing that allow you to see a mistake when you do it again."
The problem with testing things out and changing them later is what if there's still a disagreement as to whether or not it's balanced? At least right now only theoretical characters are being affected by it.
Well, outside playtesting it extensively somewhere, it would seem to me the best method is to try it and see what happens, letting players know that relying on it or building a concept around it is ill-advised as the concept is being playtested. But then again, I'm the type of person more prone to let things fly unless I see they are obviously breaking things.
Accessible at almost any time: http://www.d20srd.org/index.htm
Complete Arcane
Complete Scoundrel
Complete Mage
Complete Divine
Libre Mortis
Heroes of Horror
Drow of the Underdark
Monster Manual 3.5E
Monster Manual 2
DMG/PHB
Psionics Handbook
Expanded Psionics Handbook
Spell Compendium
Tome of Magic
These I can access rarely:
Complete Adventurer
Complete Warrior
Complete Psionic
Races of Stone
Draconomicon
Complete Champion
A few assorted Monstrous Manuals... I can't recall which ones.
I MAY be able to access the Forgotten Realms and Eberron Campaign settings.
Its much more difficult to put the genie back in the bottle in Living games: See the minotaur/bugbear/large-weapon issues in L4W, as an example. This is one reason I tend to be more conservative in Living games (while I still would rule exactly the same here for weaplements in my RL game, there have been somethings in the 3.5 LEB that I was fine banning that I allowed in my RL game).
__________________ stonegod -- LEB judge and spawn of Khyber since 2005 (Blog)
I agree on that point from stonegod, and as I stated on my first post, I would allow it in my RL game, but here, I'm less sure of it. And stonegod is true on that one. It is better to give a candy after a few month because WoTC clarify things to everyone rather than taking it back once it is eaten.
__________________ Living ENWorld di Senzio's Magical Shop, the best place to buy and sell magical items in Orussus
Characters
Jarel-karn - Male Genasi Swordmage 4 [LEW] Gloom - Male Shifter (Longtooth) Paladin 2 [LEW] River - Male Shifter (Longtooth) Cleric 6 [LEB] River - Male Half-Orc Rogue 4 [LEB]
"Experience is that great thing that allow you to see a mistake when you do it again."
And to counter stonegod, the staff is a weapon that can be used as an implement just like heavy blades can be used by swordmages. It seems odd to me I can crit with a weapon attack using a Staff of Power and you'd say it wouldn't work since it's from an implement. Personally as long as the wording still works it seems to me it should work.
Actually, if I was consistent, I'd say way happens in undefined. The FAQ is clear on what happens if you use a weapon as an implement, but not the other way around. Its a problem tied to the staff. But yes, if I were to extend the way I ruled with weapons, I'd agree the Staff of Power's power could not be used for weapon-based attacks (though there is a wrinkle that the power itself does not mention its use as an implement or weapon).
__________________ stonegod -- LEB judge and spawn of Khyber since 2005 (Blog)
Unfortunately, the Ki Focus entry has little to do with Weaplements other than the fact that the assassin uses them. It still doesn't clear up the question as to what parts of the magic weapon entry can be used when a Weaplement is used as an implement as opposed to when it is used as a weapon.
It's entirely possible I'm just showcasing my ignorance here, but I respectfully disagree. If I read it right, Assassins can use their Ki Focus through a weapon, effectively making it their implement.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mowgli
If you have a magic ki focus and wield a magic weapon, you choose before you use an attack power whether to draw on the magic of your ki focus or to employ the magic of your weapon. Your choice determines which enhancement bonus, critical hit effects, and magic item properties and powers you can apply to attacks with that power. You can’t, for example, use the enhancement bonus of your ki focus and the property of your magic weapon with the same attack power.
The bold portion, along with the red portion, seems to indicate that you can use either your implement bonuses/effects or your magic weapon bonuses/effects, but not both, with a power. If you can use either, it looks like that means you can indeed use the 'enhancement bonus, critical hit effects, and magic item properties and powers you can apply to attacks' of your magic weapon with powers. However, it does specifically limit it to powers you can apply to attacks.
So for example, let's imagine my Assassin has a falchion that does extra flame damage along with a ki focus +2. He uses his Inescapable Blade power against an opponent. The above seems to read that he can either apply the +2 attack/damage and the +2d6 critical effect of his Ki Focus or the flaming property of the falchion to that power . . . but the weapon's flaming power is definitely one of his choices.
Does this apply, or is the thread topic completely different? If so, I apologize - as I said, I'm a 4E newbie and am really just trying to grasp some of the fine points of the game.
(though there is a wrinkle that the power itself does not mention its use as an implement or weapon).
This is the same 'wrinkle' the flaming weapon has though. The power doesn't state implement OR weapons attacks. It only states damage dealt by the weapon is fire. It's stating the fact that you have to use the weapon NOT that you have to be using the weapon as a weapon and not an implement. It's to clear up that you can't hold a flaming dagger in one hands and cast a cold spell through your wand and get fire/cold damage.
Quote:
Originally Posted by stonegod
The FAQ is clear on what happens if you use a weapon as an implement
It is? If it were I don't think we'd be having this debate.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Velmont
Great potential, but not automatic
True but from my experience hitting isn't a big issue with rogues, it's getting combat advantage. This is even a bigger problem if you like to fight at range. As such the feat combo gives a HUGE advantage. While it's true you may miss sometimes the rewards are sweet and more than an equal to the feats/abilities you pointed out as potential problems for casters.
At pre-paragon levels at best we're looking at a +1 hit and damage or the ability to negate 5 damage reduction[NOT extra damage] for casters. Doesn't seem like anything game breaking and/or overpowered.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Velmont
It is better to give a candy after a few month because WoTC clarify things to everyone rather than taking it back once it is eaten.
The only issue with this is WOTC has had plenty of time to clairify this and hasn't. They have had multiple threads on there own boards and they still have vague rulings and even those aren't in the errata. No matter what we rule, I don't think waiting for them to do something is a good idea.
Mowglii, The assassin is a special case. No other class has the Ki Focus feature as of yet and ONLY the assassin can use ANY weapon as an implement through the use of his Ki Focus. Also, an Assassin cannot use both his Ki Focus AND the enhancement/properties of the weapon he wields at the same time. He must choose either Ki Focus, or Magic Weapon. Currently this means that you can wield ANY weapon with a flat enhancement bonus (the only Ki Focuses currently available), or use the enhancement bonus and properties of the magic weapon you wield (if you have one). The former gives unparalleled versatility, as ALL weapons you wield become magical (including your unarmed strikes and improvised weapons!!), while the latter gives other bonuses while wielding and using that specific weapon.
What THIS debate is over, is if the powers listed in a magic weapon entry can be used when someone uses that weapon as an implement. For instance:
You have a Tiefling Swordmage with a Flaming Greatsword. The at-will power on the Greatsword says:
"Free Action. All damage dealt by this weapon is fire damage. Another free action returns the damage to normal." (quoted from Compendium)
The debate in this case is this: Can he change the damage of his IMPLEMENT keyword powers to fire, or can he only change WEAPON keyword powers to fire?
One side says weapon only because the text specifies "damage dealt with this weapon" (emphasis mine). The other side disagrees.
This is the same 'wrinkle' the flaming weapon has though. The power doesn't state implement OR weapons attacks. It only states damage dealt by the weapon is fire. It's stating the fact that you have to use the weapon NOT that you have to be using the weapon as a weapon and not an implement. It's to clear up that you can't hold a flaming dagger in one hands and cast a cold spell through your wand and get fire/cold damage.
See Kalidrev's quote for the key difference between the two (Flaming Weapon does say 'with this weapon').
__________________ stonegod -- LEB judge and spawn of Khyber since 2005 (Blog)
See Kalidrev's quote for the key difference between the two (Flaming Weapon does say 'with this weapon').
Yeah, because it is a Flaming Weapon. I doubt it refer to the keyword weapon. I think you should read it like this:
Flaming Dagger: 'with this dagger'
Flaming Sword: 'with this sword'
Flaming Axe: 'with this axe'
etc...
And in that case, you could argue that hitting with a power with Implement keyword through a dagger used as an implement fill the needed to use the power.
I will say, the only thing that make me think you are right, it is the FAQ. Nothing else go against using a power from a weapon use as an implement on an implement keyword power. And what annoy me in the FAQ, it is the example of weapon they used are weapon not meant at start to be implement, that allow to be use as implement, and non have an item power that are use in conjunction with a class power.
That's what they should clarify.
__________________ Living ENWorld di Senzio's Magical Shop, the best place to buy and sell magical items in Orussus
Characters
Jarel-karn - Male Genasi Swordmage 4 [LEW] Gloom - Male Shifter (Longtooth) Paladin 2 [LEW] River - Male Shifter (Longtooth) Cleric 6 [LEB] River - Male Half-Orc Rogue 4 [LEB]
"Experience is that great thing that allow you to see a mistake when you do it again."
See Kalidrev's quote for the key difference between the two (Flaming Weapon does say 'with this weapon').
A non-issue IMO. It does not say 'with this weapon' in a weapon attack power. If you use the weapon as an implememt you would also be making an attack 'with this weapon'. Since you 'wield' the weapon in both kinds of attacks some kind of exclusion would have to be put into the power. Look at the staffs in eberron. 'You hit an enemy with an implement power using this staff'. You don't see 'with an weapon power' in the flaming weapon power. Really how do you suggest they word the power? When it's taking about a rod it says 'with this rod'. Should they have said 'with the object in question'?
I will say, the only thing that make me think you are right, it is the FAQ. Nothing else go against using a power from a weapon use as an implement on an implement keyword power. And what annoy me in the FAQ, it is the example of weapon they used are weapon not meant at start to be implement, that allow to be use as implement, and non have an item power that are use in conjunction with a class power.
That's what they should clarify.
I agree mostly. the thing for me is they tell you what you get [properties ect] and what you don't get [prof bonus] but power aren't mentioned one way or the other. I'd think they'd be important enough to have them say you don't get them or clairify when/how they work if they change somehow between weapons/implements. For me to say you don't get powers from weapons used as implements, I'd need them to plainly SAY that. And really, how hard would it be for them to do that?
the thing for me is they tell you what you get [properties ect] and what you don't get [prof bonus] but power aren't mentioned one way or the other.
The FAQ doesn't tell you want you don't get. It only tells you what you get.
But strictly speaking, this proposal isn't really about what WotC intended. Let's face it. Until they come out and tell us, there isn't going to be a resolution. What this proposal is about is whether allowing weapons used as implements to use their magic powers should be allowed here.
The FAQ doesn't tell you want you don't get. It only tells you what you get.
I was talking about the weapons as implements sections from the books + the FAQ. WOTC has told us what you get and what you don't. Somehow they forgot about powers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TwoHeadsBarking
But strictly speaking, this proposal isn't really about what WotC intended. Let's face it. Until they come out and tell us, there isn't going to be a resolution. What this proposal is about is whether allowing weapons used as implements to use their magic powers should be allowed here.
At best we're looking at a +1 hit and damage or the ability to negate 5 damage reduction, nothing game breaking and/or overpowered IMO. If someone can think of a super-combo let me know.
Gamers Online Now: 1,132
Linear Mode
