Stacking "Defending" weapons?

[Brock Samson]

First of all, this is allowed isn't it? Secondly: Just how much abuse can you do with this? Started with a quarterstaff, both ends defending, armor spikes defending, and an animated shield with defending, if these are all greater-magic-weaponed to +5, will it really up your AC by 20? What kind of a bonus is this? Would it apply to touch attacks? And any other methods of abuse for this wonderful quality?

[Animefunkmaster]

do not stack if they have the same type or come from the same source

Emphasis mine. Two weapons transferring enhancement bonus to AC from the defending special quality is coming from the same source (the defending special quality) which overrules that it "stacks with all others".

[Jothki]

Emphasis mine. Two weapons transferring enhancement bonus to AC from the defending special quality is coming from the same source (the defending special quality) which overrules that it "stacks with all others".

I'm fairly sure that the rules work the other way around, with specific (stacks with all others) overrulling general (bonuses from the same source don't stack).

[elliott20]

either way, it provides an "enhancement" bonus. as a named bonus, it can only be applied once.

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

A defending weapon allows the wielder to transfer some or all of the sword’s enhancement bonus to his AC as a bonus that stacks with all others. As a free action, the wielder chooses how to allocate the weapon’s enhancement bonus at the start of his turn before using the weapon, and the effect to AC lasts until his next turn.

The bonus is not added to AC as an Enhancement bonus, it is added as an unnamed bonus 'that stacks with all others' which would include other Defending bonuses. You could get a stack of +1 Defending Arrows, GMW the stack to +5, and if you could somehow fire all fifty in one round you would get +250 AC for that round.

[elliott20]

wow, defending weapons stack? somehow, that just seems... kind of silly.

[Talic]

A defending weapon allows the wielder to transfer some or all of the sword’s enhancement bonus to his AC as a bonus that stacks with all others. As a free action, the wielder chooses how to allocate the weapon’s enhancement bonus at the start of his turn before using the weapon, and the effect to AC lasts until his next turn.

Emphasis Mine.

The enhancement bonus is being transferred.
It's type doesn't change; only what it's applied to.

[Riffington]

I believe it stacks. However, you still have to use the weapon to get the bonus. So if you want 3 items to contribute, you have to make at least one attack with each of the three.

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

Even if it read, "transfer some or all of the sword’s enhancement bonus to his AC as a[n enhancement] bonus that stacks with all others," it would still stack with all other enhancement bonuses, including other Defending bonuses. Regardless of how you want to read it, it explicitly says that it stacks with all other bonuses to AC.

[Kaiyanwang]

Emphasis Mine.

The enhancement bonus is being transferred.
It's type doesn't change; only what it's applied to.

IMHO, you win rule-wise and sanity wise.

[Tsotha-lanti]

Same source + enhancement bonuses = don't stack. Seems clear enough for me. This also handily prevents using defending armor and shield spikes with a defending weapon.

I'm fairly sure that the rules work the other way around, with specific (stacks with all others) overrulling general (bonuses from the same source don't stack).

How do you figure which of those is general and which specific? Seems like it's the other way around for me. After all, if your logic were correct, Dodge bonuses from the same source would stack.

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

The general rule is that multiple bonuses of the same name, or multiple unnamed bonuses from the same source, do not stack. The Defending property includes an exception to this rule, spelled out as clearly as they could have possibly made it. Yet people are still trying to say that it won't stack, when it is clearly an exception to that rule. There is absolutely nothing vague about "this bonus stacks with all others." If a character has one Defending bonus, and tries to apply a second Defending bonus, it would be included in the "all others" category and they would definitely stack with each other.

[Talic]

The general rule is that multiple bonuses of the same name, or multiple unnamed bonuses from the same source, do not stack. The Defending property includes an exception to this rule, spelled out as clearly as they could have possibly made it. Yet people are still trying to say that it won't stack, when it is clearly an exception to that rule. There is absolutely nothing vague about "this bonus stacks with all others." If a character has one Defending bonus, and tries to apply a second Defending bonus, it would be included in the "all others" category and they would definitely stack with each other.

No. We are interpreting it not as an "all others" category. We are interpreting it as "the same". An enhancement bonus to AC granted by a defending weapon.

Enhancement bonuses from armor? Stacks with.
Enhancement bonuses from shields? Great.
Every other bonus? Sure.

But adding water to water doesn't make it twice as wet. It's just more of the same.

[Tsotha-lanti]

The general rule is that multiple bonuses of the same name, or multiple unnamed bonuses from the same source, do not stack. The Defending property includes an exception to this rule, spelled out as clearly as they could have possibly made it. Yet people are still trying to say that it won't stack, when it is clearly an exception to that rule. There is absolutely nothing vague about "this bonus stacks with all others." If a character has one Defending bonus, and tries to apply a second Defending bonus, it would be included in the "all others" category and they would definitely stack with each other.

"All others" seems to exclude "itself".

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

Quarterstaff, +5 Defending/+5 Defending
Left side grants +5 AC
Right side grants +5 AC

Left side regards right side as another bonus, "all other bonuses" applies in this case and left side is able to stack with right side.

Right side regards left side as another bonus, "all other bonuses" applies in this case and right side is able to stack with left side.

It does not say 'some' other bonuses, it does not say 'different' bonuses, it says "all other bonuses." All includes every. single. one. It does not say all other bonuses except other defending bonuses, it says ALL other bonuses. That includes other instances of the Defending property, because regardless of whether or not they're the same type of bonus or from the same source, they're still different bonuses and will stack due to the exception given in the ability.

If you don't like that a character could have +1 Defending armor spikes, a +1 Defending animated shield, and two +1 Defending weapons, all with GMW +5, then look at the second sentence of the property instead of the first: "As a free action, the wielder chooses how to allocate the weapon’s enhancement bonus at the start of his turn before using the weapon, and the effect to AC lasts until his next turn." It's a simple matter of ruling that only weapons you attack with can grant you the benefit of their Defending property, because no amount of desire on your part will change the fact that in this case, multiple abilities of the same name from the same source do in fact stack with each other.

[Darrin]

Started with a quarterstaff, both ends defending, armor spikes defending, and an animated shield with defending, if these are all greater-magic-weaponed to +5, will it really up your AC by 20?

You're missing... two spiked gauntlets, two dwarven buckler-axes (RoS), two boot blades (CSc), two elbow blades (CSc), two knee blades (CSc), chahar-aina (OA), dastana (OA), braid blade (Dungeon #120), and... I think there's a horned helm in MIC that gives you a gore attack.

And that's before you go into Warshaper + Kensai to give yourself an infinite number of defending tentacles.

[Curmudgeon]

There is one peculiar limitation of the defending property:

A defending weapon allows the wielder to transfer some or all of the sword’s enhancement bonus to his AC as a bonus that stacks with all others.

By RAW, this bonus will only stack with all others if it's on swords. So no armor spikes, shield spikes, doubly-enhanced quarterstaves -- just swords.

[J.Gellert]

And any other methods of abuse for this wonderful quality?

You're missing... two spiked gauntlets, two dwarven buckler-axes (RoS), two boot blades (CSc), two elbow blades (CSc), two knee blades (CSc), chahar-aina (OA), dastana (OA), braid blade (Dungeon #120), and... I think there's a horned helm in MIC that gives you a gore attack.

And that's before you go into Warshaper + Kensai to give yourself an infinite number of defending tentacles.

The other thing that comes to mind is a Marilith... Of course, that one doesn't get Knee Blades, but still... Don't ever, ever tell your DM this.

[Sstoopidtallkid]

There is one peculiar limitation of the defending property: By RAW, this bonus will only stack with all others if it's on swords. So no armor spikes, shield spikes, doubly-enhanced quarterstaves -- just swords.

+1 this. Yes, it's RAWtarded, but it handily prevents people from stacking more than 2 defending weapons(other than Thri-Keen etc).

[Talic]

Left side regards right side as another bonus, "all other bonuses" applies in this case and left side is able to stack with right side.

Right side regards left side as another bonus, "all other bonuses" applies in this case and right side is able to stack with left side.

That's one way to interpret it, sure.

Another way is that defending bonuses are not an "other" bonus. No left side, no right side, no nothing. If you use a defending weapon, and then try to use another defending weapon, you are trying to apply the same bonus twice.

And if we have multiple interpretations, and one leads to imbalance and abilities beyond the power scale of the item, and opens the door to rules abuse...

And the other does not...

Why on Earth would ANYONE choose the former?
Why are you, Biff?

And then why are you trying to Rules Lawyer it right back out?
Are you just trying to prove you're smart?

In that case, you win the internets. Here's a cookie.
Are we done now?

[AbyssKnight]

Talic,

I think your response is entirely too personal and antagonistic to Bif.

As far as why he would argue for a position that is abusable, it is because the default assumption when discussing a rule is discuss what the rule is. Not what it should be, or how it is better. Bif simply believes that the consequences of the rule that the bonus from a defending weapon "stack(s) with all other bonuses" is that defending weapons stack with other defending weapons. He is stating his opinion and defending that opinion.

I personally think that is a logical conclusion from the text. And it would be far from the first or only broken thing that results from the rules being followed. More than half of the ideas people post on the internet seem to fall under "horrible things technically allowed by the rules."

For the record, I also don't have a problem with the conclusion that it shouldn't stack due to game balance or other issues.

It has nothing to do with trying to "win the internets" or any other such nonsense.

Don't attack the person just because you disagree with their argument.

[lsfreak]

There is one peculiar limitation of the defending property: By RAW, this bonus will only stack with all others if it's on swords. So no armor spikes, shield spikes, doubly-enhanced quarterstaves -- just swords.

Though strictly speaking, there are examples of defending daggers in the books. Several of the hidden blades say in their text "Treat a [boot blade, sleeve blade, and instrument blade] as a dagger," in which case is something treated exactly the same as a dagger for damage, feats, class features, and everything else, not a dagger in this instance.

[Lamech]

A defending weapon allows the wielder to transfer some or all of the sword’s enhancement bonus to his AC as a bonus that stacks with all others. As a free action, the wielder chooses how to allocate the weapon’s enhancement bonus at the start of his turn before using the weapon, and the effect to AC lasts until his next turn.

If I understand this this must be done at the start of his turn, not after he has taken another action. Like say moving or casting a spell or assigning some of a defending weapon's bonus to AC. So stacking them would be difficult.

And no those two bonuses would not be the same bonus. They would be two differant ones, mearly from the same source. Otherwise applying that to here which has similar language would make the last sentence meaningless because they are not "other bonuses" if they are from "the same source"

A circumstance bonus (or penalty) arises from specific conditional factors impacting the success of the task at hand. Circumstance bonuses stack with all other bonuses, including other circumstance bonuses, unless they arise from essentially the same source.

Which would mean this is the only basic rule to govern circumstance bonuses.

circumstance bonuses however, do stack with one another unless otherwise specified.

So now circumstance bonuses would always stack with each other.

A much simpler way of looking at would be if one is using a +4/+5 quaterstaff how would you call a +4 bonus the same as a +5?

[Heliomance]

Isn't the best way to abuse Defending by stacking it with Dancing, and havig a cloud of weapons hovering around you?

[Sinfire Titan]

Isn't the best way to abuse Defending by stacking it with Dancing, and havig a cloud of weapons hovering around you?

Too expensive. that's a +6, whereas 50 +1 Defending Shurikens cost a single +2 (plus the MWK Shuriken price, as ammo), and Greater Magic Weapon CL 20th is really easy to get.

If you want to get crazy with it, Fukimi-Bari can be carried in your mouth (at an unlimited number), can be fired 3 at a time (so 15 attacks with Rapid Shot), and are ammunition for all intents. Range increment 5, so it really doesn't matter what you fire them at so long as you shoot them every round. 50 of them lasts for about 3 rounds, and there's no RAW limit to how many you can hold in your mouth. Start having fun guys.

[Tsotha-lanti]

By RAW, this bonus will only stack with all others if it's on swords. So no armor spikes, shield spikes, doubly-enhanced quarterstaves -- just swords.

Obvious typo is obvious. Inherited from the AD&D Defender sword.

[Sstoopidtallkid]

Obvious typo is obvious. Inherited from the AD&D Defender sword.

And the fact that Defending stacks with itself isn't an obvious error? As written, it stacks. Also as-written, it only applies to swords. RAI, you shouldn't be able to stack 6 defending weapons, and RAI it should apply to non-swords(since the dagger is possible to randomly generate), but you need to pick whether to follow RAW or RAI. Neither works the way you want it to.

[sofawall]

No, we aren't, because I agree that Defending weapons can stack with each other. Not with themselves, but with each other.

They stack with all other bonuses. Do we agree on that?


Each weapon is a separate source, do we agree on that?

So, unnamed bonuses that have been explicitly called out to stack with all other bonuses, from different sources.

Honestly, it seems more likely that defending stacks then Fist of the Forest/Deepwarden.

[Telonius]

Regardless, Defending only shows up in the Melee Weapon table. So, sadly, no getting a stack of +5 Defending arrows.

Taking this back to 3.0, the old FAQ had this to say about Defending Weapons:

Do you have to actively wield a weapon of defending to use its power? Or could you hold a longsword of defending in your left hand, not use it to attack (so you are not actually using the two weapons) and still wield a sword in your right hand without penalties? Or is the defending bonus considered part of the normal parrying that happens in the background?

Using a weapon of defending works just like the Expertise feat. (You have to use an attack or full attack action.) You can’t use the weapon like a shield; if you hold the weapon in your off hand and claim an Armor Class bonus for it, you take all the penalties for fighting with two weapons, even if you don’t actually attack with the weapon.

From the old SRD:

Expertise [General]
Prerequisite: Int 13+.
Benefit: When the character uses the attack action or full attack action in melee, the character can take a penalty of as much as -5 on the character's attack and add the same number (up to +5) to the character's Armor Class. This number may not exceed the character's base attack bonus. The changes to attack rolls and Armor Class last until the character's next action. The bonus to the character's Armor Class is a dodge bonus.
Normal: A character not capable of the Expertise feat can fight defensively while using the attack or full attack action to take a -4 penalty on attacks and gain a +2 dodge bonus to Armor Class.

Note that Dodge Bonuses by definition stack with all others, including themselves. Now, from the 3.5 SRD:

Defending

A defending weapon allows the wielder to transfer some or all of the sword’s enhancement bonus to his AC as a bonus that stacks with all others. As a free action, the wielder chooses how to allocate the weapon’s enhancement bonus at the start of his turn before using the weapon, and the effect to AC lasts until his next turn.

Moderate abjuration; CL 8th; Craft Magic Arms and Armor, shield or shield of faith; Price +1 bonus.

Emphasis added. It seems pretty clear to me that this was intended to work just like the 3.0 defending weapons. I would rule - as Wizards suggested in 3.0 - that the bonus only be applied if a melee weapon is actually used during that round. You would take penalties as though fighting with multiple weapons for any other defending weapons you have otherwise. If you would not normally get enough attacks to use additional weapons, those Defending bonuses would not apply (so no stacking seventeen Defending Daggers).

[Curmudgeon]

Though strictly speaking, there are examples of defending daggers in the books.

That's perfectly fine. You can have 1 defending dagger. That bonus to AC just won't stack with all others. If you want the defending bonus to stack, it's gotta be on swords.

I admit it's screwy, but it's the best way I know to tackle this niche problem in the rules via strict adherence to the RAW.