shilsen said:Nope. It's still there in 3.5.
Jdvn1 said:The monster has to bend down to hit the PC, right? That's when he cuts his head off.
And I can slice a hot bastard sword through 16 feet of butter. Just imagine that's how the property works. After all, it's a +5 enhancement. That means the weapon costs at least 72,300gp, right? Right.
Glad to help. That's my main beef with the SRD and why I rarely use it. There are far too many important little bits from the books which get snipped in the SRD version.dcollins said:Ok, thank you. The clause is in the 3.0 SRD, but removed from the 3.5 SRD.
azmodean said:IMHO the problem is the existence of the Vorpal sword in the first place, just don't like it.
Yeah, the Heavy Fortification armor property trumps Vorpal IIRC.R-Hero said:Whats the rule on Fortification Armor vs a Vorpal weapon.?
Vorpal=Dmg 3.0 says loss of head on a succesfull critical hit.
Fortification=produces magical force that protects vital areas. Chance of negating crits or sneak attacks. (Again 3.0 DM Guide)
Sounds like the monster in question should be wearing Heavy Fortification armor 100% and make it a moot point.
(+5 Fort bonus is equal to +5 vorpal enchantment.)
Thats the way I read it.