Wizard of the Spiral Tower

[Kordeth]

Oooo. I'm playing with a human wizard with an eye to WotST, and I've been looking at multiclassing as a fighter for use of the longsword. I had planned to play this guy (a younger brother to a sorcerer I played earlier) as an eldritch knight. What's this about a "swordmage"?

Swordmage is the new arcane defender class that will be appearing in the Forgotten Realms Player's Guide. Someone around here found a preview product (I want to say an RPGA adventure but I might be misremembering) that had a fully statted-up swordmage character from which we learned a fair number of its powers and abilities.

 

[small pumpkin man]

Er. You may find it nonsense, but it's written exactly as such in the PHB. You can change that in your game, but RAW is RAW.

That's somewhat of an exageration. There's a very vague sentance of which that is the current custserv interpretation. RAIBCS isn't quite the same as RAW.

 

[Eldorian]

Er. You may find it nonsense, but it's written exactly as such in the PHB. You can change that in your game, but RAW is RAW.

pg 55

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.

A wizard of the spiral tower's sword, a pact blade, and a holy avenger, are all implements when used to cast a spell/prayer with the implement keyword. The only bonus an implement adds are enhancement bonuses to attack and damage rolls, not proficiency bonuses. The REASON they don't get proficiency bonuses? Because they are not weapons when used in this fashion. Likewise, any other bonus one would have when using the weapon as an implement do not function unless the bonus also works for implements, which only enhancement comes to mind. An attack with a longsword as an implement is not an attack with a longsword as a weapon, but with an orb/staff/wand. A pact blade is a "warlock implement" not a light blade when used to cast spells, and a holy avenger is a holy symbol. Weapon feats do not apply, nor do weapon PP abilities, class abilities, or anything else of the same vein.

Staffs, also, do not add a proficiency bonus or any weapon feat bonuses to damage or hit when used as implements, because a staff is an implement that can be used as a weapon, not both at the same time. As an implement, it qualifies for no weapon bonuses. It is a special rule that lets it inherit any enhancement bonuses when used as a weapon, not something innate. If you hit someone with an orb or stab them with a wand, you do not get enhancement bonuses, these are just regular improvised attacks.


Am I the only person in the world that finds all this to be obvious and to make sense?

 

[Rith the Wanderer]

pg 55

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.

A wizard of the spiral tower's sword, a pact blade, and a holy avenger, are all implements when used to cast a spell/prayer with the implement keyword. The only bonus an implement adds are enhancement bonuses to attack and damage rolls, not proficiency bonuses. The REASON they don't get proficiency bonuses? Because they are not weapons when used in this fashion. Likewise, any other bonus one would have when using the weapon as an implement do not function unless the bonus also works for implements, which only enhancement comes to mind. An attack with a longsword as an implement is not an attack with a longsword as a weapon, but with an orb/staff/wand. A pact blade is a "warlock implement" not a light blade when used to cast spells, and a holy avenger is a holy symbol. Weapon feats do not apply, nor do weapon PP abilities, class abilities, or anything else of the same vein.

Staffs, also, do not add a proficiency bonus or any weapon feat bonuses to damage or hit when used as implements, because a staff is an implement that can be used as a weapon, not both at the same time. As an implement, it qualifies for no weapon bonuses. It is a special rule that lets it inherit any enhancement bonuses when used as a weapon, not something innate. If you hit someone with an orb or stab them with a wand, you do not get enhancement bonuses, these are just regular improvised attacks.


Am I the only person in the world that finds all this to be obvious and to make sense?

The main argument in this thread is about keyword inheritance. I think everyone agrees with you besides possibly the OP (who, to me, seems like they were looking for help with a rule, rather than claiming an opinion).

Er. You may find it nonsense, but it's written exactly as such in the PHB. You can change that in your game, but RAW is RAW.

I find it nonsense in a world building sense. I don't think cust serv is just making things up, I think the RAW could easily be interpreted the way they have ruled. There is at least one other way for it to be read and still adhere to the RAW, but I'm not saying it is better than the official way. I think my claim that it is at least a little confusing is not controversial or disputable.

I will be changing it in my game, but I am not trying to convince others that "my way" is the correct or RAW way.

 

[Tellerve]

pg 55

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.

A wizard of the spiral tower's sword, a pact blade, and a holy avenger, are all implements when used to cast a spell/prayer with the implement keyword. The only bonus an implement adds are enhancement bonuses to attack and damage rolls, not proficiency bonuses. The REASON they don't get proficiency bonuses? Because they are not weapons when used in this fashion. Likewise, any other bonus one would have when using the weapon as an implement do not function unless the bonus also works for implements, which only enhancement comes to mind. An attack with a longsword as an implement is not an attack with a longsword as a weapon, but with an orb/staff/wand. A pact blade is a "warlock implement" not a light blade when used to cast spells, and a holy avenger is a holy symbol. Weapon feats do not apply, nor do weapon PP abilities, class abilities, or anything else of the same vein.

Staffs, also, do not add a proficiency bonus or any weapon feat bonuses to damage or hit when used as implements, because a staff is an implement that can be used as a weapon, not both at the same time. As an implement, it qualifies for no weapon bonuses. It is a special rule that lets it inherit any enhancement bonuses when used as a weapon, not something innate. If you hit someone with an orb or stab them with a wand, you do not get enhancement bonuses, these are just regular improvised attacks.


Am I the only person in the world that finds all this to be obvious and to make sense?

Actually, no, I think it makes sense, although I will say that people are doing a good job at trying to confuse me, but luckily I just keep reading the book and I think like you do that it makes sense. I mean, at some level I'm a bit of a min-maxer myself and I can understand the allure to find the holes and the uber-builds of everything. But yeah, seems pretty obvious to me.

Ohh, also, people saying a wizard with an Icy Wand casting fireball makes it an icy fireball also confuse me. The wand has a power in and of itself to cast icy rays. When you do that it has the cold descriptor. Otherwise you are just getting the enchantment bonus of the wand. The frost sword, as an at-will power to change the damage of the sword to all cold. If you used that with say some paladin power that had 'weapon' in the descriptor and did radiant damage you'd do radiant and cold. If you turned off the at will power on the frost sword it would do normal damage, I don't think it would do any cold at all whatsoever.

Tellerve

 

[Rith the Wanderer]

Ohh, also, people saying a wizard with an Icy Wand casting fireball makes it an icy fireball also confuse me. The wand has a power in and of itself to cast icy rays. When you do that it has the cold descriptor. Otherwise you are just getting the enchantment bonus of the wand. The frost sword, as an at-will power to change the damage of the sword to all cold. If you used that with say some paladin power that had 'weapon' in the descriptor and did radiant damage you'd do radiant and cold. If you turned off the at will power on the frost sword it would do normal damage, I don't think it would do any cold at all whatsoever.

Tellerve

Yeah, thats why I said it makes no sense to me. But customer service has issued more answers supporting constant cold damage than refuting it, and there definitely is some text in the PHB that could be interpreted that way(mostly page 226 under Power).

Personally I don't think it would destroy the game to just run it the way you describe (afterall, thats what I plan on doing).

 

[Kesh]

Oooo. I'm playing with a human wizard with an eye to WotST, and I've been looking at multiclassing as a fighter for use of the longsword. I had planned to play this guy (a younger brother to a sorcerer I played earlier) as an eldritch knight. What's this about a "swordmage"?

Multiclassing fighter does not actually give you any weapon proficiencies. All it does is make you more effective with a class of weapons you can already use. You really just need to take the Weapon Proficiency feat for longswords.

 

[Kesh]

Delete

 

[ff6shadow]

People keep adding the At-Will portion of the Flaming Sword to the discussion. Leave it out. It's a trap and misleading.

It the example, the paladin thats uses a flaming sword and the power Holy Strike, it ill do both fire and radiant damage.

The At-Will power for lightning, frost, and flame say: All damage dealt by this weapon is (fire, ice, lightning). Not that it adds the element into the mix, but alters it completely. A paladin who uses the flaming sword's at will then uses it to attack with Holy Strike will deal pure fire damage with no radiant mixed in.

At least, thats my opinion on how it reads.

 

[Byronic]

People keep adding the At-Will portion of the Flaming Sword to the discussion. Leave it out. It's a trap and misleading.

It the example, the paladin thats uses a flaming sword and the power Holy Strike, it ill do both fire and radiant damage.

The At-Will power for lightning, frost, and flame say: All damage dealt by this weapon is (fire, ice, lightning). Not that it adds the element into the mix, but alters it completely. A paladin who uses the flaming sword's at will then uses it to attack with Holy Strike will deal pure fire damage with no radiant mixed in.

At least, thats my opinion on how it reads.

I think that the "inheritance" rule is terrible. Not because of what it does but because we haven't heard any reasoning for it. WHY do they want to put a rule in there that doesn't make any sense?

When they made platemail cost 50 gold, there were quite a few flaws with the matter. Some said it ruined sense of disbelief, but we knew the reason behind it. So that Paladins (and fighters who got it through a feat) could start with plate armour. With the inheritance rule however we have no good reason.

Is it meant to make powers like the Warlocks starpact pp work? Is it supposed to make the feats like Burning Blizzard work better (since you'll only need that one and not the various other ones as well)? The latter might be the reason since Fighters can use (for example) just heavy blades and therefor only need one feat (weapon focus).

And customer service concensus is not that reliable. I believe that such services want (above all) to look after their own asses and not look stupid. Therefore causing them (or the manager, whatever) to just choose one viewpoint and stick to it. It saves time, time is money and money is the bottom line.