Battle Royale of the Gawds continuation

[clockworkjoe]

Ok, what the heck happened over there with Icitrik?

I'm not sure exactly but last night Icitrik ICQed me saying he wanted to change his turn if he couldn't destroy the weapon using his christmas natural 20 and while normally I don't allow take backs, I mislead him before since I didn't tell him of the rule that states magic weapons can only be damaged by weapons of equal or higher enchantment (I didn't know that was a rule).

However, I was in the middle of a warcraft 3 game and didn't want to stop to icq him for however long it took to get his new turn. I told him that this turn was turning into a pain in the ass (not because of him, but because I kept having to go back to it trying to figure out what to do) and to just email me his new turn and I would figure all of this out after I was done playing warcraft 3.

I think he interpreted this as meaning that I told him to go screw himself or something like that which is NOT what I intended.

I'll give him 24 hours to send me a new turn otherwise I'll go by my second ruling (Weapon damaged, knocked out of jarrod's hands) and process ancryx's turn (which I already have but i want to sort through this first)

Again, I'm sorry If I insulted you or pissed you off. I was angry when I icqed icitirk, not at him, but at warcraft 3 (level 8 undead campaign) and just wanted to finish that off.

 

[Saepiroth]

oh, is THAT the problem? what about the Monk's Ki Strike: that gives him +x to his unarmed attacks for purposes of piercing DR, and presumably would carry over to damaging magic items. with the tattoo, he should be dealing damage effectively as a +3 weapon, shouldn't he?

unless Jarrod went all pluses with no special effects, doesn't that affect him?

 

[clockworkjoe]

oh, is THAT the problem? what about the Monk's Ki Strike: that gives him +x to his unarmed attacks for purposes of piercing DR, and presumably would carry over to damaging magic items. with the tattoo, he should be dealing damage effectively as a +3 weapon, shouldn't he?

unless Jarrod went all pluses with no special effects, doesn't that affect him?

you're forgetting the possibility of a greater magic weapon spell cast at level 15 (+5 bonus)

 

[Saepiroth]

damn.

 

[Twinswords]

I`m sorry if i made any problems.

I saw the action of icitrik (briljant action btw.) And since i wasn`t very familar with the rules of striking a weapon, i studied a bit up on them and looked also for some counteractions as mending and such. I then noticed the rule and since normally monks count as +2/+3 weapon. I simply asked if that was correct.

I try to learn from this game so i can use good actions/ideas later in my own game. (the trea of death is one trick i won`t be using)

I hope that other players also look up special actions so they can learn from it. If any notices a mistake i make or so please say so and i will look it up. and if correct ask clockwork to reverse it.

Twinswords,
Jarrod

 

[Number47]

The case could be made, although I don't think it's a very strong one, that only the permanent enchantment of the weapon counts for when determining if it can be damaged or not. Note on page 136 of the PHB the text that refers to magic weapons and shields. It could be argued that the only enhancements that count are those that are permanent.

Personally, the damaging magical weapons part of the rules is one I hope they overhaul for 3.5. It smacks of 1E/2E, where a magic weapon either did full or no damage to creatures. It didn't work for creatures, it doesn't work for weapon damage.

 

[Saepiroth]

The case could be made, although I don't think it's a very strong one, that only the permanent enchantment of the weapon counts for when determining if it can be damaged or not. Note on page 136 of the PHB the text that refers to magic weapons and shields. It could be argued that the only enhancements that count are those that are permanent.

i'll make that case. besides, you have a backup weapon, don't you, Twinswords? admittedly, my little axe is primarily for defense purposes, but it's there...

 

[Terraism]

i'll make that case. besides, you have a backup weapon, don't you, Twinswords? admittedly, my little axe is primarily for defense purposes, but it's there...

I'd argue for it, too, but mainly because I think that GMW is a bit overpowered and I like the idea of a "true" magic weapon to be in some way superior.

 

[clockworkjoe]

I was thinking along the same lines as Terrasim which is why I opted to damage it and knock it out of Jarrod's hand. It is still a significant setback for Jarrod but I want to be fair to both players.

 

[reapersaurus]

[devil's advocate]
why don't we just re-evaluate ALL the 3E rules for this Game?
Don't like something? No prob - just change it on the fly.
Of course, only do that after the player has used the 3E rule for character-building, and strategy, and deciding posted actions. [/Devil's Advocate]

Seriously though, clockwork - if you have issues with more and more 3E rules, and are going to change them from the ones in the books, than could you maybe write them down, or list them ahead of time if they are going to impact players?

I'm not asking this question because of my Game experience - I'm asking because of what I'm seeing happen to others in the Game.

I know it would be very hard to list them all, but for instance - this Greater Magic Weapon thing you've known about for a long time.
Why change it this late in the Game?

Maybe all of us could list here some common problems, or things that you don't like about 3E Rules that may be changed before the Game is done?

I'll start a couple:
Is grappling going to work differently?
Is Invisibility in combat going to be changed at all?
Are any other spells that are on character sheets going to be changed?
Will any weapon effects be changed when they are used?
Will any magic items be tweaked when they are used?

Those are some of the areas that come to my mind that may be problematic if changed mid-Game, as they come up.
Can anyone think of any other things that maybe some proactive discussion now may stop surprises and ruffled feathers (like Icitrik) later?