|
Post by kore on Jul 26, 2009 13:57:00 GMT -8
I would like to run the following passed you, Joseph, to make sure you have no objection.
Bloodthirsty Weapon Weapon: Any melee Enhancement: +x attack rolls and damage rolls Critical: +xd10 damage Property: Gain a +1 item bonus to attack rolls against bloodied targets, and add an item bonus equal to the enhancement bonus of this weapon to damage rolls against bloodied targets.
I figure it falls in line, conceptually, with Bloodiron weapons, but I want to be sure you're still cool with me using its property with implement powers.
|
|
|
Post by Joseph Barros on Jul 26, 2009 19:53:04 GMT -8
No. How does it drink the blood of its victims if it never touches them? But mostly because it says Any Melee. I think this is quite clearly a weapon intended for melee characters and only works due to rule loopholes. Bloodiron says just any, so if the make of a bow charges an otherwise mundane arrow, then I would say it does the same for a fireball. The power of using something made from the ichor of devils! How can I say no?
Really most weapon things you are going to find I am probably going to say no to because I believe that the intention for most weapon items was that they were going to be used as weapons not implements. That's why staves have their own implement section rather than just having their properties in with the weapon section. Come PHB 2 they kept daggers in the weapon section and just specified which ones were good for sorcerers to avoid similar confusion.
It might just be easier to say implement sections only for implement users unless the weapon specifically says your class can use it, but I'd like to be a little more flexible than that. Just a little though. Again the main idea for the house rule is that melee uses melee and ranged uses ranged.
|
|
|
Post by kore on Jul 26, 2009 19:59:18 GMT -8
No sweat, that's why I asked first.
|
|
|
Post by earthwizard on Jul 31, 2009 15:36:28 GMT -8
Joseph, is it alright if I retrain Dark Fury for Dual Implement Spellcaster at lvl 8 (retroactive)? I haven't used the retrain feature yet. This feat works well for my character, as he would then be able to wield his +1 pact dagger in main hand (thus being able to make OA with a real weapon) and add that +1 to damage rolls with implement powers (in addition to the +2 rod in off-hand). If not, I'll just wait until lvl 9 to do the retrain.
|
|
|
Post by Joseph Barros on Jul 31, 2009 17:31:40 GMT -8
nah that's fine. I've often used retrains as tokens I've either spent or haven't.
|
|
|
Post by reiphil on Jul 31, 2009 21:25:30 GMT -8
Joseph, is it alright if I retrain Dark Fury for Dual Implement Spellcaster at lvl 8 (retroactive)? I haven't used the retrain feature yet. This feat works well for my character, as he would then be able to wield his +1 pact dagger in main hand (thus being able to make OA with a real weapon) and add that +1 to damage rolls with implement powers (in addition to the +2 rod in off-hand). If not, I'll just wait until lvl 9 to do the retrain. lol but a dagger is a 1d4... just like your fist!
|
|
|
Post by earthwizard on Aug 1, 2009 14:58:57 GMT -8
But the dagger is +1 magical! It's what I happen to have on my character. Should another pact weapon of some kind show up, then I'll likely use that.
|
|
|
Post by reiphil on Aug 2, 2009 2:25:43 GMT -8
ahh the +1. PLUS when you roll that crit, you can stab him with an extra d6!
|
|
|
Post by Joseph Barros on Aug 2, 2009 10:34:18 GMT -8
+3 proficiency bonus. Better chance of hitting.
|
|
|
Post by reiphil on Aug 9, 2009 1:56:47 GMT -8
just to note Joseph - From wizards FAQ on PHB1
21. I am using a weapon as an implement, like a long sword for a Wizard of the Spiral Tower or a staff implement held in two hands, do I gain the extra damage from feats like Weapon Focus?
Yes, you do gain this bonus to damage.
|
|
|
Post by Joseph Barros on Aug 9, 2009 10:04:16 GMT -8
I already admitted that Weapon Focus RAW works. That was why I made it a house rule. Because outside of specific cases like Wizard of the Sprial Tower I think its silliness. All of which I have already explained at length. Please try to keep up sir.
|
|
|
Post by reiphil on Aug 9, 2009 10:35:15 GMT -8
I know joseph, i was just displaying where it came from. Not arguing your house rule or anything, but just where the interpretation came from.
|
|