PDA

View Full Version : Check my math?



Kevlimin_Soulaxe
2007-04-12, 10:16 PM
Okay, no fluff, just crunch:

16+ BAB
Greater Two Weapon Fighting
Monk's Flurry of Blows
Two-Bladed Sword of Speed (Both sides)
Double Steel Strike from Eb
Slashing Fury from PHII
Exotic Weapon Master's Flurry of Strikes CW

How many attacks may I make? I'm getting 17, 9 on-hand, 8 off-hand.

Also, any advice for more on top of what I have now?

Flawless
2007-04-12, 10:20 PM
You can~t use a monk's flury of blows with a double blade sword, only with specific monk weapons.

Hario
2007-04-12, 10:22 PM
You can~t use a monk's flury of blows with a double blade sword, only with specific monk weapons. Double steel strike is from Eberron that is a feat specific that says that 2bladed weapons count for flurry of blows

Caduceus
2007-04-12, 10:23 PM
I think there's a feat out there called "flurry of steel" or something like that. It lets you at least use a longsword for your flurry, might allow other swords, too. I have experience using it, but I haven't seen it, if that makes any sense. The character was made for one of the 30-min adventures on the WotC chat.

Flawless
2007-04-12, 10:27 PM
Double steel strike is from Eberron that is a feat specific that says that 2bladed weapons count for flurry of blows

Ah, I didn't know that, sorry. I've never played eberon. I thought it was just another feat to add extra attacks...

Matthew
2007-04-12, 10:30 PM
Speed effects don't stack. You might be interested in 'flip kick' or whatever the hell it's called.

Kevlimin_Soulaxe
2007-04-12, 10:30 PM
So...nothing is stacking that isn't supposed to be? My math is correct?

Whoops, simul-post.

Anywhere where it explicitly states that?

Fax Celestis
2007-04-12, 10:35 PM
You only get +1 attack from a speed effect, so putting it on both sides does nothing for you.

Matthew
2007-04-12, 10:40 PM
Primary: 4 Iterative Attacks
Off Hand: 3 Off Hand Attacks
Monk: 2
Exotic Weapon Master: 1
Slashing Fury: 1
Speed Weapon: 1

Kevlimin_Soulaxe
2007-04-12, 10:45 PM
How does that make sense?

Let's say I've got two Daggers of speed lying around. My buddy and I decide to knife fight, and we're just flurrying away at each other. Then, I disarm him, take his weapon, which now that I am holding is suddenly less effective.

That doesn't hold water to me...unless it explicitly states that somewhere...

Edit: Another Simul-post. So does that read as I'm getting 12 attacks?

Matthew
2007-04-12, 10:47 PM
I think it actually says so in the SRD, but the FAQ might be the source. Regardless, it makes about as much sense as Two Weapon Fighting not working on a Standard Action [i.e. Not much], but them's the rules.

Hario
2007-04-12, 10:50 PM
Speed

When making a full attack (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/actionsInCombat.htm#fullAttack) action, the wielder of a speed weapon may make one extra attack with it. The attack uses the wielder’s full base attack bonus, plus any modifiers appropriate to the situation. (This benefit is not cumulative with similar effects, such as a haste (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/haste.htm) spell.)
Moderate transmutation; CL 7th; Craft Magic Arms and Armor (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/feats.htm#craftMagicArmsAndArmor), haste (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/haste.htm); Price +3 bonus.



a speed weapon gives you the benifit of being 'hasted', haste spells do not stack so you cannot gain more than 1 extra attack from it. Besides it specifically states it in the DMG though for some reason I can't find the example in the SRD

Kevlimin_Soulaxe
2007-04-12, 11:12 PM
Speed is applying to the weapon, not you, and certainly not the other weapon. Haste will affect how many attacks you get, so it makes sense not to stack it and a speed effect, but the Speed of one weapon isn't affecting the Speed of another.

Hario
2007-04-12, 11:20 PM
it says NOT CUMULATIVE so you can't have 2+ speed weapons and have them work, you can make both sides speed and only be under the effect of one and waste your cash

Matthew
2007-04-12, 11:21 PM
This has been discussed numerous times. The effect is on the Character, not on the weapon. If it weren't, then Haste would grant Two Weapon Fighters two extra attacks. I think this was fully answered in the Simple Questions Thread.

Theodoxus
2007-04-13, 12:15 AM
similar <> identical... but whatever. Poorly worded doesn't mean the rule's bad, per se.

When it comes to TWF, D&D has the most retarded rules around.

Off hand attacks being -10? unless a lot of mitigating factors are applied... My 5 year old step brother can swing two daggers around and make a simo attack with them - and does frequently, into my groin. (and if you don't think I'm actively protecting myself, you're crazy).

So yeah, TWF needs the kind of scrutiny they gave THF between 3.0 and 3.5.

Theo

JoeFredBob
2007-04-13, 11:20 AM
This has been discussed numerous times. The effect is on the Character, not on the weapon. If it weren't, then Haste would grant Two Weapon Fighters two extra attacks. I think this was fully answered in the Simple Questions Thread.

Beg to differ. Speed and haste do different things.

Haste:

When making a full attack (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/actionsInCombat.htm#fullAttack) action, a hasted creature may make one extra attack with any weapon he is holding. ... This effect is not cumulative with similar effects, such as that provided by a weapon of speed,...

Speed, as quoted above:

When making a full attack (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/actionsInCombat.htm#fullAttack) action, the wielder of a speed weapon may make one extra attack with it. The attack uses the wielder’s full base attack bonus, plus any modifiers appropriate to the situation. (This benefit is not cumulative with similar effects, such as a haste (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/haste.htm) spell.)

The thing I would like to point out is the difference between "with it" and "with any weapon he is holding". The way I read it, having one speed weapon and another speed weapon is not cumulative, because neither affects the other. If it read "the wielder of a speed weapon may make one extra attack with any weapon he is holding", or "with his primary-hand weapon" then two speed weapons would provide the same benefit and not stack.

To refute this, please respond to the question, "Is making an attack extra attack with one weapon the same benefit as making an extra attack with a different weapon?", or find a hole in my reasoning, rather than just saying "it says not cumulative!".

Now, a caveat, and then a caveat to that caveat. First, I haven't examined what the FAQ has to say on the subject. It may give a more explicit answer that I don't know about. Second, as a DM I would definitely allow two speed weapons to stack if someone asked for it, no matter what the FAQ says, because if you're getting that many attacks anyway you'd almost certainly be better of spending that +3 bonus other ways.

elliott20
2007-04-13, 11:23 AM
take the dervish PrC?

Fax Celestis
2007-04-13, 11:26 AM
When making a full attack action, the wielder of a speed weapon may make one extra attack with it. The attack uses the wielder’s full base attack bonus, plus any modifiers appropriate to the situation. (This benefit is not cumulative with similar effects, such as a haste spell.)

"Exactly the same" is paramount to "similar", and as such, is not cumulative with another effect that does the same thing...such as another speed-enhanced weapon.

PinkysBrain
2007-04-13, 11:30 AM
This has been discussed numerous times.It would be discussed less if people just remembered to immediately explain both sides of the argument, regardless of what side they are on. The issue is hardly clear cut (at least not without the 3.0 FAQ).

When you need sentences like Fax just used to "prove" your point you should recognize it's more about semantics (ie. no truth present) than logic.

Lord Lorac Silvanos
2007-04-13, 11:42 AM
It is indeed an issue that keeps emerging.
Twice on the FAQ thread on this board alone:
http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2196707&postcount=289

http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1813921&postcount=981


And it also spurred longer debates:
http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=19529

Fax Celestis
2007-04-13, 11:46 AM
When you need sentences like Fax just used to "prove" your point you should recognize it's more about semantics (ie. no truth present) than logic.

Let me say it simply, then: two effects that are exactly the same are also similar to each other. Therefore, they do not stack, especially since the description of the effect says that they do not stack with similar effects. The fact that they are on different weapons is immaterial: the character is the one receiving the extra attack, not the weapon.

JoeFredBob
2007-04-13, 11:51 AM
Let me say it simply, then: two effects that are exactly the same are also similar to each other. Therefore, they do not stack, especially since the description of the effect says that they do not stack with similar effects. The fact that they are on different weapons is immaterial: the character is the one receiving the extra attack, not the weapon.

First, the character is receiving the extra attack, yes, but is an extra attack with that weapon, not just an extra attack (which is what haste does). Can a character recieve a +1 luck bonus to-hit with thrown weapons and a +1 luck bonus to-hit with melee weapons, and actually receive both benefits, or would they fail to stack?

Also, pretend, for a moment, that we're talking about flaming weapons.

SRD:

Upon command, a flaming weapon is sheathed in fire. The fire does not harm the wielder. The effect remains until another command is given. A flaming weapon deals an extra 1d6 points of fire damage on a successful hit. Bows, crossbows, and slings so crafted bestow the fire energy upon their ammunition. Now, add the line "This benefit is not cumulative with similar effects, such as a flame arrow spell." Regardless of whether or not that is actually true, would that line imply that one person could not use two flaming weapons and have both have the flaming property?

Lord Lorac Silvanos
2007-04-13, 11:51 AM
They could have saved a lot of board space and thread derailment if they had just added "...or other speed weapons". :-p

Lord Lorac Silvanos
2007-04-13, 12:13 PM
How does having 'speed' on weapon 'A' affect what you can do with weapon 'B'? It says it doesn't stack with haste or similar affects that would increase the character's speed, which just means that the weapon is going as fast as it can. The description says nothing about the 'speed' affect being applied to the person, or somehow limiting other weapons held.

That is exactly what the description says!

The wielder is making an extra attack, not the weapon.


the wielder of a speed weapon may make one extra attack with it


'Keen' is written identically, and I'm sure most would agree that you can dual wield 'keen' weapons without all the fuss.

Keen specifically applies to the weapon.


edit: I'll sniff around the faq's when I get back from work and have a bit of time


The 3.0 FAQ is quoted in the second link I provided above.

Fax Celestis
2007-04-13, 12:18 PM
Keen is not written identically, since the improved critical range is due to the weapon, not the wielder. As Lord Silvanos points out above, speed explicitly states that "the wielder may make an extra attack." Keen does not say anything about the wielder, instead noting that "[this] ability doubles the threat range of a weapon."

Eomir
2007-04-13, 12:35 PM
Speed does not increase the speed of a weapon! It magically increases the speed of the wielder! Basically, wielding a weapon of speed grants a similar haste effect on the wielder which allows him to attack one extra time. Having two weapons of speed is like trying to find a way to gain the benefits of two haste spells. Besides, how can a weapon attack faster? The weapon doesn't attack at all! The wielder is the one attacking, and his weapon is merely a tool.

Zeb The Troll
2007-04-13, 12:39 PM
Maybe this will shed some light on it.

From the SRD

Quarterstaff of Alacrity
Both ends of this +5 quarterstaff of speed have equal enhancement and special powers, meaning that it allows an additional attack with each end every round. While the quarterstaff of alacrity is held, it grants its wielder a +5 resistance bonus on Reflex saves. It also deflects ranged weapons as if the wielder had the Deflect Arrows and Infinite Deflection feats.

This specifically says that each end is equally enchanted AND the wielder gets an additional attack with each end. I think this clearly demonstrates WotC's intent in regards to weapons of speed.

kamikasei
2007-04-13, 12:47 PM
Keen is not written identically, since the improved critical range is due to the weapon, not the wielder. As Lord Silvanos points out above, speed explicitly states that "the wielder may make an extra attack." Keen does not say anything about the wielder, instead noting that "[this] ability doubles the threat range of a weapon."

There seems to be a very strange disconnect going on here between the two sides.

The speed enhancement states "the wielder of a speed weapon may make one extra attack with it". It states that it is not cumulative with similar effects, like haste. This means you can't have a speed weapon granting you an extra attack, have haste granting you an extra attack, and have two extra attacks: straightforward enough.

The argument is that you get an extra attack with it. One speed weapon grants you an extra attack with that weapon. A second speed weapon in another hand, then, grants you an extra attack with that second weapon. Both are affecting the wielder, but the effect of each is different: granting a similar bonus to a different weapon. So far as I can see, there's no reason for this not to be the case.

Fax Celestis
2007-04-13, 12:52 PM
There seems to be a very strange disconnect going on here between the two sides.

The speed enhancement states "the wielder of a speed weapon may make one extra attack with it". It states that it is not cumulative with similar effects, like haste. This means you can't have a speed weapon granting you an extra attack, have haste granting you an extra attack, and have two extra attacks: straightforward enough.

The argument is that you get an extra attack with it. One speed weapon grants you an extra attack with that weapon. A second speed weapon in another hand, then, grants you an extra attack with that second weapon. Both are affecting the wielder, but the effect of each is different: granting a similar bonus to a different weapon. So far as I can see, there's no reason for this not to be the case.

That would indeed be the case, if speed granted an extra attack to the weapon, instead of the wielder. The wielder can only be under one haste-similar effect at one time, such as a speed weapon, a haste spell, or similar.

Person_Man
2007-04-13, 12:55 PM
There's an Exotic Monk weapon in the Complete Warrior called the Lajatang. It's an exotic double monk weapon, so it can be used with Flurry, TWF, and Exotic Weapon Master tricks.

JoeFredBob
2007-04-13, 12:55 PM
Good lord Zeb, thank you for finding that. I can't believe nobody has seen that before.

kamikasei
2007-04-13, 01:14 PM
That would indeed be the case, if speed granted an extra attack to the weapon, instead of the wielder. The wielder can only be under one haste-similar effect at one time, such as a speed weapon, a haste spell, or similar.

Eh... hrm. That doesn't follow from the description of speed, nor from that of haste. The effects of a haste spell don't stack with the effects of a speed enhancement. The effects of a speed enhancement don't stack with a haste spell. Both use the term "or similar effects". There is not a class of effects called "haste-similar" that is described as "only one at a time".

I guess it comes down to the meaning of "similar" here. As I see it, a bonus on a weapon that grants you an extra attack specifically with that weapon is similar to a bonus from a spell that grants you an extra attack with any weapon, so they don't stack. Two bonuses, on two different weapons, each of which grants you an extra attack only with the weapon with the enhancement, to me aren't "similar" in the way covered by "or similar effects". They're effects of the same type, conferred to the same target, affecting different things.

Matthew
2007-04-13, 01:17 PM
Maybe this will shed some light on it.

From the SRD

This specifically says that each end is equally enchanted AND the wielder gets an additional attack with each end. I think this clearly demonstrates WotC's intent in regards to weapons of speed.

Good lord Zeb, thank you for finding that. I can't believe nobody has seen that before.
Now that is interesting.

Zeb The Troll
2007-04-13, 01:19 PM
Now that is interesting.Isn't it though? :smallcool:

Rigeld2
2007-04-13, 01:19 PM
See, I would say that supports the statement that speed on two weapons doesnt work. That weapon says explicitly that you get an extra attack with both ends. If they felt the need to state that for that weapon, that means its an exception, not the rule.

Zeb The Troll
2007-04-13, 01:23 PM
See, I would say that supports the statement that speed on two weapons doesnt work. That weapon says explicitly that you get an extra attack with both ends. If they felt the need to state that for that weapon, that means its an exception, not the rule.But look at what it says. It says its enchanted the same on both ends "which means you get an extra attack with each end". That doesn't sound like an exception to me. That sounds like "just in case you aren't sure, this is what that means to you." If it were an exception, it would say something like "unlike normal speed weapons" or something of the sort.

kamikasei
2007-04-13, 01:24 PM
See, I would say that supports the statement that speed on two weapons doesnt work. That weapon says explicitly that you get an extra attack with both ends. If they felt the need to state that for that weapon, that means its an exception, not the rule.

It says that it gets those extra attacks because both ends have equal enchantments. This implies that giving two ends of a double weapon speed enchantments, or two weapons, is sufficient to get you the extra attack with each end/weapon.

edit: ^^ like Zeb says.

PinkysBrain
2007-04-13, 01:32 PM
Let me say it simply, then: two effects that are exactly the same are also similar to each other. Therefore, they do not stack
It's not a question of stacking, it's a question of accumulation. To talk about accumulation between "extra attack ... with it" where "it" is different is nonsensical. Regardless of how you rule, you only ever get one extra attack "with it".

^ all just semantic dribble.

It's kind of strange that the 3.0 ELH rules differently from the 3.0 FAQ ... but all the same, the ELH was officially updated to 3.5 and the FAQ never was.

kamikasei
2007-04-13, 01:46 PM
It's not a question of stacking, it's a question of accumulation. To talk about accumulation between "extra attack ... with it" where "it" is different is nonsensical. Regardless of how you rule, you only ever get one extra attack "with it".

...Yes?

I don't follow what you're trying to say at all. Certainly, having a speed enhancement on one weapon will not give you an extra attack with a different weapon, or with a different end of the same weapon. No one's disputing that that I see. You only ever get one extra attack with a given weapon or weapon end due to a speed enhancement. The thing being argued is whether having speed on one weapon or one end of a double weapon means that the other weapon or end can't benefit from the same enhancement placed on it. So, yeah, it does make a difference. It's the difference between one extra attack, and two, though with two different weapons/ends in the latter case.

Zeb The Troll
2007-04-13, 02:02 PM
^ all just semantic dribble.But in this case it's not. It says "Both ends ... have equal enhancement ..., meaning that it allows an additional attack with each end every round." The parts I trimmed out (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/epic/magicItems/weapons.htm#quarterstaffofAlacrity) have no bearing on the meaning of the sentence.




It's not a question of stacking, it's a question of accumulation. To talk about accumulation between "extra attack ... with it" where "it" is different is nonsensical. Regardless of how you rule, you only ever get one extra attack "with it"....Yes?

I don't follow what you're trying to say at all.I highlighted the crux of what he was trying to say in that passage.

Counterspin
2007-04-13, 02:16 PM
One could argue that since the quarterstaff of alacrity is an epic unique weapon, WOTC decided to go ahead and bend the speed rules this once, but I never saw what the real problem with having two speed weapons is in the first place. I suppose the issue is poisons, or wounding, that sort of thing? But someone dedicated to going down that road gets a big ole stack of attacks anyway, so it seems moot to me. Something that needs to go in the official FAQ, or I suppose *shiver* the Rules Compendium.

Person_Man
2007-04-13, 02:17 PM
The Quarterstaff of Alacrity is an Epic weapon (http://www.systemreferencedocuments.org/35/sovelior_sage/epicMagicItems.html) that costs 462,600 gp. So its generally not allowed by most DM's unless you're an Epic character.

Also, if you're opening the door to Epic weapons, there's much more powerful stuff on the list.

Lord Lorac Silvanos
2007-04-13, 02:19 PM
PinkysBrain is fully aware of what we are talking about :)

The crucial part of his post is "with it", meaning the weapon. You only get to make one extra attack with THE weapon.



The ELH, which features the Quarterstaff of Alacrity, predates 3.5 by a year, so even when it was printed the quarterstaff, according to the Sage (Skip Williams), was either violating the rules or a special case.

The Speed effect was "clarified" in 3.5 as a result of the 3.0 FAQ, but nobody noticed the Quarterstaff.

We did not need the 3.0 FAQ to understand the 3.5 version of Speed, but it was helpful in explaining the history of the changes.

As it stands now the Quarterstaff is still in conflict with the primary source, the DMG, since the ability clearly states:


This benefit is not cumulative with similar effects, such as a haste spell.

Interpreting "cumulative with similar effects" to refer only to that specific weapon means that you could still benefit from the extra attack from a Haste spell as long as you were not using your speed weapon for the extra attack.

Zeb The Troll
2007-04-13, 02:19 PM
The Quarterstaff of Alacrity is an Epic weapon (http://www.systemreferencedocuments.org/35/sovelior_sage/epicMagicItems.html) that costs 462,600 gp. So its generally not allowed by most DM's unless you're an Epic character.

Also, if you're opening the door to Epic weapons, there's much more powerful stuff on the list.This is true. It's epic because the plusses add up to a lot (more than +8 times two). I'm not saying everyone should have one of these. I'm just providing it as evidence that WotC intended for the speed enhancement on two weapons/dual weapons to apply to each weapon/end of the weapon.

Lord Lorac Silvanos
2007-04-13, 02:25 PM
but I never saw what the real problem with having two speed weapons is in the first place.

Two speed weapons for a TWF is probably not going to be that problematic.
It gets more interesting when the TWF rogue quickdraws 4 more or the Two-handed weapon wielding Barbarian, but they are not cheap, so maybe that is :smallcool: too.

Matthew
2007-04-13, 02:26 PM
You know, looking at Haste, I'm not all that convinced that a Two Weapon Fighter cannot fully benefit, it doesn't, after all, say 'any one weapon', but 'any weapon'.

Hmmmn. I'm not so sure about this now...

Zeb The Troll
2007-04-13, 02:36 PM
You know, looking at Haste, I'm not all that convinced that a Two Weapon Fighter cannot fully benefit, it doesn't, after all, say 'any one weapon', but 'any weapon'.

Hmmmn. I'm not so sure about this now...Yeah, that "any" was a poor choice. So easily interpreted in more than one way. It should have said either "with every weapon he's currently wielding" or "with any one weapon he's currently wielding, his choice" or something like that. Given how I feel about the dual speed weapons, I don't see how letting haste work on every weapon wielded would hurt. Well, until you start getting into hasted monsters with multiple natural attacks. That could turn into, essentially, two full attacks. Instead of claw/claw/bite he'd get claw/claw/claw/claw/bite/bite if hasted. Nah, that's a little too powerful for a 3rd level spell (vs. a +3 enchantment per attack).

Fax Celestis
2007-04-13, 02:41 PM
See, I'm okay with speed weapons stacking. I figure if you shell out that much cash, you should get some benefit. However, by RAW, I don't see how it can be ruled otherwise because of the terms above.

kamikasei
2007-04-13, 02:52 PM
See, I'm okay with speed weapons stacking. I figure if you shell out that much cash, you should get some benefit. However, by RAW, I don't see how it can be ruled otherwise because of the terms above.

Easily!

A speed weapon confers a benefit on its wielder. That benefit is to make an extra attack with that weapon. Thus, two speed weapons each confer on the wielder the ability to make one extra attack with each. In the case of a double weapon, each end confers the ability to make an extra attack with that end.

I don't see any of the RAW being violated by this...

Fax Celestis
2007-04-13, 02:55 PM
Easily!

A speed weapon confers a benefit on its wielder. That benefit is to make an extra attack with that weapon. Thus, two speed weapons each confer on the wielder the ability to make one extra attack with each. In the case of a double weapon, each end confers the ability to make an extra attack with that end.

I don't see any of the RAW being violated by this...

The RAW I see being violated is what I stated above: "this benefit does not stack with other similar effects that give extra attacks."

But I suppose at this point, it comes down to a matter of opinion about the RAI.

Lord Lorac Silvanos
2007-04-13, 03:04 PM
You know, looking at Haste, I'm not all that convinced that a Two Weapon Fighter cannot fully benefit, it doesn't, after all, say 'any one weapon', but 'any weapon'.

Hmmmn. I'm not so sure about this now...

I had to read your post several times before comprehending where this was going :smallamused:

If what you suggest was the intent it would have been a lot clearer to simply write all weapons.


Easily!

A speed weapon confers a benefit on its wielder. That benefit is to make an extra attack with that weapon. Thus, two speed weapons each confer on the wielder the ability to make one extra attack with each. In the case of a double weapon, each end confers the ability to make an extra attack with that end.

I don't see any of the RAW being violated by this...

Throw in a haste spell and make a third extra attack with a weapon you quickdraw for some extra fun :smallcool:

Matthew
2007-04-13, 03:13 PM
Heh, yeah, it's a house of cards, really, but basically if you read Haste as allowing a Multi Weapon Fighter to make an extra Attack with 'every weapon', then it wouldn't stack with Multiple Speed Weapons, so the only way I can see it working is as:


Two Weapon Fighter 5 A
Primary Hand: Normal Weapon
Off Hand: Normal Weapon

Full Attack: Two Attacks (1 Primary, 1 Off Hand)
Hasted Full Attack: Four Attacks (2 Primary, 2 Off Hand)



Two Weapon Fighter 5 B
Primary Hand: Speed Weapon
Off Hand: Normal Weapon

Full Attack: Three Attacks (2 Primary, 1 Off Hand)
Hasted Full Attack: Four Attacks (2 Primary, 2 Off Hand)



Two Weapon Fighter 5 C
Primary Hand: Speed Weapon
Off Hand: Speed Weapon

Full Attack: Four Attacks (2 Primary, 2 Off Hand)
Hasted Full Attack: Four Attacks (2 Primary, 2 Off Hand)

JoeFredBob
2007-04-13, 03:18 PM
The SRD, when not listed under a variant rule set, is just about as RAW as it gets. It is completely official and includes the errata to-date.

The SRD includes a double weapon which explicitly states that the wielder is allowed to make an extra attack with each end because both ends have the speed enhancement on them.

There is no mention of this being an exception.

The only defense for two speed weapons not stacking at this point is the "ELH is 3.0 and poorly updated" defense, which holds no water in the discussion of the Rules As Written.

Zeb The Troll
2007-04-13, 03:20 PM
Throw in a haste spell and make a third extra attack with a weapon you quickdraw for some extra fun :smallcool:Except that Haste does specifically say "with any weapon he's holding" so he couldn't quickdraw after the spell is cast and then benefit from it, even if you did really "any" as "every".

Matthew
2007-04-13, 03:24 PM
What other Speed effects are there? Can we compare them?

Fax Celestis
2007-04-13, 03:26 PM
The SRD, when not listed under a variant rule set, is just about as RAW as it gets. It is completely official and includes the errata to-date.

The SRD includes a double weapon which explicitly states that the wielder is allowed to make an extra attack with each end because both ends have the speed enhancement on them.

There is no mention of this being an exception.

The only defense for two speed weapons not stacking at this point is the "ELH is 3.0 and poorly updated" defense, which holds no water in the discussion of the Rules As Written.

The weapon in question is an Epic weapon, and Epic items do not follow the same rules that other items do.

Lord Lorac Silvanos
2007-04-13, 03:26 PM
Except that Haste does specifically say "with any weapon he's holding" so he couldn't quickdraw after the spell is cast and then benefit from it, even if you did really "any" as "every".

The duration of haste is not instantaneous so it is a non issue.

BUT even so you could make two extra attacks with two non-speed weapons you were holding and then proceed to quickdraw your two speed weapons.

You want to make sure you get all your attacks after all.

Matthew
2007-04-13, 03:33 PM
I am so glad Free Actions are at the DM's discretion...

Lord Lorac Silvanos
2007-04-13, 03:39 PM
The SRD, when not listed under a variant rule set, is just about as RAW as it gets. It is completely official and includes the errata to-date.

All books printed are RAW whether they are in the SRD. The only purpose of the SRD is to make it easier for me to copy and paste non-copyrighted material as RAW references. (Disclaimer: there may be other uses:-p)


The SRD includes a double weapon which explicitly states that the wielder is allowed to make an extra attack with each end because both ends have the speed enhancement on them.

There is no mention of this being an exception.Which leaves us with three options:
1. It is an exception, but they did not mention that.
2. It is the rules as intended, even though it contradicts the 3.0 FAQ and the description of speed.
3. It is an error.


The only defense for two speed weapons not stacking at this point is the "ELH is 3.0 and poorly updated" defense, which holds no water in the discussion of the Rules As Written.
Or the argument that the primary source is in fact the 3.5 description of speed and the supporting Haste spell.

JoeFredBob
2007-04-13, 03:40 PM
The weapon in question is an Epic weapon, and Epic items do not follow the same rules that other items do.

False.

From the SRD:

Except when otherwise stated, epic magic weapons follow the rules for nonepic magic weapons.

Helgraf
2007-04-13, 03:43 PM
The SRD, when not listed under a variant rule set, is just about as RAW as it gets. It is completely official and includes the errata to-date.

The SRD includes a double weapon which explicitly states that the wielder is allowed to make an extra attack with each end because both ends have the speed enhancement on them.

There is no mention of this being an exception.

The only defense for two speed weapons not stacking at this point is the "ELH is 3.0 and poorly updated" defense, which holds no water in the discussion of the Rules As Written.

The ELH is poorly written even by 3.0 standards. It's a game suppliment designed to let you break the rules of the game, and does so repeatedly with its epic level magic items and spells.

I see it as roughly the equivalent of the Magic "Unglued/Unzipped" sets, personally.

Zeb The Troll
2007-04-13, 03:44 PM
The weapon in question is an Epic weapon, and Epic items do not follow the same rules that other items do.
Again I quote the SRD:


Except when otherwise stated, epic magic weapons follow the rules for nonepic magic weapons. There is no limit to an epic magic weapon’s enhancement bonus, to the market price modifier of an epic magic weapon special ability, or to the total of an epic magic weapon’s enhancement bonus and market price modifier.
It was not stated that it was an exception in this case. It is epic because (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/epic/magicItems/basics.htm) the cost is more than 200K.

EDIT: I'd like to add that ANY weapon which has enhancements adding up to +6 or higher is, by definition, an epic weapon since that cost modifier is 720K. My example is +8 on each end, provides additional benefits, and still comes in at only 420K. It is not exceptional as epic weapons go.


The duration of haste is not instantaneous so it is a non issue.

BUT even so you could make two extra attacks with two non-speed weapons you were holding and then proceed to quickdraw your two speed weapons.

You want to make sure you get all your attacks after all.Ha! Good point. I'll be sure to tell my GM you said it's okay. :smallsmile:

Fax Celestis
2007-04-13, 03:45 PM
One would think that this would be "an exception" using the very quote you're stating.

Lord Lorac Silvanos
2007-04-13, 03:47 PM
I am so glad Free Actions are at the DM's discretion...

Certainly, but the well-informed player would probably still point you to the FAQ for precedence on just how many weapons can be quickdrawn during a full attack.

While you consider that, the next one will ask to play a Thri-keen, you know, for the flavor.

Then you will finally sigh and prepare your Marilith encounter

Matthew
2007-04-13, 03:53 PM
Yes indeed, though it is hard to imagine any of my players doing that. Certainly, though, there would be players seeking to exploit the Quick Draw and Free Action Rules.

Rigeld2
2007-04-13, 04:47 PM
EDIT: I'd like to add that ANY weapon which has enhancements adding up to +6 or higher is, by definition, an epic weapon since that cost modifier is 720K. My example is +8 on each end, provides additional benefits, and still comes in at only 420K. It is not exceptional as epic weapons go.
Ummm..

+6 is only 72k. +10 is 100k. When its +6 enhancement bonus, its epic, regardless of other special abilities. The Quarterstaff of Alacrity is only +5 with a +3 special ability, in addition to the unable to stat other bonuses.

Unless I'm completely misunderstanding what youre saying.

Zeb The Troll
2007-04-13, 04:53 PM
Ummm..

+6 is only 72k. +10 is 100k. When its +6 enhancement bonus, its epic, regardless of other special abilities. The Quarterstaff of Alacrity is only +5 with a +3 special ability, in addition to the unable to stat other bonuses.

Unless I'm completely misunderstanding what youre saying.Double check that (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/epic/magicItems/weapons.htm). +6 is 720,000 gold pieces. +10 is 2,000,000 gp.

Rigeld2
2007-04-13, 05:16 PM
Double check that (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/epic/magicItems/weapons.htm). +6 is 720,000 gold pieces. +10 is 2,000,000 gp.
Yeah... and?
The item in question is +5 ehnancement, +3 speed, and a couple of other abilities. The +5 enhancement, +3 speed isnt epic at all. You can get up to +10 pre epic, but the enhancement maxes at +5.
http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/magicWeapons.htm



A weapon can’t actually have a bonus higher than +5. Use these lines to determine price when special abilities are added in.

Zeb The Troll
2007-04-13, 05:27 PM
Yeah... and?
The item in question is +5 ehnancement, +3 speed, and a couple of other abilities. The +5 enhancement, +3 speed isnt epic at all. You can get up to +10 pre epic, but the enhancement maxes at +5.
http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/magicWeapons.htm

And anything over 200K gold is epic (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/epic/magicItems/basics.htm).

What I've been trying to say anyway is that the "yeah but it's epic, it doesn't count" argument doesn't work because epic <> uber.

But your link brings up another question. Why don't your table (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/magicWeapons.htm) and my table (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/epic/magicItems/weapons.htm) match? :smallconfused:

EDIT: Nevermind, I figured it out. But even using the nonepic price scale, and without the added abilities, it comes to over 200K because it's a double weapon so it's (+8)x2 for 256K.

kamikasei
2007-04-13, 05:34 PM
[/URL]But your link brings up another question. Why don't [URL="http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/magicWeapons.htm"]your table (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/epic/magicItems/basics.htm) and my table (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/epic/magicItems/weapons.htm) match? :smallconfused:

They match up to the +5 bonuses, because both regular and epic weapons can have +5 enhancement bonuses. However, the +6 to +10 bonuses on the non-epic chart are for enhancement bonus plus special qualities that have a +x equivalence. Thus, a +6 non-epic weapon costing 72000gp would not have a +6 enhancement, but might have a +5 enhancement and the bane property (which is +1 equivalent). Or a +3 enhancement and speed. If you wanted an actual +6 on attack and damage, you'd need a weapon with a +6 enhancement bonus, which would be epic, costing 720,000gp.

Rigeld2
2007-04-14, 12:31 AM
EDIT: Nevermind, I figured it out. But even using the nonepic price scale, and without the added abilities, it comes to over 200K because it's a double weapon so it's (+8)x2 for 256K.
Again, wrong.

Creating magic double-headed weapons is treated as creating two weapons when determining cost, time, XP, and special abilities.
http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/creatingMagicItems.htm#creatingMagicWeapons

So its two seperate weapons, each worth 128k gp, plus the special abilities. Its the ability to have speed stack, the bonus to reflex saves, and the deflecting arrows that bump it up to epic.

edit: 128x2=256, +~12k for the resist bonus, +~24k for the nonepic feat (effectively another +1), +~100k for the epic feat (that is pulled from nowhere...) leaving ~33k for the stacking speed bonus. Thats why its epic.

JoeFredBob
2007-04-14, 01:03 AM
"A means that B" is equivalent to "A implies B". The ability to have speed stack is NOT a unique ability of that weapon, seeing as it reads (in paraphrase) "Both sides have speed, meaning that you can attack one more time with each end."

Therefore "Both sides have speed" implies "you can attack an additional time with each end". I mean that "implies" in the strongest logical sense of the term. As written it is a cause and effect.

So please, don't say that the ability to have speed stack factors into it's cost.

greenknight
2007-04-14, 04:04 AM
The SRD includes a double weapon which explicitly states that the wielder is allowed to make an extra attack with each end because both ends have the speed enhancement on them.

There is no mention of this being an exception.

The wording alone shows it's an exception, and the pre-requisites are a bit different too. A "normal" Speed weapon specifically states it doesn't stack with similar effects or haste. The Quarterstaff of Alacrity doesn't mention that, so at least in theory a character can benefit from Haste while using it. And a "normal" Speed weapon has Haste as a pre-requisite, but the Quarterstaff doesn't list Haste, so presumably it's extra attacks come from something else.

Personally, I think this item is an exception, and it's a poorly thought out one at that.

deadseashoals
2007-04-14, 04:10 AM
The wording alone shows it's an exception, and the pre-requisites are a bit different too. A "normal" Speed weapon specifically states it doesn't stack with similar effects or haste. The Quarterstaff of Alacrity doesn't mention that, so at least in theory a character can benefit from Haste while using it. And a "normal" Speed weapon has Haste as a pre-requisite, but the Quarterstaff doesn't list Haste, so presumably it's extra attacks come from something else.

Personally, I think this item is an exception, and it's a poorly thought out one at that.

Why would the entry for the Quarterstaff of Alacrity need to mention that it doesn't stack with haste? It already says it is a double +5 quarterstaff of speed. That should be implicit. The fact that it doesn't have haste as a prerequisite for creation does seem wrong, however. In fact, this whole weapon seems wrong.

I_Got_This_Name
2007-04-14, 10:38 AM
Well, Customer Service is meaningless, but I had this exact same question a while back, regarding TWF with speed weapons. I got this answer:

Hi there *****,
"Not cumulative with similar effects" means that you can’t benefit from the extra attack granted by the speed property if you’ve already taken an extra attack granted by any other effect as part of a full attack action made during your turn. The precise definition of “extra attack” isn’t clear, but it is reasonable to conclude that it refers to any effect that adds an attack to your full attack action over and above the normal number of attacks granted to a creature with your base attack bonus and number of weapons or natural weapons.
Thus, the list of effects with which speed doesn’t ‘stack’ includes, but is not necessarily limited to, other weapons with the 'speed' quality as well as the following common effects:
• The haste spell (PH 239)
• The Improved Two-Weapon Fighting feat (PH 96) and similar feats
• The Rapid Shot feat (PH 99)
• The flurry of blows class feature (PH 40)
If you have the speed property and one of these effects active simultaneously, you may choose which effect grants you the extra attack. For example, using the speed property would be preferably to using Rapid Shot, since speed doesn’t apply a –2 penalty on all attacks.
Obviously, this limitation doesn’t apply to the additional attacks that characters with a base attack bonus of +6 or greater are allotted as part of a full attack action, nor does it apply to the additional attacks allotted to a creature using its normal off-hand attack (which is a normal attack anyone is allowed with an off-hand weapon) or natural weapons as part of a full attack action. A 5th-level lizardfolk barbarian could use the extra attack from the speed property even if he’s already made two attacks with the weapon (from his BAB of +6) and a bite attack (as a secondary natural attack).
Similarly, any attacks of opportunity you might take during your turn (for instance, due to a creature taking a readied action that provokes opportunity attacks) wouldn’t prevent you from benefiting from the speed property), since those aren’t part of your full attack action.
The Quarterstaff of Alacrity is an untranslated 3rd Edition rule, but the DM can assume that it is an exception to the rule if he/she wishes.

Take Care and Good Gaming! :)
We would appreciate your feedback on the service we are providing you. Please click here to fill out a short questionnaire.
To login to your account, or update your question please click here.
Sam
Customer Service Representative
Wizards of the Coast
1-800-324-6496 (US and Canada)
425-204-8069 (From all other countries)
Monday-Friday 7am-6pm PST / 10am-9pm EST

To this question
Customer (***** *****) 08/05/2006 02:38 PM
Does speed stack with itself? Specifically, does a character equipped with two weapons of speed get the benefits of both, or do they have to choose one per round? I know it says that it does not stack with similar effects, but some people in my group are claiming that it says similar, not identical, so identical effects can stack.
Adding to the confusion is the Quarterstaff of Alacrity in the Epic-Level Handbook, which has both ends as speed weapons which do stack. Is that a 3.0 rule or a special exception to the normal speed rules?

In summary, Customer Service is backing the side that's saying that identical is a subset of similar, and so multiple Speed weapons don't stack. Then they go crazy.

Matthew
2007-04-14, 10:41 AM
Heh, that's pretty harsh. So, according to them, it doesn't even stack with Improved, Greater and Perfected Two Weapon Fighting? Nice.

I_Got_This_Name
2007-04-14, 11:16 AM
Customer Service is known for their off-base answers, so you don't have to go that far. That's when they started going crazy.

Saying, though, that Speed is similar to Speed (I'm not sure if there's a single definition of the word Similar that excludes identical objects and is useful in logic) is pretty basic; they then don't stack.

Matthew
2007-04-14, 11:31 AM
Oh yeah, I think it's quite clear how Speed is supposed to work (not stacking), but their failure to be perfectly clear about it doesn't do much more than create more confusion.

Kevlimin_Soulaxe
2007-04-14, 05:27 PM
Here goes another can of worms...

Do the various flurries work of both sides of a weapon?

Matthew
2007-04-14, 09:42 PM
No, they don't. Flurry adds one or two extra attacks and that's all.

PinkysBrain
2007-04-15, 07:28 AM
Saying, though, that Speed is similar to Speed (I'm not sure if there's a single definition of the word Similar that excludes identical objects and is useful in logic) is pretty basic; they then don't stack.
It might be basic, what is also rather basic is that the speed description never says it doesn't stack with itself. It's not cumulative with similar effects, it comes down to whether you include the entire context in the effect (ie. do you include "with it") or whether you only focus on the extra attack and call it quits.

There is a case to be made for both sides ... there is no case to be made for it being crystal clear.

Annarrkkii
2007-04-15, 09:45 AM
Don't forget ToB's Snap Kick. That's another hit in.

Misplaced_Jedi
2007-04-15, 11:34 AM
As I understand it you cannot use Flurry and TWF in the same turn

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20070410a

Look at the section on monks and manufactured weapons

Rigeld2
2007-04-15, 11:39 AM
Methinks you should read the FAQ.

Matthew
2007-04-15, 11:48 AM
Indeed. Flurry and Two Weapon Fighting stack. A lot of people think otherwise, mainly because of the original wording. It's a very common misunderstanding.

linkian19
2007-04-15, 12:16 PM
Well...let's see...I'm not claiming to know all about this...but if it's a double bladed weapon (or whatever) you make one attack with one end (with the speed) and you get that bonus. So that side is done. Then you go to attack with the other side (again with speed) and you get that benefit. Isn't one attack from one side of the weapon essentially different from the other? I think that since you attack with one end the enchantment is essentially "spent" and the next enchantment on the other side is still effective.

Again...I'm not claiming to be a know it all...in fact I don't...That's just the way I see it.

Matthew
2007-04-15, 12:21 PM
Nope. It works one of two ways. Either under the effects of a Haste Spell, and during a Full Attack Action, a character gets one extra Attack total or one extra Attack per weapon he is holding. Similarly, during a Full Attack Action, Speed Weapons either grant a character one extra Attack or one extra Attack per speed weapon he is holding.

[Edit] Actually, it just occurred to me that there is a further problem with two speed weapons. What AB do you use if a Character has two Speed Weapons, but no Two Weapon Fighting Feat? (assuming that the second case were correct).

linkian19
2007-04-16, 01:16 PM
Hmmm...so if someone were holding, let's say, two daggers of speed he would get an extra attack for each weapon held?

I'm not sure I understand you completely, Matthew.

Person_Man
2007-04-16, 03:00 PM
As I understand it you cannot use Flurry and TWF in the same turn

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20070410a

Look at the section on monks and manufactured weapons

Flurry, TWF, Frostrager One-Two Punch, Variant Barbarian Whirling Frenzy, Exotic Weapon Master Flurry of Strikes, the Master Thrower tricks, and the Snap Kick feat, ALL STACK.

Of course, you have to qualify for each:

Flurry: No armor, unarmed attacks or monk weapons
TWF: Two weapons or double weapon or unarmed attacks
One-Two Punch: Unarmed attacks, rage ability to enter PrC
Whirling Frenzy: Rage
EWM Flurry of Strikes: Double Exotic Weapon
Master Thrower: Small thrown weapon

The only way I know to combine all of these is:

Half Orc Paragon 3/Monk 9/Frostrager 2/Exotic Weapon Master 1/Master Thrower 5, wielding a lajatang, shuriken, and unarmed strikes interchangeably, for example.

But its easy to get 2 or 3 of them together without a huge penalty. Whirling Frenzy Barbarian 6/Frostrager 2, or Ranger 2/Monk 2, for example.

Of course, the penalties to hit also stack. So mathematically its generally a bad idea to combine more then one, unless you have some big bonus to hit or are dealing touch attacks.

Matthew
2007-04-16, 04:14 PM
Hmmm...so if someone were holding, let's say, two daggers of speed he would get an extra attack for each weapon held?
Well, yes, if you go with the second interpretation of how Weapons of Speed stack. Similarly, a character would get as many extra attacks as weapons being used when Hasted, but Haste would not stack with Speed.

I'm not sure I understand you completely, Matthew.
The above interpretation is not the generally accepted one, as far as I can tell. The most usually accepted interpretation is that Haste only grants one extra Attack, regardless of the number of Weapons, and that Speed Weapons niether stack with themselves or with Haste, so any combination of the above would still result in only one extra attack.
The mechanical problem with this second view is that it makes Two Handed Fighting an even better choice than Two Weapon Fighting. Though the case for the second interpretation is far from proven (and in my opinion most likely to be debunked) it would be a reasonable House Rule.
However, as Lord Silvanos has pointed out, you do have to watch out for Characters with Quick Draw trying to claim infinite Attacks via Haste or Speed.

Runeclaw
2007-04-16, 06:59 PM
Going back to the original post for a second, I was under the impression (as told to be my a more knowledgable friend) that one could not Flury and TWF in the same turn, as both required (incompatible) full-attacks. Is this not the case?

Fax Celestis
2007-04-16, 07:15 PM
Going back to the original post for a second, I was under the impression (as told to be my a more knowledgable friend) that one could not Flury and TWF in the same turn, as both required (incompatible) full-attacks. Is this not the case?

That is indeed not the case. Flurry and TWF are perfectly comingleable. A L20 monk who has invested in TWF, ITWF, and GTWF gets an attack pattern that looks like this while flurrying:

+13/+13/+13/+8/+3 (Primary Hand)/+13/+8/+3 (Off-Hand).

Even better, if you somehow get multiple arms (such as by being Thri-Kreen, being the target of Girallon's Blessing, or binding the Girallon Arms soulmeld to your totem chakra) and take MWF, IMWF, and GMWF, your attack pattern gets even niftier:

+13/+13/+13/+8/+3 (Primary Hand)/+13/+8/+3 (Off-Hand 1)/+13/+8/+3 (Off-Hand 2)/+13/+8/+3 (Off-Hand 3).

Annarrkkii
2007-04-16, 07:33 PM
Don't forget Slashing Flurry from the PHB II!