35ft reach???

[Olaf the Stout]

Question for the ignorant, what does DMM and DSP stand for?

Olaf the Stout

 

[Deset Gled]

Quote from WotC 3.5E FAQ, dated 12/21/07:
...
As with the vast majority of examples in the Player’s
Handbook, the spiked chain description assumes that the
wielder is a Small or Medium creature wielding a spiked chain
appropriate to her size. What the description really means is
that a character wielding a spiked chain can attack creatures
that are within her natural reach (in addition to those at the
normal range of a reach weapon). For a Medium or Small
creature, that means creatures that are 5 feet away (i.e.,
“adjacent”).
....

Translation: We are changing the rules without issuing errata, and are blatantly disregarding the Primary Source Rule. Therefore, nothing we say here has any practical value.

 

[mvincent]

From the custserv database (if desired):
"Since both abilities look back at your actual size, Monkey Grip and Powerful Build are redundant and do not stack. They both give you the ability to wield a weapon one size category larger than yourself, but neither actually increases your size."

(and before it's mentioned: yeah, custserv has made errors before too... but as always, that's missing the point entirely)

 

[avr]

Question for the ignorant, what does DMM and DSP stand for?

Olaf the Stout

DMM's Divine Metamagic, essentially trading turn attempts and feats to get metamagic without changing the spell level. I'm not sure what DSP is.

 

[Hypersmurf]

"Since both abilities look back at your actual size, Monkey Grip and Powerful Build are redundant and do not stack. They both give you the ability to wield a weapon one size category larger than yourself, but neither actually increases your size."

Right.

The Strongarm Bracers, on the other hand, don't let you wield weapons one size larger than you; rather, they let you wield weapons as if you were one size larger.

So a Medium creature with the Bracers wields weapons as if he were a Large creature, and a Large creature with Monkey Grip or Powerful Build (or both) can wield Huge weapons. So a Medium creature with the Bracers and either Monkey Grip or Powerful Build can wield Huge weapons, but without the Bracers, he can only get as far as Large weapons, even with both Powerful Build and Monkey Grip.

-Hyp.

 

[moritheil]

DMM's Divine Metamagic, essentially trading turn attempts and feats to get metamagic without changing the spell level. I'm not sure what DSP is.

Divine Spell Power, which increases your caster level on the next spell you cast. By a close reading of the text, it can be stacked, as using it is a free action. Things get amusing when you have a caster level of, say, 20+ your character level. For example, you can run around with SR 45 pre-epic and laugh off most enemy spells. You can conjure up a massive angel or demon ally for an important fight. You can animate something normally far beyond your level.

DSP alone is, of course, unimpressive - it's DSP plus all the other things you can do to increase caster level that are collectively referred to as a "DSP build."

 

[moritheil]

Right.

The Strongarm Bracers, on the other hand, don't let you wield weapons one size larger than you; rather, they let you wield weapons as if you were one size larger.

So a Medium creature with the Bracers wields weapons as if he were a Large creature, and a Large creature with Monkey Grip or Powerful Build (or both) can wield Huge weapons. So a Medium creature with the Bracers and either Monkey Grip or Powerful Build can wield Huge weapons, but without the Bracers, he can only get as far as Large weapons, even with both Powerful Build and Monkey Grip.

-Hyp.

Of course, the real way to do this is to be titan-blooded. Due to the wording, you wield gargantuan weapons. Try hefting a structural column!

As the titan special ability.

Oversized Weapon (Ex)

A titan wields a great, two-handed warhammer (big enough for Gargantuan creatures) without penalty.

 

[Mistwell]

I don't mean to be snide, but this is the point at which you lost any hope of conclusively ending the argument. The 3.5 FAQ is notorious for incorrect judgments and contradicting both the printed rules and itself.

It convinced me conclusively.

People who reflexively dismiss out of hand anything from the 3.5 FAQ because it has errors are arguing from very weak ground in my opinion. The DMG has blatant errors that contradict it's own language and which are not corrected by errata, but that doesn't make it incorrect in general. See for example the pricing on Prayer Beads.

Same goes for the FAQ. In general, the FAQ is a very good source for resolving rules issues where there are two reasonable interpretations...like now. If the FAQ offers a logical explanation that is one consistent way of interpreting the rules, it's generally wise to go with it.

 

[Mistwell]

Translation: We are changing the rules without issuing errata, and are blatantly disregarding the Primary Source Rule. Therefore, nothing we say here has any practical value.

There are two competing reasonable interpretations of the existing rule. The FAQ clarified which interpretation was correct. That's not errata, it's exactly what a FAQ should do.

 

[Deset Gled]

There are two competing reasonable interpretations of the existing rule. The FAQ clarified which interpretation was correct. That's not errata, it's exactly what a FAQ should do.

To reach its interpretation, the FAQ states that the rules were in error when they used the term "adjacent", and that the term "natural reach" should be used instead. Since "adjacent" is a defined game term that means something very different than "natural reach", this change can only be made in an errata document.

The FAQ ruling is certainly reasonable and logical, but the explanation it gives is not valid.