Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="DracoSuave" data-source="post: 4344132" data-attributes="member: 71571">But there are class powers that have Reliable.  Fighters get them.And if inheritance works one way, it works the other way as well.The rule does not -explicitly- state that -powers- get the keywords.  It says 'they all apply.'  It does not say 'The item's keywords apply to the power's keywords.'  It does not say 'The power's keywords apply to the item's keywords.  It states 'The powers' keywords all apply. For instance, a flaming sword used to attack with a radiant power does both fire damage, and radiant damage.'That -tells me- that it's the effect (The damage) that inherits the melding of the powers, NOT the powers themselves.  See, I didn't -stop- reading at 'all apply.'Which means I know FOR A FACT, that using the flaming sword's at will does not -replace- the keywords of the damage it deals with powers... because 'for instance, a flaming sword used to attack with a radiant power does both fire damage and radiant damage.'I know FOR A FACT it does not replace the damage, because it says -explicitly- it does not.  The fact people are even -making- that argument proves they've quoted the '...all apply.' out of context -completely.-Using -your- logic, if class powers inherited item powers' keywords, then by -the same logic- item power's keywords inherit class power keywords.  The use of Reliable is -very- relevant in that case, because unlike Fire, Cold, or Poison... Reliable is a keyword that has -RULES- attached to it.  Which means keyword inheritance becomes -very relevant- whenever a fighter is involved.Now... let's look at the -preceding- statement.  Like racial powers and class powers, magic items often have keywords that indicate their damage or effect types.This first sentence tells us that this -entire paragraph- is talking about damage and/or effect types.  That means that the paragraph is discussing what happens to the keywords of damage or effects.... NOT to powers.Seriously, guys.Stop taking it out of context and calling it an argument and concluding things OPPOSITE to the example IN THE SAME PARAGRAPH.</blockquote>

Verification