Keen stacking

[Crothian]

Here's a link if you want to see the context of the rant.

I honestly don't understand what he is complaining about. The armor and the belt mentioned are fine. Sure, the power is unique and something not seen before, but it makes perfect sense. Once again proving why I don't go over there. Even in context that rant made little sense.

 

[Kibo]

I don't know what that means, but I pray it doesn't mean that you think you have a leg to stand on.

It's latin for, "I've obviously lost, so I'm switching to another language in the hope you'll get bored with my pretentiousness and wander off." At least that's what it means on the internet, in other overly self congratulatory circles it means "to the man," as opposed to idea.

The people who typically ruthlessly abuse the phrase, and latin in general, fail to recognize, "You're an idiot, as proof I submit the idea you provided," is a criticism of both the man and his stupid idea.

Not that all people who use latin are idiots (I happy to fancy et al myself), nor do all idiots use latin.

 

[Kraedin]

It's latin for, "I've obviously lost, so I'm switching to another language in the hope you'll get bored with my pretentiousness and wander off." At least that's what it means on the internet, in other overly self congratulatory circles it means "to the man," as opposed to idea.

The people who typically ruthlessly abuse the phrase, and latin in general, fail to recognize, "You're an idiot, as proof I submit the idea you provided," is a criticism of both the man and his stupid idea.

Not that all people who use latin are idiots (I happy to fancy et al myself), nor do all idiots use latin.

Considering I'm obviously right, your post doesn't make much sense.

 

[Kai Lord]

Considering I'm obviously right, your post doesn't make much sense.

Straw Hominem.

 

[baradtgnome]

I think some of you are lost

I thought this was the keen effects stacking discussion.

Abuse is down the hall.



Also, round things tend not to stack very well and often fall over.

As a DM, I would rule in my game that the spell and the weapon (created with the spell) don't stack. Rule 0.

Have a nice argument.

 

[Stalker0]

Interesting argument about keen not working because the keen ability has the prereqs of the keen spell.

Does that mean chill metal won't work on a sword of icy burst because the prereq spell is chill metal?

I'm not pointing anything out, just simply asking the question.

 

[kreynolds]

Does that mean chill metal won't work on a sword of icy burst because the prereq spell is chill metal?

Ask yourself this: Are the effects similar?

I'm not pointing anything out, just simply asking the question.

It's cool. It was pointed out above as well.

 

[Oni]

I swear this topic has been discussed before and the conclusion was they did stack as they were similar but not the same.

 

[baradtgnome]

OK, so I didn't articulate very well

Interesting argument about keen not working because the keen ability has the prereqs of the keen spell.

Does that mean chill metal won't work on a sword of icy burst because the prereq spell is chill metal?

I'm not pointing anything out, just simply asking the question.

Good clarification question, I didn't mean it that way. I would rule that chill metal would work. It isn't benefiting the wielder by providing more 'icy burstness'.

What I really meant was that a magically keen sword has the same bonus that the keen edge provides and therefore shouldn't stack. The spell specifically says it does not stack with itself.

I can see the two lines of thought on this, however, game rule logic and balance would IMO make it clear that they cannot stack. Following the other line of thought, could you apply the +keen ability to a magic sword multiple times? Sure there are many times that the letter of the law allows one to create some pretty powerful items, good thing we have rule 0.

Oh, and since I am a player too, I'm allows trying to find ways to stretch my critical threat range...

 

[Veldrane]

I swear this topic has been discussed before and the conclusion was they did stack as they were similar but not the same.

Think you're confusing this topic with the Vorpal / Keen one (the argument was: Vorpal and Keen don't stack cause the same spell is required and same bonuses don't stack).

This one is, well, funny. It's obvious that the misunderstanding come from the fact that the Keen ability should've been written "the weapon functions as it had Keen Edge cast on it", in order to make it clear it doesn't stack with Keen Edge. It's obvious that this is the purpose of the designers, too.
Still, it's not worded like that, and thus can be misunderstood and abused. Ok, so what? Maybe it's legal 'till an errata, but no DM would allow this since it's clearly not in the spirit of the rules.
Actually, I find it would have been better to say something like "hey, they wrote it wrong! this way it could stack! Funny, isn't it?", instead of claiming it's right to let'em stack; since we all know it's not like this. It's a funny lawyer discussion, no more.

My two cents.