Defending weapon question

[Runestar]

Never thought of the masterwork bonus applying either! I have learnt something new again!

 

[orion90000]

Enhancement Bonus
An enhancement bonus represents an increase in the sturdiness and/or effectiveness of armor or natural armor, or the effectiveness of a weapon, or a general bonus to an ability score.

All magic weapons are automatically considered to be of masterwork quality. The enhancement bonus granted by the masterwork quality doesn’t stack with the enhancement bonus provided by the weapon’s magic.

+3 overrides the Masterwork quality of the sword in the first place. Converting the +3 to Armor doesn't change the fact that the sword is still has +3 enhancement bonus; therefore, no, you don't somehow cheat the system.

 

[Magesmiley]

So to clarify some of my thinking - the passage explicitly indicating that they don't stack is a really strong indicator that the enhancement bonus for the masterwork property and the magic enhancement bonus are two separate bonuses of the same type.

Normally, if there are two bonuses of the same type, only the bigger one applies. However, if the bigger one ceases to be applied for some reason, the lesser usually kicks in (a good example might be normal plate mail + mage armor vs an incorporeal attack).

It really comes down to how you interpret the transfer statement in the defending ability - I interpret it to mean that if you transfer everything to AC that the magic of the weapon grants a +0 enhancment bonus to attack rolls, and that since the masterwork enhancement bonus is still in effect, you get a +1 on attack rolls.

Finally, what constitute's the sword's enhancement bonus is another fun grey area. Does it mean any enhancement bonus on the sword or just the magical pluses? I interpreted that to mean the magical pluses. Interpreting it any other way can lead to some really odd situations.

 

[Dross]

There's no reason to put your main weapon as a defending weapon, really.

Seeing as how you can get +1 defending armor spikes, +1 defending shield spikes, +1 defending gauntlets, +1 defending braid blade, +1 defending dueling cloak, +1 defending poison ring (as many as you want really), +1 defending boot blades, knee blades, sleeve blades, etc. and cast greater magic weapon on one or more of them, and put the (now higher) enhancement bonus from all of those to AC every single round as a free action, and that AC bonus stacks for all forms of AC... and you just attack with your main weapon as normal...

Don't you actually have to use the weapon for it to qualify?

You do have to use the weapon to gain the defensive bonus. From the DMG:
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.
Moderate abjuration; CL 8th; Craft Magic Arms and Armor, shield or shield of faith; Price +1 bonus.

To me, using in this case is rolling to hit something.

Or just thought, using the total defense action probably qualifies.

Pre-crash I asked this Q and Hypersmurf had some replies along the lines of (from memory so only a vague quote): if you use all the +'s on defending the sword is no longer magical and thus the defending property doesn't work snapping the +'s back to the weapon which is now + thus the you can use defending which makes the weapon non-magical again. Hype also noted that as only the +'s on a weapon increase the weapon's HP (without anything to trump that general rule) any + added to defending changed the HP of the weapon.

My common sense come "houserule" says that the HP stays the same regardless of the +'s added to defending. the + from masterwork would rules wise work because of the non-stacking (allowing it might be another matter if it ever comes up).

 

[Vegepygmy]

Or just thought, using the total defense action probably qualifies.

I very much doubt it. When using the total defense action, you don't threaten anybody, which implies you're not using the weapon at all.

 

[Dandu]

Pre-crash I asked this Q and Hypersmurf had some replies along the lines of (from memory so only a vague quote): if you use all the +'s on defending the sword is no longer magical and thus the defending property doesn't work snapping the +'s back to the weapon which is now + thus the you can use defending which makes the weapon non-magical again. Hype also noted that as only the +'s on a weapon increase the weapon's HP (without anything to trump that general rule) any + added to defending changed the HP of the weapon.

I'd consider changing the magical status of the weapon and its HP a rather odd interpretation of how the Defending weapon property works.

The weapon should definitely not stop being magical just because it has the +2 enhancement bonus taken away, otherwise you would be unable to use it in the manner specifically laid out in the item description.

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.

 

[Dross]

I'd consider changing the magical status of the weapon and its HP a rather odd interpretation of how the Defending weapon property works.

The weapon should definitely not stop being magical just because it has the +2 enhancement bonus taken away, otherwise you would be unable to use it in the manner specifically laid out in the item description.

Agree with that Dandu. To me it is the ideal indication of RAI overruling RAW, as otherwise it doesn't work.

 

[Aplus]

As a DM, I would not allow the masterwork to-hit bonus to be applied. If you want +1 to hit, then you will have to only take +2 to your AC. Just because you are transferring the weapon's enhancement bonus to your AC, that does not cause the weapon to become non-magical, so you do not get the masterwork bonus.

I think the spirit of a player trying to make a case for this is very munchkinesque.

Right or wrong, that's how I'd rule.

 

[Zomg Zombies]

Just to take a moment for a couple examples of the quagmire that is taking real-life logic and applying it to the game:

When you use the defending enhancement, you shift the magical aptitude and 'luck' of the weapon that normally finds the weak spots in your opponents armor, to magical aptitude at parrying and being at the right place to knock your opponents weaponry away. However, your weapon is still masterfully weighed/aerodynamicly designed so you should still get the mundane bonus.

You do have to use the weapon to gain the defensive bonus. From the DMG:
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.
Moderate abjuration; CL 8th; Craft Magic Arms and Armor, shield or shield of faith; Price +1 bonus.

To me, using in this case is rolling to hit something

Actually, the use of armor/shield spikes were mostly used defensively in real life, either to catch a blade as it skittered across the armor/shield, and thusly mess up proper fallow-through, or to intimidate/demoralize your opponents so they aren't using all their offensive capabilities as they wonder if this sharp spiky dude is really worth fighting.

If you were dual-wielding two weapons, with one defender, you wouldn't need to fight defensively, or go total defence to shift the defender's enhancement to AC; shield/armor/knee/elbow/shoulder/forehead/codpiece spikes are just additional weapons.

If you feel that a player is going overboard on armor spikes (no, Freud has NOTHING to say about my +5 defender codpiece spike...), I'd suggest A) cut back on how many spiked things you'd allow, 2) incorporate the characters proclivity for spikes in-game (sure he's a lawful good paladin of Pelor, but with those spikes, spines, and blades sticking out everywhere, he LOOKS like a cultist of Demogogian, jobs have been strangely just been filled, hirelings keep asking if you're feeling alright, the local tavern closes up for lunch just as you approach), and may St. Cuthbert help you if you ever get knocked prone, instead of needing squires to get you up, you need squires with prybars! ¾) you could modify the untyped AC bonus to a typed one, or go half-n-half say main and off hand the AC bonus is untyped, but for everything else it's a morale bonus to AC.