Defending weapon

[leperkhaun]

i didnt see anything covering this type of question already.

Does the bonus for defending weapons stack?

For example could i use a +2 defending/+2 Defending quarterstaff, give up all the bonus to attack and gain +4 to AC?

[Quietus]

It does say in the description that it "Stacks with all others", so given that, I'd generally allow it to do so.

[Skjaldbakka]

Yes you can. Just keep in mind how much money you are spending on that AC bonus. It is much, much more expensive to do than other methods.

[the_tick_rules]

i believe they function as a dodge bonus, and dodges stack so yeah. personally i find it's a better idea to save your weapons enchantments for offense and get + armors instead, unless your character really hates to be hit.

[Draz74]

It's not a dodge bonus. It's an unnamed bonus.

Yes you can. Just keep in mind how much money you are spending on that AC bonus. It is much, much more expensive to do than other methods.

This is why my new favorite combo to protect a caster is Defending and Greater Magic Weapon. Think about a high-level Sorcerer with a Quarterstaff with +1 Defending (each end). Every morning he casts GMW on each end of the quarterstaff, and then never actually uses it to attack -- voila! +10 AC for 16600 gp and 2 spell slots, a great tradeoff.

[Skjaldbakka]

I hate wizards so much sometimes.

[Dr. Weasel]

If they do in fact stack, you could get an obscene armor class at high levels with the addition of four items:

+1 Defending Gauntlet (right): 8300ish gp
+1 Defending Gauntlet (left): 8300ish gp
+1 Defending Shield Spikes: 8300ish gp
+1 Defending Armor Spikes: 8300ish gp

Each providing [1/4 Caster Level -1] AC.
(5th-7th: Nada)
(8th-11th: +4- 8300 gp/AC)
(12th-15th: +8- 4150 gp/AC)
(16th-19th: +12- 2766 gp/AC)
(20th: +16- 2075 gp/AC)

This might be best for a Cleric so you don't have to beg for all of your Wizard/Cleric's 3rd/4th level spells each day.

Foiled by Amiria two posts down... then by Shhalahr.

[Skjaldbakka]

I don't think most DMS would let defending armor spikes and shield spikes work though. Defending is supposed to represent the weapon moving of its own volition to intercept attacks. How do the spikes on your armor do that?

Still works by RAW, though.

[Amiria]

Also keep in mind that you have to use the weapon in an attack (and both ends of the quarterstaff if you want both boni) to get the AC bonus. Just holding the weapon in your hand or have it welded to your armor or shield won't do it. So a spellcaster can't cast spells (apart from swift or immediate) in the same rpund where he gets the AC bonus.

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.

[Shhalahr Windrider]

It's not a dodge bonus. It's an unnamed bonus.

But unnamed bonuses from identical sources do not stack.

Doesn't stack for that reason.

[OzymandiasVolt]

The line in question from the ability's description could easily be argued to simply mean that the decision of whether the bonus applies to attack or defense has to come before the weapon is used, if it is used at all.

The sentence structure and grammar supports both views. It's an instance of bad writing, as it's not as specific as it should be and therefore contains two mutually exclusive meanings.

[Person_Man]

Why would you buy a Defending weapon? Weapons are twice as expensive as armor and similar magic items. So you can get the same exact effect for a much better bargain if you're smart about it.

[Leicontis]

You make a defending weapon because it stacks with armor. If it didn't stack, there wouldn't be many uses for it, but it does.

[Indon]

Why would you buy a Defending weapon? Weapons are twice as expensive as armor and similar magic items. So you can get the same exact effect for a much better bargain if you're smart about it.

But you couldn't get so many sources of it as you may have weapons...

If they stacked, a Thri-keen with Armor spikes could potentially have a ridiculous AC.

For that reason, I'd say they don't stack, regardless of general stacking rules (which I feel are somewhat ambiguous on this specific point).

[Person_Man]

You make a defending weapon because it stacks with armor. If it didn't stack, there wouldn't be many uses for it, but it does.

That's correct. But there are tons of different bonuses to AC out there that stack with each other. Armor, Shield, Natural, Deflection, Unnamed, etc. You need not invest so much money in a Defending Weapon in order to get the AC you desire.

But you couldn't get so many sources of it as you may have weapons...

If they stacked, a Thri-keen with Armor spikes could potentially have a ridiculous AC.

Not really. Magic weapons are very expensive. If your Thri-Kreen wanted four +3 Defending weapons, it would cost him 128,000 gp for a +12 to AC. I'm pretty sure I could get a lot more bang for my buck with 128,000 gp via other magic items.

[leperkhaun]

thanks for the thoughts all. Im playing a monk for my friends campagin (yes i know they are a weak class). GMW and defending weapons are what i was trying to do to make up for the lack of armor.

[Draz74]

But unnamed bonuses from identical sources do not stack.

Doesn't stack for that reason.

Except that, in this case, the ability description says it "stacks with all others." Individual descriptions trump general rules. Multiple defending weapons, by RAW, absolutely stack.

The line in question from the ability's description could easily be argued to simply mean that the decision of whether the bonus applies to attack or defense has to come before the weapon is used, if it is used at all.

The sentence structure and grammar supports both views. It's an instance of bad writing, as it's not as specific as it should be and therefore contains two mutually exclusive meanings.

That's ... true. I suppose a DM would be perfectly within his right to use the "before attacking" clause to keep my mage from getting his AC bonus unless he was actually attacking with his quarterstaff. But it also wouldn't be a houserule to allow the quarterstaff AC boost in this way. The rules for Defending are ambiguous.

Personally, I'd allow it, if only because of the arguments I've seen from Duelist enthusiasts about how the Duelist can actually fight with a dagger or main gauche in the off hand (as is traditional for warriors of that style) without giving up his Precise Strike feature, if his off-hand weapon is actually a Defending Dagger.

[Person_Man]

thanks for the thoughts all. Im playing a monk for my friends campagin (yes i know they are a weak class). GMW and defending weapons are what i was trying to do to make up for the lack of armor.

Amulet of Natural Armor

Psychoactive Skin

Bracers of Armor

Gloves of Dexterity

Periapt of Wisdom

Ioun Stones

Have a friend cast Mage Armor or similar spells on you.


There are more. That's just from the SRD.

[Hawriel]

The quarterstaff is not a cheesy double axe or dire flail. Its just a stick. One stick. A stick with metal caps on the ends and maybe some cloth or leather rapped around it for grip. The ends are not separate weapons. A +1 quarter staff is just a +1 quarter staff no matter what end you hit the target with. Its not a +1/+1 that really stack to make it a +2. The quarterstaff is an agile weapon, the European firghtng style is the bases of why a quarterstaff gives the user an extra attack, as if using two-weapons or a cheesy double weapon.

[Thinker]

The quarterstaff is not a cheesy double axe or dire flail. Its just a stick. One stick. A stick with metal caps on the ends and maybe some cloth or leather rapped around it for grip. The ends are not separate weapons. A +1 quarter staff is just a +1 quarter staff no matter what end you hit the target with. Its not a +1/+1 that really stack to make it a +2. The quarterstaff is an agile weapon, the European firghtng style is the bases of why a quarterstaff gives the user an extra attack, as if using two-weapons or a cheesy double weapon.

On double weapons you have to enchant each end separately.

[Kaelik]

a cheesy double weapon.

^^^^^^The problem with your post.

You should probably head over to Char Op if you think double weapons are cheesy. There you can be "educated."

[Shhalahr Windrider]

Except that, in this case, the ability description says it "stacks with all others." Individual descriptions trump general rules. Multiple defending weapons, by RAW, absolutely stack.

All others. Another defending weapon is the same source.

Interpereting "others" as you do would mean you could say, "Oh, no, I got über-untyped bonus buff from Wizard Bob, who is clearly another different source from Cleric Jane. Therefore her über-untyped bonus buff stacks with it.

It's still the same effect. Saying it stacks with all others is just another one of the rules' inconsitently applied reiterations of a more general rule.

[Dr. Weasel]

Kaelik- I think he means "cheesy" in a ridiculous-over-the-top-usually-Darth-Maul-fanboy sort of way, which pretty much all the double weapons are.

[leperkhaun]

Amulet of Natural Armor

Psychoactive Skin

Bracers of Armor

Gloves of Dexterity

Periapt of Wisdom

Ioun Stones

Have a friend cast Mage Armor or similar spells on you.


There are more. That's just from the SRD.

I know about those, but a +1 defending with GMW is cheap.

[Roderick_BR]

Cheesy trick: Use bracelets (I don't remember which book it is). The base cost is 1000 gp, then you can enchant it as normal weapons (+1, +2, flaming, etc...), but you always need to enchant both, doubling the costs. You put on the bracelets, and all the bonuses counts for your unarmed strikes.
Get two +5 defending bracers, put them on, switch all the bonus to defense (a total of +10) and then use your normal weapon of choice. You can use these with normal armor, since they stack with armor bonus.
I don't know if a DM would allow it, but as written, you can use it, as defending weapons don't require you to actually be fighting with them.