Duel Wielding Implements - Clarifications

[Turtlejay]

This is the third time I have seen such a thread (and likely there have been many more than that) and what bothers me most about the rods of reaving and corruption is that it takes no action to do it. The combo does a trivial amount of damage against non-minions, though, so the player invests two magic items in an attempt to thwart a specifit subset of the DM's tactics. Just feels slimy.

The example given farther up is more in the spirit of the ability though, allowing you to benefit from two effects. That I like.

Jay

 

[abyssaldeath]

For the Rod of Reaving, Rod of Corruption trick you could rule that since your "transferring" the curse it won't trigger the Rod of Corruption since it requires you to "place" the curse.

 

[Eldorian]

For the Rod of Reaving, Rod of Corruption trick you could rule that since your "transferring" the curse it won't trigger the Rod of Corruption since it requires you to "place" the curse.

I'm going with this. The Rod of Reeving requires you to actually put the curse on someone, not transfer the curse from someone else. Otherwise it's dumb.

 

[Skornn2k7]

What about when you dual wield implements and crit, do you get xtra dice for both, it you had two implements at +2, would you get to roll 4 dice of crit damage ?

 

[Rothe_]

19. Can a Warlock benefit from holding two rods?

Yes, a warlock can gain the properties from two rods but he still can only use one to make an attack.
​

That is from the FAQ of PHB. Makes it kind of clear how it works. Some people don't like to use FAQ rulings, but in my opinion this is a decent way to handle it.

EDIT:

I also happen to think that this ruling means that you *ONLY* get to use properties from both, and the attack uses either one implement or the other (enhancement bonus, critical hit effects etc.).

 

[Draksila]

That is from the FAQ of PHB. Makes it kind of clear how it works. Some people don't like to use FAQ rulings, but in my opinion this is a decent way to handle it.

EDIT:

I also happen to think that this ruling means that you *ONLY* get to use properties from both, and the attack uses either one implement or the other (enhancement bonus, critical hit effects etc.).

I personally find this interpretation to be in the spirit of the rules. Implements, in my viewpoint, represent old-school fantasy wherein wizards had to channel their mystic energy through a device to direct the power's focus. In D&D they're by no means necessary, but the theory is still the same. As such, you can only channel your power through one focus at a time, thereby only gaining the attack benefits of one. Passive benefits, on the other hand, would flow from both rods as they're a benefit of wielding the rod rather than channeling through it.

 

[abyssaldeath]

That is from the FAQ of PHB. Makes it kind of clear how it works. Some people don't like to use FAQ rulings, but in my opinion this is a decent way to handle it.

EDIT:

I also happen to think that this ruling means that you *ONLY* get to use properties from both, and the attack uses either one implement or the other (enhancement bonus, critical hit effects etc.).

The FAQ is a little misleading. A large number of Magic Rod properties affect you pact boon or do things when your pact boon triggers and that FAQ was posted when there was only the PHB for magic items. When you have a property thats nothing to do with attacking you can absolutely benefit from the property while the implement is in you off-hand. In the PHB the is only 1 Rod with a property that requires you to attack with it. If the property says "when you hit with this rod" "Gain a +1 bonus with this rod if" then you need to make the attack with the rod.

 

[cdrcjsn]

A lot of the wands in AV is also like that. Some of the properties specifically states that you gain the property only when you use that particular wand to attack with the power.

 

[The Lone Badger]

If I have both hands full because I'm using two implements, does that stop me from using Reagents?

 

[Dr_Ruminahui]

When would you be using reagents in combat? Aren't they pretty much only for rituals, which are unlikely to be used in combat?

That said, if a particular combat did occur during a ritual casting by the players, it would be the DMs call as to whether you need both hands to continue casting the ritual.