So this query came up in another thread. Do the spells lead blades and strong jaw stack for the purpose of increasing unarmed strike damage of a monk (whose unarmed strike is considered both a natural and a manufactured weapon)?
I think most of the concern comes from the phrase "than they actually are" which some take to refer to the original size of the unarmed strike.
But what do people think?
prototype00
Similar affect, but different source is where I think this falls.
Same Effect More than Once in Different Strengths: In cases when two or more identical spells are operating in the same area or on the same target, but at different strengths, only the one with the highest strength applies.[/qoute]
I don't think they stack since they both do the same thing.
Similar affect, but different source is where I think this falls.
Same Effect More than Once in Different Strengths: In cases when two or more identical spells are operating in the same area or on the same target, but at different strengths, only the one with the highest strength applies.[/qoute]
I don't think they stack since they both do the same thing.
I'd agree with you, but that particular rule is under the heading of:
Spells that provide bonuses or penalties on attack rolls, damage rolls, saving throws, and other attributes usually do not stack with themselves. More generally, two bonuses of the same type don't stack even if they come from different spells (or from effects other than spells; see Bonus Types, above).So it would seem to me that this ruling that you're quoting is referring to enhancement bonuses to an attribute,(i.e. a +3 enhancement bonus to hit will override a +1 enhancement bonus to hit) and not a spell effect,(which if they don't stack as in the case of transmutation spells that increase size, specifically spells it out in the spell description).
Or am I mistaken here?
prototype00
Design Manager
|
Hey Proto!
Since I was the one who brought up the discrepancy here I thought I'd share my view on the subject. The spells don't actually give you (+x size categories) to your weapons, they read, respectively:
Strong Jaw: (edited for length) Each natural attack that creature makes deals damage as if the creature were two sizes larger than it actually is.
Lead Blades:All melee weapons you are carrying when the spell is cast deal damage as if one size category larger than they actually are.
These aren't bonuses, they are static effects. So as I understand them, casting Strong Jaw sets your damage to two size categories larger, while casting Lead blades sets it to one size category larger.
Essentially, if you were to cast Lead Blades after casting Strong Jaw, it would actually lower your damage since it sets your effective size category to one size larger instead of two.
That's how I read it anyways.
|
Hey Proto!
Since I was the one who brought up the discrepancy here I thought I'd share my view on the subject. The spells don't actually give you (+x size categories) to your weapons, they read, respectively:
Strong Jaw: (edited for length) Each natural attack that creature makes deals damage as if the creature were two sizes larger than it actually is.Lead Blades:All melee weapons you are carrying when the spell is cast deal damage as if one size category larger than they actually are.
These aren't bonuses, they are static effects. So as I understand them, casting Strong Jaw sets your damage to two size categories larger, while casting Lead blades sets it to one size category larger.
Essentially, if you were to cast Lead Blades after casting Strong Jaw, it would actually lower your damage since it sets your effective size category to one size larger instead of two.
That's how I read it anyways.
This.
I actually dont think Lead blades affects monks at all. The problem is the monk isnt carrying any weapons. Yes his fists can be targeted by effects that afect weapons but lead blades isnt targeting his fists Its targeting the monk then the spell affects his carried weapons. Of which his Fists are not.
i may be looking at it wrong though.
|
Design Manager
|
I actually dont think Lead blades affects monks at all. The problem is the monk isnt carrying any weapons. Yes his fists can be targeted by effects that afect weapons but lead blades isnt targeting his fists Its targeting the monk then the spell affects his carried weapons. Of which his Fists are not.
i may be looking at it wrong though.
I could see an argument for this interpretation Mojo, but I would probably not rule it that way. It does specify all melee weapons you are carrying when the spell is cast, so I guess by the strictest interpretation of the spell, you would be correct, since the monk isn't actually carrying his unarmed strike around....
I actually dont think Lead blades affects monks at all. The problem is the monk isnt carrying any weapons. Yes his fists can be targeted by effects that afect weapons but lead blades isnt targeting his fists Its targeting the monk then the spell affects his carried weapons. Of which his Fists are not.
i may be looking at it wrong though.
Also, a Monk's unarmed damage is based on his level, not the size of his fists.
Strong Jaw gets around this by making his unarmed damage progress as if he were two sizes larger, but Lead Blades does not.
|
Design Manager
|
I actually dont think Lead blades affects monks at all. The problem is the monk isnt carrying any weapons. Yes his fists can be targeted by effects that afect weapons but lead blades isnt targeting his fists Its targeting the monk then the spell affects his carried weapons. Of which his Fists are not.
i may be looking at it wrong though.
Also, a Monk's unarmed damage is based on his level, not the size of his fists.
Strong Jaw gets around this by making his unarmed damage progress as if he were two sizes larger, but Lead Blades does not.
ooh, good point Steve, I hadn't even thought of that. Strong Jaw increases the Monk's effective size, while Lead blades would increase the effective size of his unarmed strike if it worked... Which is kind of creepy when you think about it. What would the monk who headbutts for his unarmed strike look like if this spell worked...? Eww.
Regardless, I think we've pretty well established that you can't combo up Strong Jaw and Lead Blades.Proto, what was that combo chain you were trying to use to push your unarmed strike damage past 12d8 again?
I believe it had to do with a wildshaping monk/druid using the wildshape to get a huge form then using the new base form size, bumping that with monk levels, tossing in the spells. There is a thread about it but on my phone and can't look it up easily right this moment.
The build for 12d8 damage was huge wildshape + strong jaw which didn't include lead blade at all. Lead blade just lets you have some leeway in how many monk levels you had to take.
So it seems that they don't stack, ah well. Thanks for the replies everyone.
prototype00
Edit: I think the logic I shall take away from this is that you can have one effect that actually changes your size (which have been stated not to stack in the spell description) and one effect that says your weapon deals damage as if it is x sizes bigger (which though it doesn't say it doesn't stack with similar effects, everyone seems to think that they don't)
Edit: I think the logic I shall take away from this is that you can have one effect that actually changes your size (which have been stated not to stack in the spell description) and one effect that says your weapon deals damage as if it is x sizes bigger (which though it doesn't say it doesn't stack with similar effects, everyone seems to think that they don't)
The spell doesn't need to state it doesn't stack due to the "general" magical stacking rules. The two abilities could be cast on the target (if lead blades actually targeted unarmed strike) but because of them doing the same thing (increasing the size of the weapon in question) only the most powerful of the effects would work. You'd get the better of the two effects, the lesser effect would persist but wouldn't take effect unless the more powerful lapsed or was dispelled.