When [W]eapon keyword exploits don't use a [W]?

[Mongolia Jones]

All Bets are Off and Lion of Battle are exploits that have "Weapon" as a keyword.

They both start with a primary attack which utilizes the weapon in hand.

They both conclude with a secondary attack which does not utilize the weapon in hand (i.e. a fist in the face and a roar.)

The question is: Do exploits with the weapon keyword that don't use a weapon for a particular attack get proficiency and/or enhancement bonuses to the attack roll? Should any damage inflicted get enhancement and/or feat bonuses to damage rolls?

 

[jaelis]

All Bets Are Off indicates that the secondary attack is made with your fist, so I would take that to be the weapon used. Any attack bonuses for your fist (or unarmed strikes) would apply, but most people wouldn't have any. Just like you would apply your primary weapon's bonuses for the first attack of a Twin Strike, and your off-hand weapons for the second. It's debatable though, since the ABAO interpretation is relying on the flavor text.

I would say that the secondary attack of Lion of Battle is not a weapon attack at all, and weapon bonuses wouldn't apply.

 

[yu gnomi]

I don't know about Lion of Battle, it sounds like a Warlord power, but I can't seem to find it. I had always assumed that second attack with All Bets are Off was with butt of weapon.

As far as I know, if you use an attack power with the weapon keyword, you can always add your proficiency bonus to attack rolls, unless the text of the power states otherwise.

 

[jaelis]

I don't know about Lion of Battle, it sounds like a Warlord power, but I can't seem to find it. I had always assumed that second attack with All Bets are Off was with butt of weapon.

As far as I know, if you use an attack power with the weapon keyword, you can always add your proficiency bonus to attack rolls, unless the text of the power states otherwise.

Lion of Battle is another pit fighter exploit.

While you should add your weapon bonuses to your attacks, there remains the question of which weapon you are using. If someone wanted to say they were using the butt or pomel of their weapon for ABAO, I'd be fine with that.

Not so much for Lion of Battle, since your weapon can't even reach the targets. But then, I guess if a magic weapon let you put on a more fearsome display of prowess, you could make a case for it...

 

[yu gnomi]

Found Lion of Battle and I see what you mean. I have no idea how to rationalize Lion of Battle, but in both instances I would assume that PC is using primary weapon, and any appropriate enhancement and proficiency bonuses on attack rolls.

Don't infer 'off-hand' or 'unarmed' from term 'secondary attack'. It is a common term in power descriptions. For these two powers I'm guessing it is used because you have to hit with primary attack, in order to roll secondary attack.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Don't infer 'off-hand' or 'unarmed' from term 'secondary attack'.

He isn't; he's inferring it from "belt the enemy in the face with your fist"

-Hyp.

 

[Ander00]

I wouldn't read too much into the flavor text. If you do want to explain it, you could just say the 'solid blow' that enables the secondary attack is with the weapon, which is why you'd get to add its modifiers. D&D combat is a very abstract matter, and nowhere in the actual rules of the power does it say that the secondary attack is unarmed. Likewise, with Lion of Battle a more gruesome primary attack (thanks to a better weapon) could more easily scare the secondary targets.


cheers

 

[Bagpuss]

Ignoring the flavour text, the thing that makes me suspect you might not use your primary weapon modifiers for either attack is one has a +2 bonus replacing weapon proficiency, the other targets Will (generally a lower defense).

But saying that, you also end up losing enhancement bonuses as well so that could make the secondary attack virtually useless. So I'd say you use your primary weapon bonuses.

Rules wise - both the powers have the Accessories: Weapon

Accessories: These keywords identify items used with the power. If you have a proficiency bonus to
attack rolls and damage rolls from your weapon or an enhancement bonus to your attack rolls and damage
rolls from a magic weapon or an implement, you add that bonus when you use a power that has the associated keyword.

It has the keyword you add the bonuses.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Rules wise - both the powers have the Accessories: Weapon

It has the keyword you add the bonuses.

Right. I don't think it's ambiguous as written - you hit him with your fist or with your voice, but you still make an attack roll using the modifiers of the weapon that's the accessory for the power.

-Hyp.

 

[Mongolia Jones]

I wouldn't read too much into the flavor text. If you do want to explain it, you could just say the 'solid blow' that enables the secondary attack is with the weapon, which is why you'd get to add its modifiers. D&D combat is a very abstract matter, and nowhere in the actual rules of the power does it say that the secondary attack is unarmed. Likewise, with Lion of Battle a more gruesome primary attack (thanks to a better weapon) could more easily scare the secondary targets.

Rules wise - both the powers have the Accessories: Weapon

It has the keyword you add the bonuses.

Right. I don't think it's ambiguous as written - you hit him with your fist or with your voice, but you still make an attack roll using the modifiers of the weapon that's the accessory for the power.

Right, you all seem in agreement... go by the letter of the rule.

What about magic weapons with special effects?

Flavor-wise are "frost fists" or "vorpal fists" OK with you?

What about "resounding roar" or "duelist's roar"?