the Defending property

[jeffhartsell]

I'd say the +5 Defending shortsword keeps its hardness and hit points. This is because the magic of the blade, which is what makes it harder in the first place, has not diminished... merely shifted around.

What I'm trying to avoid, which the increase-to-AC-reduces-hardness/HP crowd's ruling would lead to, is a situation where a guy is fighting a sundering enemy and not making use of his sword's defending property. The enemy damages the sword quite a bit, but is killed. The next day, the defending-shortsword guy starts fighting again, and decides to transfer some enhancement bonus to AC. The sword snaps in half.

IMO The weapon is definitely still a +5 weapon. All you are doing is reassigning the bonus from to-hit/damage to AC. In the case of greater magic weapon, once the spell ends the blade would break. Just like if you had bear's endurance and enough damage to kill you without the spell; once it ends you die.

An analgous example would be your base BAB (assume +11), you can shift it to power attack to increase damage and reduce to-hit; you still have a +11 base BAB, you just reassigned the bonuses, thus you still get 3 attacks.

 

[Hypersmurf]

There's nothing in the rules to support that you can do such a thing...

Certainly there is. The ability specifically states that I can elect to transfer some, rather than all.

The 'some' I elect to transfer is the magic +5.

As far as the defending description goes, there is ONE enhancement bonus, not two, and certainly not defined as allowing the wielder to separate out the sources.

And the fact that the ability references only a single enhancement bonus leads me to believe that it refers to the enhancement bonus defined in the Magic Weapons section, under which the ability appears. "The enhancement bonus" is that referred to throughout that section:

"Magic weapons have enhancement bonuses ranging from +1 to +5. They apply these bonuses to both attack and damage rolls when used in combat."

"A weapon with a special ability must have at least a +1 enhancement bonus."

"Each +1 of enhancement bonus adds 2 to a weapon’s or shield’s hardness and +10 to its hit points."

In all cases, this is referring to the magic enhancement bonus; a masterwork longsword (which has a +1 enhancement bonus to attack rolls) gains no extra hardness or hit points, nor can it have a special ability.

I put it that the Defending abiilty references 'enhancement bonus' in the same way - excluding the masterwork quality or 3E adamantine or other non-magical enhancement bonuses - because it only refers to a singular bonus.

-Hyp.

 

[Hypersmurf]

An analgous example would be your base BAB (assume +11), you can shift it to power attack to increase damage and reduce to-hit; you still have a +11 base BAB, you just reassigned the bonuses, thus you still get 3 attacks.

That's not analogous at all.

You do not 'shift' BAB to Power Attack. You take a penalty to attack rolls, with an upper limit determined by your BAB.

If you did, in fact, 'shift' BAB to Power Attack, you would lose iterative attacks.

Note, also, that someone with a +5 BAB can use 5 points of Power Attack and 5 points of Combat Expertise. If he were 'shifting' BAB, this would not be possible.

The Defending weapon, on the other hand, explicitly transfers its bonus. It is 'shifting' the bonus, which is completely different to what Power Attack and Combat Expertise do.

-Hyp.

 

[azhrei_fje]

The 'some' I elect to transfer is the magic +5.

A worthwhile argument, but the description does not say that you can control that aspect, does it?

Well, this is fun, but it seems to be pointless. Have fun playing the game by your rules. TTFN.

 

[Felix]

Then what do you do with a spell such as (greater) magic weapon?

The sword breaks. The temporary magic that buffed the sword and was keeping it together is now gone, and so the blade falls apart.

Similarly if the sword is subject to Mord's Disjunction. The magic is no longer there, and so the sword crumbles. I'm of an unmade mind when it comes to targeted Dispels and Anti-magic fields, though. I'm not quite sure what I think of the word "supress" in those instances.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

A worthwhile argument, but the description does not say that you can control that aspect, does it?

Yes, it does.

Unless you mean to imply that the "some" referenced in the ability refers to "a random amount."

 

[SidusLupus]

I forget where/when we got the official ruling on the defending adamantine weapon. It is broken to allow a +1 adamantine defending weapon to always be +1 to-hit/+1damage/+1 AC. That was not the intent of the ability. I'll just have to agree to disagree. It took me awhile to change my mind, but eventually I did.

Perusing the SRD, adamantine does nothing for weapons now besides allow them to bypass dr/ adamantine. In addition, they're always masterwork weapons. A +1 defending adamantine weapon would only have +1 to hit, and give +1 to ac if you chose to move the bonus.. but it wouldn't be magical for purposes of damage reduction. It'd still be adamantine tho, but I dont think there's many magic & adamantine DRs.. but there are tons of dr/ magic.

What's wrong with having something nice? You're chosing the AC over the ability to bypass magical DR.

 

[myradale]

I remember when this thread came around the first time, and again I've got to side with the smurf.

Not only does it make sense from a RAW perspective, it even follows with the often maligned "realistic" perspective. That being: If you have a very balanced sword (masterwork) that has an enchantement on it that makes it better (magic) and you take the magic away... how does the removal (or transfer) of magic somehow make the sword LESS balanced than the day it was forged (before it was enchanted).
If you remove all the magic from the sword, whether by an antimagic field, a dispel, or transferring it's magic into a defensive sheild...you're still left with a very sharp, well balanced, masterwork sword....which gives +1 to Attack.

If it didn't, I'd have to ask what happens physically to the sword that causes it to lose that precious balance or sharpness?

 

[Jhulae]

I definitely don't agree with the sword suddenly becoming easier to sunder if you're defending with it.

Whether the +5 Defending sword providing its bonus to hit or to defense, it's still a '+5 sword'. It didn't just turn into a 320 gp sword when it started providing defense.

 

[FEADIN]

I definitely don't agree with the sword suddenly becoming easier to sunder if you're defending with it.

Whether the +5 Defending sword providing its bonus to hit or to defense, it's still a '+5 sword'. It didn't just turn into a 320 gp sword when it started providing defense.

I agree, nothing in the rules say that, the sword is still a +5 magical sword even if you shift all the bonuses for defense, you can bypass dr/magic with it, you don't get this +1 masterwork to hit and in the case of a greater magical weapon I would rule that the magic has absorbed the "sundering points" and when it's gone we would see what is left to apply to the sword.