Defending - Melee Weapon Special Ability

[Hypersmurf]

It never says anywhere in the text for Defending that the weapon actually loses it's enhancement bonus; it's just being applied differently. It won't change the hardness or hitpoints of the weapon, just it's bonus to hit and damage. (If it lost it's enhancement bonus, then it would lose the defending power, since a weapon needs to be at least +1 to have special weapon powers)

Only if it loses all of its enhancement bonus. You can transfer some or all. It's just that if you transfer all, it's no longer eligible to be a Defending weapon.

A point of enhancement bonus grants:
+1 to attack rolls
+1 to damage rolls
+2 hardness
+10 hit points
ability to bypass DR X/Magic
ability to possess magic weapon special abilities

The Defending ability doesn't say that you transfer the attack and damage elements of the enhancement bonus while leaving the other elements unaffected. It says you transfer the enhancement bonus to AC as a [unnamed] bonus. While it's being an unnamed bonus, it's not being an enhancement bonus, so why should the benefits of having an enhancement bonus apply? How do we decide what goes and what stays?

-Hyp.

 

[pawsplay]

You know that don't I don't like the question game, and on more than one occasion I've politely requested that you don't attempt to use it with me. Yet you still choose not to give me that simple courtesy.

Hm...

How characteristic of Socrates! he replied, with a bitter laugh; --that's your ironical style! Did I not foresee --have I not already told you, that whatever he was asked he would refuse to answer, and try irony or any other shuffle, in order that he might avoid answering?

 

[pawsplay]

Only useless if you have an enhancement bonus of less than +2 on the weapon.

And it's complicated by taking an implicit "minimum of +1" rule (explicit in the general Magic Weapons section, but not highlighted in the Ability description) and reminding the wielder of its existence.

I don't see it as less simple, and it strikes me as the natural consequence - if you transfer away a bonus that has benefits, you lose access to those benefits until you regain the bonus.

-Hyp.

While your argument is sound, I disagree on your interpretation. I support the position it is still a weapon of whatever enhancement bonus, but that bonus has temporarily been shifted to another purpose.

 

[Hypersmurf]

While your argument is sound, I disagree on your interpretation. I support the position it is still a weapon of whatever enhancement bonus, but that bonus has temporarily been shifted to another purpose.

But shifted from where?

From wherever it was, surely... and does that not include hardness and hit points?

-Hyp.

 

[pawsplay]

But shifted from where?

From wherever it was, surely... and does that not include hardness and hit points?

-Hyp.

I don't think so. While you can transfer the enhancement bonus using the defending property, that doesn't make the weapon not have the bonus. Which is to say, a +3 weapon which is currently +1 makes at least as much as sense as a fighter with a 16 Str who currently has a 12 (due to magical effects).

An unfortunate side effect of considering it a change in the weapon itself is that the "effect" (presumably the bonus, not the transfer) lasts until next turn, but the transfer itself is stated as of no particular duration.

Thus, a +3 defending longsword is still a +3 defending longsword, even if +1, +2, or even +3 of the bonus is currently transferred. Further, it is still a weapon with an enhancement bonus (if it lacked one, it could not be transferring its effect).

If you consider, as you state, that a +3 defending longsword that transfers three points to not be a +3 weapon, it follows logically that if it transfers two points it is a +1. But a +1 longsword cannot transfer two points of enhancement bonus. If it must retain its bonus in order to transfer it, the weapon property results in a contradiction if it is used at all.

 

[tenkar]

I agree that Smurf's interpretation is overcomplicated and unwieldy. The pluses are being used for AC temporarily as opposed to a to hit bonus. The pluses aren't gone. They don't disappear. The magic doesn't weaken because the bonus is being applied differently. A plus 5 Defender is a +5 item no mater how its bonuses are being used. If it is adding plus 5 to my AC it is still a plus 5 item... +2 hit +3 to AC it is still a plus 5 item... that doesn't change, nor does its hardness, hit points, or anything else.

I would, however, consider the need to wield the weapon actively as a prerequisite to applying an AC bonus. For the defender properties to work the weapon would have to take an active defensive posture of some sort, not just be held in a hand as a spell is cast.

{pawsplay posted as i was typing... heh}

 

[Hypersmurf]

... it follows logically that if it transfers two points it is a +1.

Right.

But a +1 longsword cannot transfer two points of enhancement bonus.

It doesn't need to. It was a +3 longsword that transferred the points. The +1 longsword isn't tranferring anything... that already happened.

If it must retain its bonus in order to transfer it...

It must retain at least a +1 bonus in order to be a Defending weapon.

-Hyp.

 

[chriton227]

Only useless if you have an enhancement bonus of less than +2 on the weapon.

And it's complicated by taking an implicit "minimum of +1" rule (explicit in the general Magic Weapons section, but not highlighted in the Ability description) and reminding the wielder of its existence.

I don't see it as less simple, and it strikes me as the natural consequence - if you transfer away a bonus that has benefits, you lose access to those benefits until you regain the bonus.

-Hyp.

But you aren't transfering the bonus away from the weapon, the ability just allows you to utilize the bonus in a non-standard way. The enhancement bonus on shields increase the hardness and hp of the item in the exact same way as a weapon's enhancement bonus.

Defending
A defending weapon allows the wielder to transfer some or all of the sword’s enhancement bonus to his AC as a bonus that stacks with all others. As a free action, the wielder chooses how to allocate the weapon’s enhancement bonus at the start of his turn before using the weapon, and the effect to AC lasts until his next turn.

Notice the word "allocate". That implies that the weapon still has its enhancement bonus, just instead of allocating it to the normal purpose of providing a bonus to attack and damage, you can choose to allocate the bonus to your AC in a very specific way.

Interpreting it as the weapon "losing" it's enhancement bonus would be needlessly complex at my game table. It would make Defending the only ability that you can put on a weapon and not be able to use at all (in the case of a +1 defending weapon), a weapon could self destruct from shifting the bonus, hardness would vary up and down, and caster level would vary up and down. It would really mess with the new weapon crystals out of the Magic Item Compendium, since I believe some of them have a minimum enhancement bonus requirement for the weapon to which they are attached.

To prevent abuse (dual wielding defending weapons with defending armor spikes on both your armor and your animated shield), I would rule as a DM that the AC bonus from multiple defending weapons don't stack with each other (under the clause under stacking that indicates that unnamed bonuses from identically named sources don't stack), and would not require an attack to utilize the bonus to AC. If a character really wants to pay 72k gp for a +5 to AC (that can be easily disarmed no less) instead of paying the 50k gp for a +5 ring of protection or amulet of natural armor, or even 64k gp for +8 Bracers of Armor or a +5 moderate fortification buckler and still have money left over, I would let them.

I would also say that if you allocated the entire enhancement bonus to your AC, the weapon would not defeat DR #/Magic since the DR entry specifically says:

Some monsters are vulnerable to magic weapons. Any weapon with at least a +1 magical enhancement bonus on attack and damage rolls overcomes the damage reduction of these monsters.

If you have allocated the entire bonus to AC, that means you have allocated none of the bonus to attack and damage, and thus have not met the criteria to defeat the DR.

 

[pawsplay]

It doesn't need to. It was a +3 longsword that transferred the points. The +1 longsword isn't tranferring anything... that already happened.

Along with calculating hardness and deciding what qualities are legal on the weapon. The +3 longsword, as you observe, does continue to exist. It simply has had its bonus (not its properties in general, just the number) transferred.

 

[Olaf the Stout]

Oof, this is another one those questions that can generate pages of discussion, debate, and eventually cyberstalking and restraining orders.

Yikes! You were right!

I think I might just avoid the whole argument and not take a weapon with the Defending special ability.

Olaf the Stout