How do you rule on invisible weapons?

[szilard]

The fact that people are giving multiple answers to the same question, and they are different from one another, shows that there is more than one answer, none of which are "right" or "wrong".

I disagree on all counts.

Since you and I are responding to the same issue in ways that are different from one another, there is more than one answer, none of which are "right" or "wrong."

Therefore, it is neither right nor wrong that people are giving multiple answers to the same question, nor is it right or wrong that there is more than one answer... nor is it right or wrong that that one or more answer that may or may not exist is/are right or wrong.

-Stuart

 

[ainbimagh]

Even for the whip in question?

You know the weapon with no fixed length.

Yes even for the whip in question, length has nothing to do with the entire situation.

 

[javcs]

<experience>
When you're fighting with someone, as long as you know what you're using, it really doesn't matter if you are looking at your weapon, you're watching the other guy and his weapon. Once you're decent with whatever weapon you're using it's really like an extension of your body.

That might not go for more flexible weapons such as whips and such weapons, I wouldn't know, I haven't used them, so I can't go from experience.
</experience>

Besides, when all of you and your weapon is invisible, you can't see yourself, you just know where everything is. When you're invisible, it should be much harder for you to wield a weapon accurately than when you are visible and the weapon is invisible, if you're going with that argument.

But yeah, since a source for rules have been given ...

 

[lukelightning]

All I can say is that getting your invisible weapon disarmed is a major pain!

 

[pallandrome]

There is an easy way to test the "Do you need to see the weapon to effectively know it's range?" question. It's something we do at the dojo all the time called "learning your reach". You swing your sword (or in our case at the dojo, your staff) at the target, until you barely strike it. Then you do it over and over and over again. Trust me, once someone is well trained with the staff, they can swing at the target without looking at it or their weapon, and get within half an inch of where they want to hit almost every time. Pretty much anyone who has trained extensively with a weapon will tell you the same thing. Seeing your own weapon does not help a good fighter fight.

 

[sirwmholder]

Since I do not own the new Complete Han Solo book this is how I would handle it. I might would require Exotic Weapon Proficiency to effectively wield an invisible weapon (I can see the argument either way). I would allow the invisible weapon wielder a Sleight of Hand or Bluff check to Feint ( being Unarmed ) in order to catch their opponent Flat-footed the first round they engage combat even if they are aware of you. I would also give a circumstance bonus to the weapon wielder in question if anyone tried to disarm or sunder their invisible weapon. Probably a +4 or +5 against the attempt.

Thank you for your time,
William Holder

 

[Abisashi]

All I can say is that getting your invisible weapon disarmed is a major pain!

This is hillarious.



For those who want to make invisible weapons very powerful (+2 to hit, flat-foot the opponent, etc.), why wouldn't every high-level adventurer use an invisible weapon? The price is much less than adding that 5th +1. I would be ready for any high-level PC to invest in this as soon as you reveal how good it is.

 

[javcs]

All I can say is that getting your invisible weapon disarmed is a major pain!

That's why you get your wizard/sorcerer buddy to arcane mark it for you.
Or you tie a string to it.
Or use Detect Magic, or See Invisibility. Or something.

 

[KarinsDad]

You can't disprove that wielding an invisible weapon is harder than wielding it if it were not invisible.

I might not be able to disprove it, but I can make a strong case according to the rules.

If one is Invisible and swings his Invisible weapon at an opponent, then according to the RULES, there are no penalties to hit.

So minimally, there should be no penalties for swinging an invisible weapon while visible if there are no penalties for doing it while invisible. In both cases, he cannot see his weapon. It can be inferred from the rules that is it not harder to swing a weapon while it is invisible.

Whether there are bonuses is debatable.

 

[blargney the second]

If using an invisible weapon to hit someone is impossible, then I guess all those Wii players are miracle workers.