Intelligent Blademaster with Javelin?

[elecgraystone]

But if you want to benefit from a feat that says "make a basic attack with a melee weapon", you must be using a melee weapon to make a basic attack.

And you aren't, because the javelin can't be used as a melee weapon right now.

-Hyp.

But you ARE making a basic attack with a melee weapon. You just aren't using it as a melee weapon. Being a melee weapon and using a weapon as a melee weapon are two different things. The feat doesn't say "make a melee basic attack" It says "make a basic attack with a melee weapon". A javelin is always a melee weapon even when it's not being used as one. A ranged basic attack is a basic attack.

So "make a (ranged) basic attack with a melee weapon (used as a ranged weapon)" works. It's a very poorly worked feat.

 

[Kraydak]

But if you want to benefit from a feat that says "make a basic attack with a melee weapon", you must be using a melee weapon to make a basic attack.

And you aren't, because the javelin can't be used as a melee weapon right now.

-Hyp.

Are there any rules about what is/isn't a melee weapon beyond inclusion/exclusion from the melee weapon tables? I didn't see any, but that doesn't mean that they aren't there... Melee weapon with the various thrown properties do explicitly provide another way to *gain* the "ranged" qualification beyond mere ranged weapon table membership, of course.

But the only way I see to become a melee weapon is to be on a table of melee weapons. I don't see any way to cease being a melee weapon beyond being deformed so much that you no longer qualify as one of the entries for melee weapons (which, in the javelin case, would also remove the heavy-thrown and generally make the thing worthless).

In short, I don't see how being able to be used to make a melee attack has any relation to being a melee weapon in 4e. Which might be stupid, but there it is: in absence of good definitions of melee weapons, the definitions there are, stand. If there was a "squeeze toy" entry in the superior melee weapons (weight, 0.5 lb to avoid any confusion), with prof/damage entries of N/A and property: "Cannot be used to make a melee attack. Squeeze to make noise. Amuses small children and goblins.", then it would still be a melee weapon by virtue of being on the superior melee weapon table (and designer insanity, of course).

So for Intelligent Blademaster, which doesn't require that you be using a melee weapon *as* a melee weapon (which of course you can't when throwing a javelin, but the point is irrelevant), but only requires that you be making a basic attack with a melee weapon (no requirement that you be using it as a melee weapon, note, merely that it *be* a melee weapon), javelins are made of win.

It gets weirder if there are rules for javelins ceasing to be melee weapons when thrown. If a javelin ever ceases to be a melee weapon, then the javelin line in the simple melee weapon table does not apply (because it isn't a melee weapon anymore), the heavy-thrown goes away and you are left with a pointy piece of junk.

 

[Doctor Proctor]

This is just pointless now. The rules clearly state that specific trumps general, and "counts as a ranged weapon when thrown" is more specific than the general rule of "it's a melee weapon". You choose not to see this though, and can show evidence supporting that assumption beyond the general rule. If you're going to ignore the specific trumps general rule the go ahead, but it doesn't make what you're trying to do correct, and it causes a whole host of problems with other specific rules that trump general ones.

 

[Doctor Proctor]

Actually, here's another "specific" rule for you.

PHB p215
Weapons in all four categories are further categorized
as melee weapons, which you use to attack
foes within reach of the weapon

Reach for a melee weapon is defined as follows.

PHB p270
Range: A melee attack’s range usually equals your
melee reach. (Sometimes a power specifies that
it affects only adjacent targets, though, so even if
you’re using a reach weapon, you can’t attack more
distant targets with that power.)
✦ Reach: Most characters have a reach of 1 square.
Certain powers, feats, and weapons can increase
your reach.

Using it as a ranged weapon does not increase your melee reach, therefore it's not a melee weapon anymore when thrown because you're attacking an opponent beyond your reach. This is why it counts as a ranged weapon when used in a ranged attack, is because only a ranged weapon can attack opponents beyond the melee reach of a weapon.

To state that again: If you're attacking an adjacent square it's within reach, so it would be melee, and then Intelligent Blademaster would apply. If you're attacking beyond reach it's no longer melee, but counts as ranged, and Intelligent Blademaster would not apply.

So there's your specific rule saying it's not melee when it's in the air. Can we be done with this now?

 

[Hypersmurf]

But you ARE making a basic attack with a melee weapon. You just aren't using it as a melee weapon.

Can you make a basic melee attack with a melee weapon, without using a melee weapon?

-Hyp.

 

[Kraydak]

This is just pointless now. The rules clearly state that specific trumps general, and "counts as a ranged weapon when thrown" is more specific than the general rule of "it's a melee weapon". You choose not to see this though, and can show evidence supporting that assumption beyond the general rule. If you're going to ignore the specific trumps general rule the go ahead, but it doesn't make what you're trying to do correct, and it causes a whole host of problems with other specific rules that trump general ones.

We are arguing that "counts as ranged when thrown" and "melee" are orthogonal concepts. They simply do not interact. Which is good, because if they *did* then a thrown javelin wouldn't have a range/prof bonus or damage. Throwing a javelin would, somehow, magically, make it a different weapon that doesn't have an entry.

People claim, wrongly, the "specific trumps general" in a lot in cases where the rules work without needed "specific trumps general". If you can run the game with both the specific, and the general, at the same time, then "specific trumps general" doesn't trigger. In this case, there is no rule contradiction caused by a weapon having both the ranged and melee qualifiers at the same time, so "specific trumps general" is irrelevant. Note that "specific trumps general" also requires there to actually, you know, BE a specific rule.

Now, if there was an interaction between "counts as ranged when thrown" and "melee", then you would have something that could count as a contradiction: the thrown javelin would, under those circumstances, not have a weapon entry. At that point (and only at that point), you could try to invoke "specific trumps general" to fix the rules-break. However, given that there is no specific rule for what stats a non-melee javelin has, or specific rules for how thrown melee weapons get to keep their melee weapon stats despite not being melee weapons, the exercise would be somewhat futile.

A hypothetical case where "specific trumps general" would apply would be one where the rules for thrown weapons included "When thrown, melee weapons cease to be melee weapons. Use the melee weapon stats for their thrown properties". At that point you would have a contradiction between the general rule (melee weapons have stats on the melee tables, ranged weapons have stats on the ranged tables, thrown melee weapons, being ranged, would not have any stats) and the specific rule (thrown melee weapons get to keep their melee weapon stats). Sounds like a trivial example? Virtually all uses of "specific trumps general" are. That is the whole point. "Specific trumps general" sets how you handle rule contradictions by defining a priority scheme. It does not affect how you handle rule weirdness.

 

[Kraydak]

Can you make a basic melee attack with a melee weapon, without using a melee weapon?

-Hyp.

Maybe. If you can get an implement based melee basic attack up and running, it'll be relatively easy. Remember, you can make a basic ranged attack with a ranged weapon, without using a ranged weapon (Eldritch blast, pact-blade dagger as implement, 1 lb so improvised ranged weapon), so there certainly isn't any inherent prohibition against doing so.

 

[DracoSuave]

Can you make a basic melee attack with a melee weapon, without using a melee weapon?

-Hyp.

Can you make an two-handed attack with a weapon without it being a two-handed weapon?

Yes.

Can you make an attack with a weapon without using it as a weapon?

Yes.

Does a holy avenger weapon continue to be a weapon when you use it as an implement?

Yes.

Can you make a basic attack with a weapon without that attack being a melee basic attack?

Yes.

The burden of proof is on you, Hypersmurf, to prove one very simple premise.

Are the qualities 'melee weapon' and 'counts as a ranged weapon' mutually exclusive? What page, exactly, does it state a weapon cannot be both? Without that page, then your -entire- logical base crumbles, because it is all founded on the assumption that a weapon cannot have both traits.

A melee weapon with the heavy thrown trait is just that. A melee weapon. An exception to the rules exists that permits it to be used in place of a ranged weapon. It does -not- say 'becomes a ranged weapon.' It says 'counts as a ranged weapon.' It does NOT lose any prior traits.

In fact, there IS no rule that says a melee weapon cannot be used in ranged attacks. The term 'counts as' does not imply the loss of any traits, but merely that the item in question can be used as something else. That is all.

 

[elecgraystone]

Can you make a basic melee attack with a melee weapon, without using a melee weapon?

-Hyp.

LOL No, but the reverse isn't true. There aren't any ranged weapons with a property to use them as melee weapons. You CAN make a ranged attack with a melee weapon. In fact all thrown weapon are melee weapons you can make ranged attacks with.

So there's your specific rule saying it's not melee when it's in the air. Can we be done with this now?

It would be if you posted something relevant. You posted stuff about melee attacks. Good for you.

I'm talking about melee weapons being used as ranged weapons. If it stopped being a melee weapon, it also stopped being a thrown weapon so it can't be used in ranged combat. Counted as a ranged weapon in no way means that is stopped being a melee weapon.

 

[DracoSuave]

Maybe. If you can get an implement based melee basic attack up and running, it'll be relatively easy. Remember, you can make a basic ranged attack with a ranged weapon, without using a ranged weapon (Eldritch blast, pact-blade dagger as implement, 1 lb so improvised ranged weapon), so there certainly isn't any inherent prohibition against doing so.

Actually, you can use a ranged basic attack without using a weapon at all.

Magic Missle with no implement what-so-ever is a basic ranged attack without an accessory. But this is splitting hairs.