Bracers of Striking

[Pax]

Like I said, Riga, it's a technicality, nothing more. But ... enhancemetn bonusses aren't "special abilities" the way the DMG lists them. Flaming, yes. Icy burst, yes. Ghost touch, sure. +2? No, that's not "Special", it's just inherent to a magic weapon -- it has a "plus-something-or-other" ... 8)

Further support for "both ends teh same" comes, IMO, in the form of Savage Species' "Necklace of Natural Weapons" -- which has it's given ability, priced as a magic wepaon .. and then multiplied by how many natural weapons it can affect. Indirect support, but support nonetheless.

 

[0-hr]

Pax, you are a moron, and a rude one at that(emphasis mine).

To everyone else, I appreciate your input on this matter and thank you for your opinions. I'm not going to respond to any more goads by troll-boy here so last word goes to him (which means his opinion must be right of course).

 

[Veldrane]

Pax, you are a moron, and a rude one at that(emphasis mine).

To everyone else, I appreciate your input on this matter and thank you for your opinions. I'm not going to respond to any more goads by troll-boy here so last word goes to him (which means his opinion must be right of course).

Any person who cannot see he's doing exactly what he's asking other people not to do must have something to think about.. ..we're here to discuss, and discussing implies expressing opinions based (mostly according to the topic discussion) on facts. You are reading the text one way, and that is your way.. ..others read it another way, and they have the same right you have to do it.. ..if you have the right not to be convinced by their argument, it's absolutely futile and quite childish to whine about them not convinced by yours...

Back to the topic, duoble weapons have special abilities, Bracers of Striking bestow special abilities, so that I would think it's quite strange to have a pair of bracers, one that bestow one ability, one another, considering that it's explicitly stated that you have to double the cost of any ability..

 

[Henry]

**************
Ki Ryn, I need to remind you that others' opinions need to be respected, ESPECIALLY when you are asking for them beforehand. "Now you're just making stuff up" is not what I would consider respect.

If you are ready for this thread to be closed, please let me know. Otherwise, if anyone has something productive to say, please contribute.
***************

 

[Storminator]

Like I said, Riga, it's a technicality, nothing more. But ... enhancemetn bonusses aren't "special abilities" the way the DMG lists them. Flaming, yes. Icy burst, yes. Ghost touch, sure. +2? No, that's not "Special", it's just inherent to a magic weapon -- it has a "plus-something-or-other" ... 8)

But you can't get any special abilities on your weapon until it's at least +1, so I would think enhancement is implied.

PS

 

[Pax]

Thx Henry.

Anyway -- Storminator, I do agree it should be allowed, but by the letter of the bracers it could be interpreted to not allow that. Mainly by way of pointing out that there are mroe than one way to interpret what might, at first blush, seem patently, irrefutably obvious.

OTOH, I consider those bracers to be the Gods' gift to Monks -- a real saving grace. Ergo, I let them have any and all enhancements, specials, etc ("of Impact" is a good one, IMO). They simply have to be (occam's razor) identical on both bracers.

 

[0-hr]

Yes, please, by all means close it. I didn't know I had such an option or I would have made the request days ago!

It's just a pet peeve of mine when people state an opinion as fact and then get insulting when others disagree. These rules are nothing if not open to interpretation.

 

[Pax]

Okay, Ki Ryn ... please look in a mirror. I didn't call you names (you caleld me names), I didn't say you were an idiot (you accused me of that).

I simply emphatically disagreed.

If you wish to characterise people as beinginsulting when they disagree, then I respectfully suggest you make sure you are not comitting the very sin you accuse others of.

As the saying goes, "remove the log from your own eye before you point out the splinter in another's eye" ...

 

[0-hr]

Would you care to tell me what the acronym "RTFM" stands for?

I hold a rather low opinion of people who swear at me for disagreeing with them. I, the author of this thread, have requested that it be closed. So please refrain from further posts unless you have something salient to add to the discussion.

Thank you.

 

[Pax]

Boy, that was a fishing expedition to write home about, wasn't it?

RTFM does not have to include profanity. For my part,it almost never does. "read teh freaking manual" != swearing at you. Now consider: you accused me of making things up ... in response to quoting the book word for word.

Ergo, an "rtfm" comment was appropriate; don't accuse someone of making stuff up when they quote the book, unless they HAVE (IOW, unless their quote is inaccurate).

Which translates nicely into, "read the book before you call my quote inaccurate" ...