Munchkin arrow makin'

[Camarath]

Yes. Primarily because that is something determined when the weapon is thrown, and does not change after it is thrown. Here's an interesting (though admitedly, kind of weird and complicated) senario for you: a wizard readies a "Ray of Enfeeblement" against a fighter to go off when the fighter throws a knife through a door (read: a specific square or hex). The fighter throws the knife, the knife goes through the door, the wizard casts the spell, the fighter's strength drops, and then the knife hits another enemy. Do you determine damage based on the strength of the fighter when he threw the knife, or when the knife hit? I'd say based on when he threw it, your interpretation argues for the opposite.

From SRD

Readying an Action: You can ready a standard action, a move action, or a free action. To do so, specify the action you will take and the conditions under which you will take it. Then, any time before your next action, you may take the readied action in response to that condition. The action occurs just before the action that triggers it. If the triggered action is part of another character’s activities, you interrupt the other character. Assuming he is still capable of doing so, he continues his actions once you complete your readied action.

Thus the readied spell casting would occur before the attack action inculding the attack roll.

 

[Camarath]

Another case: would you allow a person wielding a Defending weapon (who activates that ability) to still gain the bonus AC if they throw the weapon?

Yes since the bouns to AC lasts until the character's next turn and is not stated to end if the character loses the weapon.

 

[Deset Gled]

Sorry, I may have been unclear about this. The action that the caster is responding to is the action of the knife passing through a specific place (not the throwing or the hitting of the targe). Thus, the spell happens after the knife has left the hands of the fighter, but before it hits the target. You effectively interrupt the fighter in the middle of his attack. After the spell is cast, he continues with his action of finishing the knife throw (and rolling damage)

Given, its not something you're likely to see, but it is allowed by the rules.

 

[Camarath]

Sorry, I may have been unclear about this. The action that the caster is responding to is the action of the knife passing through a specific place (not the throwing or the hitting of the targe). Thus, the spell happens after the knife has left the hands of the fighter, but before it hits the target. You effectively interrupt the fighter in the middle of his attack. After the spell is cast, he continues with his action of finishing the knife throw (and rolling damage)

Given, its not something you're likely to see, but it is allowed by the rules.

Personally I would not allow readied action to interrupt attacks but you are free to allow it. But since the damage roll is not stated to based on the wielder strength at the time of the attack roll I would calculate the damage using the wielders strength at the time of the damage roll.

As an aside how would you handle throwing a weapon into a anti-magic field what bonuses would you allow to apply to what rolls?

 

[Firzair]

Hi everybody,
this is an interesting discussion.
Just to give my two cents, I would allow the interruption of an attack as described above. The damage roll would use the strength bonus at the time of the attack i.e. the throw. This just makes sense as the momentum of the knife was given by the strength at the time of the throw.

As for a magical dagger thrown into an antimagic field: I would use attack and damage as for a non-magical dagger, just because of the abstracted combat rules. The attack roll is a combination of precision and armor penetration. I see magical boni as better armor penetration due to the fact that the bonus enhances the damage, too and this bonus is lost in an AMF.
This "armor penetration bonus" comes into effect at the time of the impact. If you think that a magical bonus to hit should be precision based (your aim is improved) you could argue, that the attack roll should recieve the bonus even in an AMF because the bonus comes into effect at the time of the throw (or shot). The damage should never be enhanced by the magical bonus in an AMF IMO. You would get into trouble to justify the enhanced bonus without the weapon being magical at the moment of the impact.

Please note that this only logically applies to 3.5 rules where missile weapons give their boni to the ammunition. In 3.0 the above thoughts are brought ad absurdum due to fact that e.g. a +1 longbow gives a bonus of +1 to hit and +1 to damage and this bonus CAN only be given at the time of the shot. So in 3.0 a magical missile weapon should ALWAYS give the bonus to hit and damage (as long as itself is not inside an AMF and therefore it's non-magical).

This is just my opinion, YMMV.

Greetings
Firzair

 

[Westwind]

Just to add fuel to the fire:

We once had a high-level mini-series ("hunt the dragon" thing), using 3.0 rules to take a break from our normal campaign. Munching out was okay (both the players and the DM did it--we ended up concluding that indeed, dragon CRs are a little off) so I made a Ranger/Deepwood Sniper (Monte Cook's version) and took the Inscribe Rune feat from FRCS.

Hunter's Mercy spell trigger arrows. Combined with 3.0 haste and Shoot on the Run this was a pretty damn effective technique (not to mention cheaper than spell storing arrows). I'm not quite sure it's legal, but we couldn't find any reason not to (other than game balance).

As for the idea of spell storing arrows...although I'm not convinced that it would work by the rules, I would consider allowing them in a game simply because it can become such a huge money pit for players, something I always encourage as a DM. You'll rock for a single fight but reloading will probably cost more than you get from the ghoul's cache.

 

[Darmanicus]

Opps, sorry about that. I will go ahead and fix it.

Cheers dude, I think I'll print this off and read it a I don't seem to be getting anywhere with this thread.

 

[Zhure]

Great tactic, barring that Spell Storing is a melee weapon only modifier. Other than for the rules, that'd be really powerful.

Greg

 

[Jeremy]

<topic hijack>

My favorite munchkin arrow maker is found at the WotC website over here:

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=books/fr/lonedrowstats

Quiver of Anariel:

Quivers of Anariel appear to be typical arrow containers capable of holding a score of arrows. However, the quivers automatically replenish themselves with standard or magical arrows, such that they are always full. Some quivers also create arrows made of special materials, such as adamantine, cold iron, or alchemical silver.

Once an arrow it taken from the quiver, it must be used within 1 round or it vanishes.

Moderate conjuration; CL 7th; Craft Wondrous Item, magic weapon, minor creation; Price 28,000 gp (standard arrows), 29,000 gp (masterwork arrows), 32,000 gp (+1 arrows), 44,000 gp (+2 arrows), 64,000 gp (+3 arrows), 92,000 gp (+4 arrows), 128,000 gp (+5 arrows); Add an additional +6,000 gp for adamantine arrows, +4,005 gp for cold iron arrows, or +200 gp for alchemical silver arrows; Weight 1 lb.

</hijack>

 

[Camarath]

Hi everybody,
this is an interesting discussion.
Just to give my two cents, I would allow the interruption of an attack as described above. The damage roll would use the strength bonus at the time of the attack i.e. the throw. This just makes sense as the momentum of the knife was given by the strength at the time of the throw.

As for a magical dagger thrown into an antimagic field: I would use attack and damage as for a non-magical dagger, just because of the abstracted combat rules. The attack roll is a combination of precision and armor penetration. I see magical boni as better armor penetration due to the fact that the bonus enhances the damage, too and this bonus is lost in an AMF.
This "armor penetration bonus" comes into effect at the time of the impact. If you think that a magical bonus to hit should be precision based (your aim is improved) you could argue, that the attack roll should recieve the bonus even in an AMF because the bonus comes into effect at the time of the throw (or shot). The damage should never be enhanced by the magical bonus in an AMF IMO. You would get into trouble to justify the enhanced bonus without the weapon being magical at the moment of the impact.

It all denpeds on how you rationalize the bonuses in the attack. Because of the abstract nature of combat I do not allow a chronological separation between the attack roll and the damage roll because IMO there is no way to soundly determine which bonuses should and should not apply. The attack roll covers not only the actions you take to throw or fire the weapon but also the flight of the weapon after it leaves your hand untill you actually hit your opponent (i.e. everything that happens during the attack action). So IMO a trigger the happens during the flight of a weapon is occuring during the attack roll. Also I believe the damage roll happens at exactly the same time as you succed at you attack roll (such that they resolve simultaneously).

That is just how I run it. If you feel secure in your reasons and rationalizations for ingame bonuses and effects you should run it as it suits you. Not allowing Attacks to be vivisected save me from arguments and debates about the "realistic" reasons why bonuses should or should not work (which IMO tend to be subjective, frustrating, and inconclusive).