Let's say I have a +1 Called Combat Scabbard and sheathed in the scabbard is a blade. When I use the teleport feature, would it teleport just the scabbard or the scabbard AND the sheathed blade.
Thank you in advance for the help.
Just the scabbard. If it weren't a combat scabbard I'd let it teleport the blade, but essentially what you want is to get the function of two called weapon enchantments for the price of one. No dice.
Cool. I understand where you're coming from.
Thanks again!
Good question.
If you had a Called sword in a Combat Scabbard, what happens?
If you can add Called to a Double Weapon and have it bring both ends, why would this be bad?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's been my experience that teleporting containers also bring along their contents.
If the blade was sheathed in the scabbard when it was called, I'd rule yes.
In any other case, no.
Reviewing the RAW, it says that it can "be teleported to the wielder's hands".
Taking the general assumption as to how most teleportation effects work (as well as the function of its spell source, Teleport), equipment that is carried with the caster travels with it upon teleportation. Since the scabbard is carrying the sword, it would travel with it.
@ Lord Pendragon: I say it should still be allowed. If the enemy was smart (or a recurring villain), they'd know to take the blade out of the scabbard, thusly making the property itself pointless (unless the scabbard itself is also being used as a weapon).
A called weapon can be teleported to the wielder's hand
RAW is clear. RAW says 'a called weapon' and not 'a called weapon with scabbard or other container that is holding the weapon'. You 'draw' the weapon with a range of 100ft. Thats all. It is a weapon special ability and it only works for the weapon. All other ruling would result in further discussion/questions/cheesing/munchkining.
Combat scabbards are special because they are container and weapons. Compare them with shields who are protective items and weapons. The rules for enchanting shields are clear. In this case only the 'weapon' part of the scabbard is enchanted.
A called weapon can be teleported to the wielder's handRAW is clear. RAW says 'a called weapon' and not 'a called weapon with scabbard or other container that is holding the weapon'. You 'draw' the weapon with a range of 100ft. Thats all. It is a weapon special ability and it only works for the weapon. All other ruling would result in further discussion/questions/cheesing/munchkining.
Combat scabbards are special because they are container and weapons. Compare them with shields who are protective items and weapons. The rules for enchanting shields are clear. In this case only the 'weapon' part of the scabbard is enchanted.
So, you'd rule that shield spikes rip themselves out of the shield and teleport to your hand, since the shield is not a weapon and doesn't have the called special ability?
@mdt
Sure. And on my table you can wear large combat scabbards as boots and you create a rift between time and space as soon as you call the scabbard to your hand.
@ Lord Pendragon: I say it should still be allowed. If the enemy was smart (or a recurring villain), they'd know to take the blade out of the scabbard, thusly making the property itself pointless (unless the scabbard itself is also being used as a weapon).
See that's my whole problem with it. The scabbard is in fact a weapon. It's a combat scabbard, not merely a sheathe.
Upon second thought, I'd probably let it slide in my game, since I so rarely see anyone get the Called enchantment. But RAW I don't think one should bring the other (no matter which has the Called property, to answer blackbloodtroll's query).
I hadn't considered the double weapon issue.
@mdt
Sure. And on my table you can wear large combat scabbards as boots and you create a rift between time and space as soon as you call the scabbard to your hand.
Translation : I don't have an answer for the postulated situation, so I'll spew snark instead.
Would you simply have your feet violently torn off, and find your self holding your bleeding feet in your hands screaming "god help me?"
The ability doesn't say whether or not a scabbard would come with it.
Myself- I'd say no. No to a regular scabbard, no to a combat scabbard, no to the basket the sword was laying in and no to the silk cloth the sword was wrapped in.
It is the simplest answer given the text of the ability and seems to fit the flavor of it.
-S
The ability doesn't say whether or not a scabbard would come with it.
Myself- I'd say no. No to a regular scabbard, no to a combat scabbard, no to the basket the sword was laying in and no to the silk cloth the sword was wrapped in.
It is the simplest answer given the text of the ability and seems to fit the flavor of it.
This is my belief as well, RAW. But as I said, I think I'd allow it just because I never see my players ever choose the Called enchantment. :p
A called weapon can be teleported to the wielder's handRAW is clear. RAW says 'a called weapon' and not 'a called weapon with scabbard or other container that is holding the weapon'. You 'draw' the weapon with a range of 100ft. Thats all. It is a weapon special ability and it only works for the weapon. All other ruling would result in further discussion/questions/cheesing/munchkining.
Combat scabbards are special because they are container and weapons. Compare them with shields who are protective items and weapons. The rules for enchanting shields are clear. In this case only the 'weapon' part of the scabbard is enchanted.
RAW, A called weapon can also refer to a weapon that was affected by the property; case in point, if a sword was sheathed in the scabbard, and the scabbard's property was used, the sword would come with it since the scabbard was called and at that point in time the sword was drawn. If the sword was already drawn, then obviously the ability wouldn't affect it. Saying it doesn't directly conflicts with the intent of teleportation spells/effects, i.e. the Teleport spell, which is the spell requisite for the property.
Of course, the intent behind that RAW is "a weapon with the called property," and while I understand the point being made, saying that it denies the physics of any sort of container is equally ridiculous. If I had a Proxy-like Teleportation spell (there is a spell that allows this, I forget what it's called) active on a Bag of Holding that would function on anyone other than myself opening the bag to teleport right into my hands, you'd rule that the Bag of Holding itself would teleport to my hand, and all of the items stored inside would just drop out of nowhere?
Even ignoring the use of a Bag of Holding, what about any traditional backpack? Would the backpack itself just teleport to my hands and all of the equipment shaped within the backpack would just fall to the ground?
According to the ruling you present, that's what would happen; in which case, whenever I teleport I'd just be some naked humanoid being, since all of my equipment shaped around my body doesn't travel with me.
Seems legit.
Of course, the intent behind that RAW is "a weapon with the called property," and while I understand the point being made, saying that it denies the physics of any sort of container is equally ridiculous.
What "physics" is being denied? The sword is teleported. Objects in contact with it are not. After all, where do you draw the line? If the sword was locked in a chest, would the chest also be teleported? If it was 'sheathed' in a person's chest at the time, would the body be teleported?
The intent is pretty clear. Only the sword is teleported.
'quote]If I had a Proxy-like Teleportation spell (there is a spell that allows this, I forget what it's called) active on a Bag of Holding that would function on anyone other than myself opening the bag to teleport right into my hands, you'd rule that the Bag of Holding itself would teleport to my hand, and all of the items stored inside would just drop out of nowhere?
Even ignoring the use of a Bag of Holding, what about any traditional backpack? Would the backpack itself just teleport to my hands and all of the equipment shaped within the backpack would just fall to the ground?
These are all strawman arguments. You're creating silly scenarios to tear them down. Nobody's talking about a vague spell you can't recall teleporting backpacks. The subject is the Called enchantment, which calls a weapon--and only a weapon--to your hand.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Of course, the intent behind that RAW is "a weapon with the called property," and while I understand the point being made, saying that it denies the physics of any sort of container is equally ridiculous.
What "physics" is being denied? The sword is teleported. Objects in contact with it are not. After all, where do you draw the line? If the sword was locked in a chest, would the chest also be teleported? If it was 'sheathed' in a person's chest at the time, would the body be teleported?
The intent is pretty clear. Only the sword is teleported.
If I had a Proxy-like Teleportation spell (there is a spell that allows this, I forget what it's called) active on a Bag of Holding that would function on anyone other than myself opening the bag to teleport right into my hands, you'd rule that the Bag of Holding itself would teleport to my hand, and all of the items stored inside would just drop out of nowhere?
Even ignoring the use of a Bag of Holding, what about any traditional backpack? Would the backpack itself just teleport to my hands and all of the equipment shaped within the backpack would just fall to the ground?
These are all strawman arguments. You're creating silly scenarios to tear them down. Nobody's talking about a vague spell you can't recall teleporting backpacks. The subject is the Called enchantment, which calls a weapon--and only a weapon--to your hand.
|
Indeed.
A Combat Scabbard is both a weapon and a container.
So, using examples that include a container of sorts, is completely valid.
Also, the Retrieve Item and Teleport Object spells are good examples.
If the scabbard was called, would the sheathed sword come with it, in the same way that a backpack's contents would/would not come with a called backpack?
My point was that there is no such item as a Called Backpack in the game, so comparing the called combat sheathe to a nonexistent item to make a point is disingenuous.
However, the spells blackbloodtroll brings up do add an interesting angle to the debate.
A Combat Scabbard is both a weapon and a container.
So, using examples that include a container of sorts, is completely valid.
Also, the Retrieve Item and Teleport Object spells are good examples.
I guess as I see it, there are two questions here.
1. Would I rule that using Retrieve item on a Bag of Holding would bring along all its contents or just the bag. Same with Teleport Object on a backpack.
And 2. If so, do I believe the Called property a) does the same RAW, and b) was meant to do the same RAI?
I think in the case of #1 the answer would be yes. There is nothing in either spell that addresses the issue, so RAW it's entirely GM fiat without a FAQ or errata to clarify. It feels like a clever use of a spell that requires preparation to pull off (you have to cast the spell on the bag/backpack ahead of time).
In the case of #2 I feel the answer is no. I mentioned chaining 2 weapons together in a previous reply, and this feels the same way, a means of gaining 2 Called enchantments for the price of 1. It doesn't feel like this was RAI, and the RAW do not address it directly.
I recognize there may be some inconsistency between the two rulings, and I think a part of that is that while a combat scabbard may technically also be a "container" for a weapon, it doesn't feel the same as a bag of holding or a backpack. YMMV
|
Does anyone know the official ruling for using called or throwing on a double weapon?
If, say, throwing were on one end of a double weapon, does it work but only that end can hit, or does the weapon split in two until the thrown end returns (unlikely), or won't it work unless both ends have the throwing enchantment?
Whatever the answer is for throwing would also apply for called.
Once we know the answer to that, it may help us with the combat scabbard/sheathed sword.
I will again ask...
If shield spikes have the called property, and it is used, does the shield come with them? Or just the spikes.
1) If just the spikes, what damage is done to the shield, is it still a shield anymore? The spikes cease to become weapons after they are removed from the shield, so do they lose their enchantment, no longer being valid targets for enchantment?
2) If the shield does come with the spikes, why would the shield come with the spikes, but the sword not come with the combat sheath?
Armor/Shield spikes are something added onto the armor.
If you want to add a scabbard onto your sword I think it would make for a very ineffective blade after that- but at least then you could call your hilted scabbard to you.
I get what you are saying MDT, I do. But shield/armor spikes are in a definite grey area in the rules as being both part of the armor and not. (you don't make a shield spike attack, for example, it just increases the damage of the shield bash and alters it to piercing)
IMO: The scabbard and the weapon are two different items- whether its a combat scabbard or just a leather holder is irrelevant.
A shield spike is part of the shield not an independent weapon in and of itself (except for the purposes of enchanting) and to me would allow someone to call the shield to them.
I would rule armor spikes to do the same as well- though it might be of dubious use to suddenly have a full suit of armor in your hand in the middle of a fight. (unless, of course, your opponent had been wearing it. Then you need a camera.)
I will freely admit that armor spikes and shield spikes are a corner case not entirely realized under the current language of the rules and that it could easily and freely go either way. I don't think that same language supports just any ole random container the sword happened to be laying in gets to teleport along for the ride.
If the sword is in a chest, does the chest come with it? How about a sack? A backpack? What if its handing on a sash- does the sash come with it?
The ability says it works on the weapon. I'd just have it work on the weapon.
-S
Wow... I didn't think the question would make a thread this long. :)
The conversation has brought another question to mind though...
With the input from those saying the blade would not teleport, would that also apply for things residing on the +1 Called Combat Scabbard? Let's say the combat scabbard is covered in flesh eating acid or some other deadly filth? When I teleport the combat scabbard to my hands, does that mean it arrives to me acid free? If I stabbed someone with a +1 Called Combat Scabbard in cold murder, and then teleported it, would it now be free of the victim's blood?
If I have called armor spikes, do they auto-equip my armor? That would be pretty cool.
If I have called armor spikes, do they auto-equip my armor? That would be pretty cool.
For some reason, after reading that, I immediately got a vision of Power Rangers, Kamen Rider, and Japanese magic girls. :P
Would the Armor be counted as Doned-hastily, as there was no time taken to put it on anf fasten it right? Or would spikes appear on whatever armor you are wearing?
Serious note tho: if I called my sword I would want it to appear in my hand, ready to use, and not teleport it with the scabbard on, possibly Peace-bonded. But rather POOF ready to fight. So no thanks for the scabbard.
The cleaning isn't necessary in my mind, as the blase is drawn covered in blood or acid or whatever. It just doesn't bring OBJECTS with it.
I'm a bit of a lateral thinker when it comes to magic items, so I'm not interested in the obvious combat applications of Called... but to what extent I can use Called for.
If a Called object only brings itself -- no blood after stabbing someone -- then it has creative uses I can think of. If a Called object DOES bring the blood with it, then there are other uses I can think of.
Same went for it bringing a sheathed blade or not.
Just summoning the item to use it then and there is fine... but what you're NOT expecting me to use it for... that's the fun part. :)
Of course, the intent behind that RAW is "a weapon with the called property," and while I understand the point being made, saying that it denies the physics of any sort of container is equally ridiculous.What "physics" is being denied? The sword is teleported. Objects in contact with it are not. After all, where do you draw the line? If the sword was locked in a chest, would the chest also be teleported? If it was 'sheathed' in a person's chest at the time, would the body be teleported?
The intent is pretty clear. Only the sword is teleported.
These are all strawman arguments. You're creating silly scenarios to tear them down. Nobody's talking about a vague spell you can't recall teleporting backpacks. The subject is the Called enchantment, which calls a weapon--and only a weapon--to your hand.If I had a Proxy-like Teleportation spell (there is a spell that allows this, I forget what it's called) active on a Bag of Holding that would function on anyone other than myself opening the bag to teleport right into my hands, you'd rule that the Bag of Holding itself would teleport to my hand, and all of the items stored inside would just drop out of nowhere?
Even ignoring the use of a Bag of Holding, what about any traditional backpack? Would the backpack itself just teleport to my hands and all of the equipment shaped within the backpack would just fall to the ground?
The question posed was "If a sword was sheathed in a +1 Called Combat Scabbard, would the sword travel with it?" At no point is a "sword" a Called Weapon, the Scabbard is. With that said, we're talking Scabbard carrying Sword, not Sword carrying Scabbard.
If those scenarios are explained ridiculously then how about I get a better question: If I have a Contingency Spell (remembered the name) cast on a backpack with a Teleport spell to teleport right into my hands if anyone else other than me attempts to open and examine its contents, does that mean that because of how I worded the Contingency that only the backpack itself teleports to my hands, and all of the contents inside just appear from the shape of which it occupied the backpack and fall to the ground?
That's exactly what you're saying. Since I didn't specify "The Backpack and its contents," the Contingency only transports the backpack, not the contents. In correlation to your statement, the RAW doesn't specify "weapons in scabbards also teleport the scabbard sheathing the weapon" (or something of that effect), so you're ruling that it bypasses the laws of standard physics.
In correlation to your statement, the RAW doesn't specify "weapons in scabbards also teleport the scabbard sheathing the weapon" (or something of that effect), so you're ruling that it bypasses the laws of standard physics.
And this is where you're losing me. You're trying to say that it's "standard physics" that a sheathe would teleport the weapon inside it should it be Called. I say physics has nothing to do with it, and it has to do with the capabilities of the spell, and how those capabilities are described in the spell's write-up.
we're talking Scabbard carrying Sword, not Sword carrying Scabbard.
A couple of other posters pointed this out. My previous reply was based on this premise, and addresses your question regarding Teleport Object though the inclusion of Contingency is unnecessary for our purposes, methinks.
First, I'm not even sure you can enchant a Combat Scabbard as a weapon. In the only resource I have that lists it, the PFSRD, it is explicitly called out as an improvised weapon. As such, even though it has weapon stats, I would no more say that you could enchant it as a weapon than you could a beer stein, a chair, or a table. The only threads I've seen on this aspect seem divided and there is nothing that I see in the FAQ for clarification.
But assuming that you could enchant it as a weapon I would guess that it would teleport like any other container. If it held a weapon the weapon comes along. If not, it comes by itself.