2HW vs. Versatile for Feats?

[rainsinger]

There are a number of feats that read this way, but for sake of this post I'll just use this one:

Steel Vanguard Veteran
(blah blah blah... skip most of it)

You score a critical hit on a 19 or 20 with any at-will exploit associated with this feat when using a two-handed heavy blade. (Brash Strike, Brash Assault)

...anyway, what I couldn't get any definitive answer on was this: If a person is using a versatile weapon (Longsword for example) two-handed, and uses one of those at-wills, does the attack get to use that feat?

My assumption here leans toward no, as I think they are implying a weapon property and not an active 'stance' or use of the weapon as the prerequisite, but if there's been any official errata on this or whatever, I'd appreciate the input.

Thanks!

 

[Obryn]

No. Two-Handed weapons are a type of weapon. They don't include one-handed or versatile weapons used with two hands.

 

[rainsinger]

Aye, so a versatile weapon would only work if it read "...while wielding a heavy blade in two hands."

Or something like that... pretty much what I figured.

 

[Obryn]

Aye, so a versatile weapon would only work if it read "...while wielding a heavy blade in two hands."

Or something like that... pretty much what I figured.

Bingo!

-O

 

[DracoSuave]

Mike Mearls says the intent is that Versatile treats it as two-handed when you use it as such.

Immo take his word for it, his name is on the cover.

Opinion of designer of game trumps the opinion of rules-attorneys on joe q forum (and that includes myself) with regards to rules questions.

 

[Flipguarder]

I still think there's no problem ruling either way. I really think that there is a whole lot out there more problematic in 4e.

 

[Mirtek]

Mike Mearls says the intent is that Versatile treats it as two-handed when you use it as such.

Immo take his word for it, his name is on the cover.

Opinion of designer of game trumps the opinion of rules-attorneys on joe q forum (and that includes myself) with regards to rules questions.

That depends on where this questions comes up.

In a home game I would always go with the stated intent of the designers.

If this however comes up at official games (like RPGA) I would go with what the designers have actually written down in the RAW, even if this contradicts what they later stated to have been their original intent (if they don't write down what they meant, they'll need to issue official errata and be more carefull what they're actually writting down next time)

 

[Obryn]

Mike Mearls says the intent is that Versatile treats it as two-handed when you use it as such.

Immo take his word for it, his name is on the cover.

Opinion of designer of game trumps the opinion of rules-attorneys on joe q forum (and that includes myself) with regards to rules questions.

Absent official clarification, he's just a rules-attorney on a forum, too.

-O

 

[Flipguarder]

So Obryn, would you say that it could go either way? Or do you still stick to your previous comment. And if so why?

 

[Obryn]

So Obryn, would you say that it could go either way? Or do you still stick to your previous comment. And if so why?

Erm... yes? I'd forgotten that Mearls had weighed in on it, but I don't think it necessarily matters.

I also don't think he's playing the game wrong if he does this in either way. He should play whatever way is most fun. He wasn't asking which way is more fun, though - he was asking what the rules are.

-O