Defending - Melee Weapon Special Ability

[Hypersmurf]

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.

But it ceases to be an enhancement bonus at that point, and becomes an unnamed bonus. The weapon no longer has an enhancement bonus (if you transferred all of it), so it interacts differently with sentences like "A weapon with a special ability must have at least a +1 enhancement bonus" or "Each +1 of enhancement bonus adds 2 to a weapon’s or shield’s hardness and +10 to its hit points".

-Hyp.

 

[Hypersmurf]

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.

It existed in the past; it will exist in the future. But right now, it isn't a +3 longsword. It has had (some of) its enhancement bonus reallocated as an unnamed bonus to AC; therefore, properties which depend on being a +3 longsword aren't going to be the same as they were.

If it's currently a longsword with a +1 enhancement bonus, which is also providing a +2 unnamed bonus to AC, then it follows the rules for longswords-with-+1-enhancement-bonuses, not the rules for longswords-with-+3-enhancement-bonuses.

-Hyp.

 

[Infiniti2000]

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.

And it doesn't matter how much or how politely you are asked not to be passive aggressive, dismissive and condescending, yet you still do it. Your take is "more reasonable"? Says who? If you don't like Hyp's responses, put him on ignore. Put me on it, too. Lord knows I need to be on someone's ignore list. I can't seem to get Bad Paper to do it...

 

[pawsplay]

It existed in the past; it will exist in the future. But right now, it isn't a +3 longsword.

So you're saying a +3 defending longsword is not a +3 defending longsword, when it uses its defending property? I believe the modifications to the weapon's properties are listed under objects, not under the rules for the enhancement bonus of items.

I have a hard time believing a monk's fist, when enhanced, gains hardness and hit points.

 

[Infiniti2000]

I have a hard time believing a monk's fist, when enhanced, gains hardness and hit points.

A monk's fist doesn't have hit points in the first place, so that is a straw man argument. However, should you have (for example) a house rule attributing hit points to different body parts, a la The Morrow Project, then it certainly would give the first hardness and hit points. Of course, that brings up a-whole-nother thorny problem, which is 'separating' out the fist from unarmed strike. Let's not get into that one.

 

[pawsplay]

A monk's fist doesn't have hit points in the first place, so that is a straw man argument. However, should you have (for example) a house rule attributing hit points to different body parts, a la The Morrow Project, then it certainly would give the first hardness and hit points. Of course, that brings up a-whole-nother thorny problem, which is 'separating' out the fist from unarmed strike. Let's not get into that one.

Simply stating "that is a straw man" is not an adequate rejoinder unless you state why the argument is a straw man. It may be ridiculous that the fist would gain hit points, but that is the consequence of the opposite position, not mine.

It is not correct to state, thus, that an argument is a "straw man" by virtue of it slicing through one's own position like butter.

 

[Hypersmurf]

So you're saying a +3 defending longsword is not a +3 defending longsword, when it uses its defending property?

Right. Because the +3 represents its enhancement bonus, and while its using the Defending property, its enhancement bonus isn't +3... it's +3 less whatever enhancement bonus has been reallocated as an unnamed bonus to AC.

I believe the modifications to the weapon's properties are listed under objects, not under the rules for the enhancement bonus of items.

It's under both, but even if it were only listed under objects, what it says under objects is that it has +2 hardness and +10 hit points per point of enhancement bonus. If the enhancement bonus goes away, then the +2 hardness and +10 hit points are no longer applicable.

If I cast a targeted Dispel Magic and suppress your +3 sword, its extra hardness and hit points would go away then, too... and they'd come back when the magic returned.

-Hyp.

 

[Gerion of Mercadia]

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.

Which then means that I am no longer WIELDING a "defending" weapon?

What you are stating Hyp is that a +1 Defending longsword, when you activate it's "defending mode" - isn't magical in any respect anymore, and therefore, cannot have a bonus to my AC or attack rolls.

It's under both, but even if it were only listed under objects, what it says under objects is that it has +2 hardness and +10 hit points per point of enhancement bonus. If the enhancement bonus goes away, then the +2 hardness and +10 hit points are no longer applicable.

It still "has" the bonus, it is just being reallocated.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Which then means that I am no longer WIELDING a "defending" weapon?

What you are stating Hyp is that a +1 Defending longsword, when you activate it's "defending mode" - isn't magical in any respect anymore, and therefore, cannot have a bonus to my AC or attack rolls.

Except that once it becomes no longer Defending, the ability that permits the bonus to be reallocated is gone, and so the reallocation can't be sustained; it will revert to being an enhancement bonus, and thus you'll have a +1 Defending weapon again. It's just that the start of your turn has already passed, so you can't reallocate again.

It still "has" the bonus, it is just being reallocated.

It's being reallocated as an unnamed bonus... so the weapon is no longer a weapon that has at least a +1 enhancement bonus.

-Hyp.

 

[Gerion of Mercadia]

Lets say I have a +5 Defending longsword. I reallocate all of the +5 bonus to my AC.

BBEG Blackguard uses His improved Sunder attack on My longsword, dealing it 40 points of damage...

Is My sword destroyed?