Earthbound Weapon

[Laniius]

There's a weapon enchantment in the Eberron Campaign Setting, Earthbound

Earthbound: An earthbound weapon has a Small
earth elemental bound to it, and has a heavy, crystalline
appearance. As long as the wielder and his opponent are
both touching the ground, the weapon grants its wielder
an additional +2 bonus on attack and damage rolls. If the
wielder is flying, the weapon’s enhancement bonus from
this property does not apply to his attacks (though the +1
enhancement bonus on his attack rolls for using a masterwork
weapon still applies).
Moderate conjuration; CL 9th; Bind Elemental,
lesser planar binding; Price +1 bonus.

Emphasis mine. Does the bold sentence change the ability of the weapon at all? I say that the enchantment was poorly written and the bolded sentence should be ignored, leaving us with someone getting the +2 attack and damage while both the opponent and attacker are on the ground, and not getting the bonus otherwise. One of my friends says that with that last sentence, if the wielder is on the ground and the opponent is flying that the +2 attack and damage should still apply, contradicting the first sentence. Also, why is it saying that the +1 masterwork bonus still applies? To add weapon enchantments like earthbound the weapon needs to have a +1 bonus through magical enhancement already, doesn't it? Which subsumes the +1 masterwork? I am confused.

[Keld Denar]

Its a poorly edited WotC product...you should come to expect that by now.

Yes, all weapons need to be +1 minimum before recieving other bonuses.

A +1 Earthbound weapon would be treated as a +1 weapon while flying, and a +3 weapon while touching the ground, just like a +1 Bane: Drow weapon would be a +1 weapon while fighting non-Drow, and a +3 weapon while fighting Drow. The authors apparently forgot that. It shouldn't be a surprise anymore. Just ignore that line.

[Laniius]

Would it be considered a +1 weapon of I were on the ground and the opponent was flying? Edit: I agree with your interpretation. But my friend and I were arguing until we were both blue in the face about that one sentence and ways it could be abused, such as flying around on a floating piece of land (because it never says how large the "ground" has to be underneath you) hitting enemies that were flying because there's no mention in the bolded sentence about losing the bonus if you are touching "the ground" and your opponent is not.

[Keld Denar]

The phrase I'd go off of is this:
As long as the wielder and his opponent are both touching the ground, the weapon grants its wielder an additional +2 bonus on attack and damage rolls.

That seems to supercede the 2nd sentance. Or I guess more acurately, the 2nd sentance doesn't overrule this. So yes, both you AND your foe have to be touching the ground.