Implement ambiguities

[Benly]

So there are a couple things regarding implement rules that I can't find a clarification about anywhere in the books. I apologize if these are obvious questions or have already been answered, but I also couldn't find them on the forum here.

1: Is an actual limit placed on the number of implements that can be utilized at once in a general fashion? There is a clearly-stated limit for holy symbols, but I can't find such a limit stated as a general rule for implements, nor as a specific rule for rods (as I am playing a warlock, rods are my primary field of interest). While it is probably not rules-as-intended, it seems to be rules-as-written that a warlock can carry a Rod of Contagion in one hand and a Rod of Reaping in the other, and mow down an unlimited number of minions with a single minor action.

2: Suppose a warlock multiclasses to rogue and Eldritch Blasts an enemy against whom he has combat advantage, using a Pact Blade as his implement. Is this an attack with a light blade, thereby granting sneak attack damage? If so, why? If not, why not? Again, the rules as intended are probably that it is not, but I can't find any reason in the rules as written that it wouldn't be.

 

[neoweasel]

So there are a couple things regarding implement rules that I can't find a clarification about anywhere in the books. I apologize if these are obvious questions or have already been answered, but I also couldn't find them on the forum here.

1: Is an actual limit placed on the number of implements that can be utilized at once in a general fashion? There is a clearly-stated limit for holy symbols, but I can't find such a limit stated as a general rule for implements, nor as a specific rule for rods (as I am playing a warlock, rods are my primary field of interest). While it is probably not rules-as-intended, it seems to be rules-as-written that a warlock can carry a Rod of Contagion in one hand and a Rod of Reaping in the other, and mow down an unlimited number of minions with a single minor action.

Given that implements (except Holy Symbols) need to be actively wielded to have an effect, I would say that you only get the effect of the implement you actually used to activate the power.

2: Suppose a warlock multiclasses to rogue and Eldritch Blasts an enemy against whom he has combat advantage, using a Pact Blade as his implement. Is this an attack with a light blade, thereby granting sneak attack damage? If so, why? If not, why not? Again, the rules as intended are probably that it is not, but I can't find any reason in the rules as written that it wouldn't be.

Well, given that he is attacking with Eldritch Blast rather than a weapon out of the appropriate categories, I'd say that it doesn't qualify for sneak attack.

 

[Benly]

Given that implements (except Holy Symbols) need to be actively wielded to have an effect, I would say that you only get the effect of the implement you actually used to activate the power.

The Rod of Corruption (I misrecalled the name) has a property that does not require the use of a power - it triggers when your pact boon activates, permitting you to place your Warlock's Curse on a number of enemies. Similarly, the Rod of Reaving's property is not applied to powers with the implement keyword, but rather triggers when your Warlock's Curse is place. Since neither pact boon nor Warlock's Curse has the implement keyword, your suggestion would indicate that neither rod can ever have its effect, since they cannot be used to "activate" the power in question.

Well, given that he is attacking with Eldritch Blast rather than a weapon out of the appropriate categories, I'd say that it doesn't qualify for sneak attack.

This is surely the intention. However, what rules text exists that differentiates this from (for example) a rogue using an attack power with a light weapon? Unless Sneak Attack only triggers on basic attacks, there needs to be rules text differentiating the situations for there to be a difference - a power with the implement keyword is "using a light blade" when a light blade is the implement to the same degree that a power with the weapon keyword is "using a light blade" when a light blade is the weapon.

 

[neoweasel]

The Rod of Corruption (I misrecalled the name) has a property that does not require the use of a power - it triggers when your pact boon activates, permitting you to place your Warlock's Curse on a number of enemies. Similarly, the Rod of Reaving's property is not applied to powers with the implement keyword, but rather triggers when your Warlock's Curse is place. Since neither pact boon nor Warlock's Curse has the implement keyword, your suggestion would indicate that neither rod can ever have its effect, since they cannot be used to "activate" the power in question.

Hrm. I can't see anything that explicitly PREVENTS it from happening. None of the entries on Implements says anything I can see (I've only looked at the class lists and the stuff in the magic items section). Regardless, I am SURE that wasn't intended to happen. I might just be overlooking something, though.

This is surely the intention. However, what rules text exists that differentiates this from (for example) a rogue using an attack power with a light weapon? Unless Sneak Attack only triggers on basic attacks, there needs to be rules text differentiating the situations for there to be a difference - a power with the implement keyword is "using a light blade" when a light blade is the implement to the same degree that a power with the weapon keyword is "using a light blade" when a light blade is the weapon.

As far as I can tell, there is no specific rules text that prevents that from happening. I am fairly sure that was the intent, however.

I am also fairly sure that the game won't suddenly become unbalanced just because a warlock does an extra 2d6 or so once per encounter, so whatever makes your socks go up and down.

 

[tophu]

Well, given that he is attacking with Eldritch Blast rather than a weapon out of the appropriate categories, I'd say that it doesn't qualify for sneak attack.

Oh man! Does this mean that spellcaster/rogues can't sneak attack with their spells in 4e? Bummer.

So perhaps the deciding factor on whether the light blade would work is the Weapon keyword in the power description?

 

[tophu]

Well, given that he is attacking with Eldritch Blast rather than a weapon out of the appropriate categories, I'd say that it doesn't qualify for sneak attack.

Oh man! Does this mean that spellcaster/rogues can't sneak attack with their spells in 4e? Bummer.

So perhaps the deciding factor on whether the light blade would work is the Weapon keyword in the power description?

 

[Makaze]

1. I'd allow a Warlock to wield multiple rods and use the powers from any of them, much like wielding an axe and a hammer allows a fighter to use either axe or hammer powers. In your specific example with the Rod of Corruption I'd definitely make sure that the power used to kill the enemy (And thus activate the pact boon) was cast with the Rod of Corruption as its implement. I'd also rule that its transference of the curse to all surrounding enemies would not activate the Rod of Reaving since the curse spreading is part of an action that was using the Rod of Corruption as its implement and not the Rod of Reaving.

But there's nothing wrong with a warlock using a minor action to curse something and use the Rod of Reaving power to hurt it. Then using a standard action to kill it and use the Rod of Corruption to spread the curse. Basically it means just having a +1 Rod of Reaving in your off hand if a pretty decent warlock strategy.

And if you want a legal way of pulling off that combo then you can combine the Rod of Corruption with the Doomsayer paragon path's action point ability that makes everyone under your curse take your curse damage.

2. Clearly not the intention of the rules. I'm sure it will be erratad but it's one of many many examples that are going to come up in the following weeks that might possibly be correct by the RAW but no one with a bit of common sense would let or think you should get away with.

 

[Benly]

1. I'd allow a Warlock to wield multiple rods and use the powers from any of them, much like wielding an axe and a hammer allows a fighter to use either axe or hammer powers. In your specific example with the Rod of Corruption I'd definitely make sure that the power used to kill the enemy (And thus activate the pact boon) was cast with the Rod of Corruption as its implement.

Pact boon triggers no matter who downs the target. In other words, the Rod of Corruption's trigger is independent of your use of powers or your use of it as an implement. You may have a case with Corruption not triggering Reaving, since Corruption's wording is that it "transfers" your Curse and Reaving triggers when you "place" your curse, but it's muddy water.

If you can carry a rod in each hand and both are considered "wielded", there is no case that you should not be able to benefit from both as each triggers off a particular event and there is no event that will trigger both's properties. (Presumably their bonuses for Implement powers are not intended to be simultaneously gained, but this is not clear in the rules and is easy to houserule out.) This suggests that the optimum strategy for a warlock is to offhand a Corruption, Reaving or Harvest rod with low bonus to get its property benefit while using a "main" rod as your actual implement.

 

[small pumpkin man]

Oh man! Does this mean that spellcaster/rogues can't sneak attack with their spells in 4e? Bummer.

So perhaps the deciding factor on whether the light blade would work is the Weapon keyword in the power description?

This.

The pact blade "functions as an implement" meaning you're not using it as a weapon, meaning things like weapon damage, range, keywords, or weapon types (such as "light blade") have no effect.