THE ANSWER TO: What does "does not stack with" mean?

[MeanGenes]

OK so...

Suppose the following predicament:

A character (BAB 9 with ITWF) has 2 weapons of speed and has the haste spell cast upon him. An opponent is 30 feet away.

Can he use the haste partial action to move 30 feet, then use the full attack action (two primary attacks and 2 secondary attacks with offhand) to attack with both speed weapons and then get one additional attack from each speed weapon (for a total of 30 foot move and 6 attacks) in one round?

 

[Akunin]

Doesn't appear that he can.

If I'm reading this right, he can move (Haste partial), then full attack (2 for BAB, 2 for ITWF). In his *next* round, he can get six attacks, but only if he does not move or takes a 5' move.

 

[Cl1mh4224rd]

Doesn't appear that he can.

If I'm reading this right, he can move (Haste partial), then full attack (2 for BAB, 2 for ITWF). In his *next* round, he can get six attacks, but only if he does not move or takes a 5' move.

how do you figure? according to what ristamar found on monte's old boards, each extra attack granted by a speed weapon is added onto the normal attack sequence (sorta). so, the character would get his normal 4 attacks (from bab and itwf), plus the extra attacks from each speed weapon (that's 2, for a total of 6 attacks). that is, if he doesn't use his hasted partial action to attack.

hmm... i think i can see the issue here. it is a bit weird.

 

[kreynolds]

how do you figure? according to what ristamar found on monte's old boards, each extra attack granted by a speed weapon is added onto the normal attack sequence (sorta). so, the character would get his normal 4 attacks (from bab and itwf), plus the extra attacks from each speed weapon (that's 2, for a total of 6 attacks). that is, if he doesn't use his hasted partial action to attack.

hmm... i think i can see the issue here. it is a bit weird.

I think that's what he meant to say. Who knows.

 

[reapersaurus]

Caliban - so the Sage supports the (in my eyes obvious) INTENT of the DMG quote, thereby not being logical or consistent within the (loose) framework of the 3E rules.
Is that fair to say?

kreynolds - please stop your schoolboy attempts to make a name for yourself by calling out the schollyard hero (of rules here on the board), i.e. Caliban.

Caliban has been spending his personal time and skill in helping MANY people on these boards learn and know the 3E rules since WAY before you probably even knew 3E was around.

While I appreciate your (or anyones) efforts to further clarify the muddy 3e rules, I request that you stop or modify your approach re: Caliban.
I really don't think you are aware of how well-regarded he is on the internet with regards to 3E rules.

someone who has MORE clout that the friggin' SAGE should get more respect from you, I contend.

And don;t reply saying i shouldn;t state my opinion of you that i have developed based on your own words.
This whole post is just my opinion.
YMMV, blah blah blah.

 

[kreynolds]

And don;t reply saying i shouldn;t state my opinion of you that i have developed based on your own words.
This whole post is just my opinion.
YMMV, blah blah blah.

That's perfectly fine as you are fully entitled to your opinion. But I don't care what your opinion is of me. This isn't about popularity for me. I'm not being childish, just straight up honest. I'm not here to establish a "long-term relationship" with text on a screen. I'm here to learn about the rules and try to help others. Someone gets nasty with me, I naturally become spitefull. Perhaps I shouldn't lash back at all, but in a way, it doesn't make a difference whether I reply to such posts or not, because I don't really care. I can't be insulted on a message board. I don't even see how that would be possible. I also stated that I do respect Cal, but I lost most of that very recently, for about 5 minutes, then it came back.

I can understand why someone might be upset about this whole discussion about Haste and Speed weapons. Just look at how big the previous thread got. So many people offered their opinions, some helpful, some not. And in the end, what happens? Me, the new guy, was right in the end, according to Skip Williams, a 3rd Edition designer. So many people sided with the "veterans" in the beginning of the previous thread. As it progressed, just a few turned their heads in another direction. By the time this thread got this far, even more of them started seeing this issue in another light, the logical one. I'm not saying anyone sided with me, and they surely didn't, far too much bitterness towards me for that, but they sure did begin to side with the Sage, who ironically, sided with me.

DnD is a role-playing game and I have fun playing it, but it's not my life. What happens on these boards doesn't effect my life in the least. Though it is nice to be able to point my friends here for questions regarding the rules, because I know they will get an answer from all of you, and I know the majority of you will try to help anyone with a question. And that's a good thing.

 

[Uller]

kreynolds - I don't want to pile on here. And I'm sorry but, in your conversation with Caliban, you were coming across in a manner that is very odd to most of us here. You really seem to be trying to "win" an arguement. It is almost as if you desire for Caliban to give you some sort of pat on the back and say "Nice goin', kid. You really showed me!" When that didn't happen, you started flaming....yes...you did...don't deny it.

For the record, I was on your "side" in the debate all along and thought Caliban was reading too deeply into the rules. But all along, I felt you were crossing the line in your approach to Caliban...almost as if you were acting like he is some long lost buddy of yours, yet he was holding you at arms length and clearly feeling somewhat uncomfortable and confused about the whole thing(If I were him, I'd have politely taken my leave of you after a couple posts).

Again...this is nothing personal against you. I don't know you. I don't know Caliban. I often disagree with Caliban so I think I am rather unbiased in this. I think you've generally been well received around here(and should continue to be so), but also I think Caliban was admirably restrained in his conversation with you.

Just, IMO.

 

[Cl1mh4224rd]

hey, guys... cut the crap. this is the "d&d rules" board, not some friggin' soap opera.

 

[Anubis]

I believe I have the answer you are all looking for. As for you, Caliban, I know you and I have had our disagreements, but I think even you will find my thoughts on this to be rather interesting. I think we should just stop looking toward Skip and Monte and the other for clarifications, mainly because their answers sometimes contradict either the core rules, the errata, sometimes both, and sometimes with each other. WHAT A MESS!

Okay, here we go. If Speed were truly +4, as someone else has already said, I think it would be best to allow the affects to stack with Haste. As is, however, Speed should be a +1, and should NOT stack with Haste.

The Iajutsu Master in Oriental Adventures has an ability called "One Strike, Two Cuts". With that ability, the Iajutsu Master gets two attacks at the same attack bonus with a standard action. Speed is very similar to "One Strike, Two Cuts", but is applied per weapon as opposed to being applied to the character wielding it. When one attacks with a weapon with Speed, that character essentially gets two attacks at the highest bonus no matter what else is done in a round. To use two weapons with Speed would require a full attack, but would give two extra attacks, one per weapon. Speed is simply a limited form of Haste, so Haste would always override weapons of Speed much like casting Holy Sword on a weapon overrides all of its abilities.

That should do it. Just call me The Sage II or Anubis the Omnipotent. Any questions?

 

[SpikeyFreak]

Cl1mh4224rd and MeanGenes:

Akunin was exactly right. According to what the sage wrote to kreynolds, you can not use the speed enchantment and the extra partial from haste in the same round, period.

The DMG is correct, the speed property does not stack with haste. When hasted, use the extra attack from the weapon or the extra attack (or partial action) from the haste effect, not both.

Note the (or partial action). That means you can't use both, which causes a little puzzle as to why 2 speed weapons (which grant EXACTLY the same thing) stack, but speed and haste (which don't even grant the same thing) don't stack.

--Spectator Spikey

PS Can people please stop attacking kreynolds. Gees.