Does the same "must make attack roll" apply to the allying special ability?The "defending" special ability requires an attack be made because it is use-activated
Use Activated: This type of item simply has to be used in order to activate it. A character has to drink a potion, swing a sword, interpose a shield to deflect a blow in combat, look through a lens, sprinkle dust, wear a ring, or don a hat. Use activation is generally straightforward and self-explanatory.The "free action" refers to the act of choosing how to allocate, not the act of using the weapon.
So your question becomes Is the "allying" special ability use-activated ?
I would think so, yes.
Thanks for the response. That makes sense.
What if you can attack as a swift action for whatever reason? Like by expending ki or something. Would you be able to activate defending then? Since that is an attack roll still?
The Defending property must be activated before you make your attack roll with the weapon, on your turn. It applies until the beginning of your next turn.
Thus, you can't activate Defending on an AoO, or an immediate action taken off turn.
As long as you allocate the bonus before you attack on your turn, it doesn't matter if it's a normal attack, iterative, swift action, hasted attack, or such...although you can't do it in response to getting an AoO on your turn, since that would require it to be an immediate action, not a free action. And once you change it, you can't change it again until the beginning of your next turn.
Defender was much more useful in 1E then in PF. This is because the AC's of enemies were much, much lower in 1E, so you could still reliably hit and do damage even if the bonus dropped, while the AC benefit against higher HD monsters was more important if you didn't want to be hit in turn, easily able to send you almost to no-hitsville.
remember, the equivalent of AC -10, the 'high end' of AC in 2e, was just ac 30 in PF. Demogorgon in 1 E had AC -6, I think, and THACO 2. +5 to AC against him was a major AC increase!
IN PF, using Defender, and Defensive fighting, has the unwelcome side effect of crippling your iteratives. 1 & 2e, all attacks were at full BAB, and since stuff had lower AC's, the 'penalty' was basically meaningless, while the benefit was substantial.
Defender's best usage, oddly enough, is probably on the charge. The additional +2 to hit off sets some of the penalty, you can neutralize the charge penalty to AC, and perhaps you have spirited charge or some other ability to do extra damage on the charge so you don't miss the dmg boost at all.
It would probably be more useful if Guardian and Defender were conflated into one property, and you could switch off TH for +AC, and Dmg for +Saves.
==Aelryinth
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
The problem with defending is that it really is worthless.
You pay the scaling cost of a +1 enhancement to get the ability to trade your 2000*bonus^2 weapon enhancement for a 1000*bonus^2 armor enhancement. This is never worth doing unless you weren't attacking anyways.
It was a stupid FAQ that confused the meaning of wielding to defeat an "abuse" that was the only actual purpose a still not very good enhancement had.
Or you could invest 3 skill points into acrobatics and get a +6 dodge bonus for that standard action instead of +5 from a defending weapon.
As stated above, Defending is only really worth the cost for a very high level character using his last iterative with an off weapon. It is still more useful than some of the other enhancements.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Cost is a real factor.
Change Defending to a +2-4k GP ability for a weapon and it would suddenly seem much more reasonable.
==Aelryinth
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Cost is a real factor.
Change Defending to a +2-4k GP ability for a weapon and it would suddenly seem much more reasonable.
==Aelryinth
There are a few ways to add defending without the cost in gold.
Arcanist: Arcane Weapon Arcanist Exploit
Bard (Arcane Duelist): Bladethirst or Mass Bladethirst
Magus (Esoteric): Arcane Pool
Magus: Arcane Pool with Gnome Favored Class Bonus
Monk (Monk of the Empty Hand): Ki Weapons [Any improvised weapon.]
Occultist: Legacy Weapon
Paladin (Not Divine Hunter): Divine Bond
Skald (Spell Warrior): Enhance Weapons
Warpriest: Sacred Weapon
Wizard (Spellslinger): Mage Bullets [Gun only]
These make defending a decent option in some situations.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, but you can't base its usefulness on class ability. IF it's so cheap and easy to acquire with class levels, it should be cheap and easy to get money wise.
i.e. making it a good option for a paladin and all those other combos, and a stupid option for a fighter, is bad.
Also, you can't put Defender on a Gun, because it works on melee attack rolls only. Unless you're going to pistol whip them, i suppose.
==Aelryinth
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Also, you can't put Defender on a Gun, because it works on melee attack rolls only. Unless you're going to pistol whip them, i suppose.==Aelryinth
Specific overrides general.
Spellslinger specifically calls out the defending property on Arcane Guns. While the Defending property does specify melee weapons only (which is overridden by the Spellslinger class ability) the Defender property does not specify the attacks must be melee, only that the weapon must be used.
The FAQ states only that the weapon must be used in the intended manner. For a gun, that would be shooting.
What are the rules for blocking, with a weapon. You are trying to stop someone from going around you. Since you step right in front of them, they have to stop and fight you. Then you are defending with the weapon. It's different if they succeeded at their tumble. If a PC tried to attack a demon summoner without fighting their summoned demon using a defending pitchfork, the GM wouldn't allow it. Not without tumble.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
What are the rules for blocking, with a weapon.
"Blocking: When you use this weapon to fight defensively, you gain a +1 shield bonus to AC."
Sadly, the FAQ means that Total Defense isn't correctly using a weapon called "Defending" because somehow the correct way to use a defensive item is to attack with it... :P
What are the rules for blocking, with a weapon. You are trying to stop someone from going around you. Since you step right in front of them, they have to stop and fight you. Then you are defending with the weapon. It's different if they succeeded at their tumble. If a PC tried to attack a demon summoner without fighting their summoned demon using a defending pitchfork, the GM wouldn't allow it. Not without tumble.
More then likely, it's a mistake and oversight on the part of the archetype designer, since you can't apply the property to a non-melee weapon. Note that including it is an illegal choice...like including unholy for a paladin would be, for example.
This ability can only be placed on melee weapons.
says right in the defending property. That's not specific overrides general, that's an outright illegal error. Most likely they copied the list over the magus bladebond, and didn't cross check it.
==Aelryinth
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, but you can't base its usefulness on class ability. IF it's so cheap and easy to acquire with class levels, it should be cheap and easy to get money wise. ...
I wasn't claiming that those class abilities make defending universally better. I was just pointing out that for some classes the cost/benefit analysis is slightly different. Of course even with such abilities you still have opportunity costs. An Occultist, for example, could have spent that +1 enhancement equivalence on other features, and she will give up some of the bonus to hit and for damage to get the AC enhancement.
But if you will only use defending occasionally (which I suspect is true for most players), getting the ability only when you need it is much better than having the permanent price increase on your weapon.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What are the rules for blocking, with a weapon. You are trying to stop someone from going around you. Since you step right in front of them, they have to stop and fight you. Then you are defending with the weapon. It's different if they succeeded at their tumble. If a PC tried to attack a demon summoner without fighting their summoned demon using a defending pitchfork, the GM wouldn't allow it. Not without tumble.
More then likely, it's a mistake and oversight on the part of the archetype designer, since you can't apply the property to a non-melee weapon. Note that including it is an illegal choice...like including unholy for a paladin would be, for example.
This ability can only be placed on melee weapons.
says right in the defending property. That's not specific overrides general, that's an outright illegal error. Most likely they copied the list over the magus bladebond, and didn't cross check it.
==Aelryinth
They definitely didn't copy the list from the Bladebound Magus list because the Bladebound Magus doesn't get its own list. Bladebounds use the standard Magus list, which doesn't even include defending.
Magus list: dancing, flaming, flaming burst, frost, icy burst, keen, shock, shocking burst, speed, or vorpal.
Spellslinger list: dancing, defending, distance, flaming, flaming burst, frost, ghost touch, icy burst, merciful, seeking, shock, shocking burst, spell storing, thundering, vicious, and wounding.
The only overlaps are dancing and the energy abilities. I also compared Spellslinger to classes like the Divine Hunter Paladin and Arcane Duelist Bard. The Spellslinger list doesn't appear to be very similar to any list that I can find, so your theory that it was the result of copying another list seems weak.
Is it illegal? It's in one of the books that actually defines what legal means, so why can't it be intended as an exception to the normal rules for defending? Maybe it is like the Arcane Archer's ability to add distance to an arrow even though that isn't normally allowed.
That said, there is a similar issue with both Vicious and Spell Storing. If the list is correct then the Spellslinger gets to apply three melee-only special abilities to his firearm. I'm not at all sure how those abilities gets activated, unless firearms can also function as melee weapons. I don't play in games with firearms, so I'm really unfamiliar with their rules.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What are the rules for blocking, with a weapon. You are trying to stop someone from going around you. Since you step right in front of them, they have to stop and fight you. Then you are defending with the weapon. It's different if they succeeded at their tumble. If a PC tried to attack a demon summoner without fighting their summoned demon using a defending pitchfork, the GM wouldn't allow it. Not without tumble.
More then likely, it's a mistake and oversight on the part of the archetype designer, since you can't apply the property to a non-melee weapon. Note that including it is an illegal choice...like including unholy for a paladin would be, for example.
This ability can only be placed on melee weapons.
says right in the defending property. That's not specific overrides general, that's an outright illegal error. Most likely they copied the list over the magus bladebond, and didn't cross check it.
==Aelryinth
Got to love it when the response is "The RAW is wrong."
There's no real answer to that, we'll all just errata our books to comply with your sense of right/wrong.
That said, there is a similar issue with both Vicious and Spell Storing. If the list is correct then the Spellslinger gets to apply three melee-only special abilities to his firearm. I'm not at all sure how those abilities gets activated, unless firearms can also function as melee weapons. I don't play in games with firearms, so I'm really unfamiliar with their rules.
None of the properties specify a melee attack must be used.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
True, but none of those three properties are listed on the Ranged Weapons table so they don't have the footnote about transferring their properties to their ammunition. So would you have to hit someone with the gun itself to activate Spell Storing or would we assume that for a Spellslinger the stored spell is delivered by a bullet?
But this is probably a discussion for another thread.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What are the rules for blocking, with a weapon. You are trying to stop someone from going around you. Since you step right in front of them, they have to stop and fight you. Then you are defending with the weapon. It's different if they succeeded at their tumble. If a PC tried to attack a demon summoner without fighting their summoned demon using a defending pitchfork, the GM wouldn't allow it. Not without tumble.
More then likely, it's a mistake and oversight on the part of the archetype designer, since you can't apply the property to a non-melee weapon. Note that including it is an illegal choice...like including unholy for a paladin would be, for example.
This ability can only be placed on melee weapons.
says right in the defending property. That's not specific overrides general, that's an outright illegal error. Most likely they copied the list over the magus bladebond, and didn't cross check it.
==Aelryinth
Got to love it when the response is "The RAW is wrong."
There's no real answer to that, we'll all just errata our books to comply with your sense of right/wrong.
That said, there is a similar issue with both Vicious and Spell Storing. If the list is correct then the Spellslinger gets to apply three melee-only special abilities to his firearm. I'm not at all sure how those abilities gets activated, unless firearms can also function as melee weapons. I don't play in games with firearms, so I'm really unfamiliar with their rules.None of the properties specify a melee attack must be used.
And I love it when the rules specifically state that you can't do something, and someone says it ain't RAW.
Illegal enchantment on a non-melee weapon is illegal. IN other words, he'd throw it on his gun, and it would fail to work.
As for not working...now you're trying for a corner case argument. If you throw a Defending dagger, do you still get the AC bonus for the round?
It's also noteworthy that there's an outright error in the ability that makes it legal:
----------------------------
With that weapon bonus the spellslinger can apply any of the following to his arcane bond: enhancement bonuses (up to +5) and dancing, defending, distance, flaming, flaming burst, frost, ghost touch, icy burst, merciful, seeking, shock, shocking burst, spell storing, thundering, vicious, and wounding.
------------------
The error, of course, is that the wizard doesn't have an arcane bond. An arcane bond can be to a weapon, which is normally a dagger or staff (melee weapon), and would make the ability legal for those weapons.
The mage's arcane gun replaces arcane bond.
So, what you have there is a class ability with FOUR different errors in it.
Still going to argue RAW? Because as it stands, the archetype can't imbue abilities into anything, cause he ain't got nothing arcane bonded.
i.e. typos and rules-checking are real things.
==Aelryinth
ANd yes, firearms can be melee weapons. Pistol whipping is a thing, and rifles do a magnificent d12 when used as melee weapons.
Which means you'd actually have to use them as melee weapons to activate defending...otherwise, it's a ranged weapon, and the ability won't activate. Spending an attack on empty air might do the trick, but you'd still have to spend the melee attack action.
Oh, and do it before you make any other attacks, too, not with the last iterative so you don't have to take the penalty on your ranged attacks.
==Aelryinth
Illegal enchantment on a non-melee weapon is illegal. IN other words, he'd throw it on his gun, and it would fail to work.
A spellslinger is adept at transferring spell energy into his arcane gun attacks. As a swift action, he can sacrifice a spell and transform that energy into a weapon bonus equal to the level of the spell sacrificed on a single barrel of his firearm. With that weapon bonus the spellslinger can apply any of the following to his arcane bond: enhancement bonuses (up to +5) and dancing, defending, distance, flaming, flaming burst, frost, ghost touch, icy burst, merciful, seeking, shock, shocking burst, spell storing, thundering, vicious, and wounding. An arcane gun gains no benefit from having two of the same weapon special abilities on the same barrel. The effect of the mage bullets ability lasts for a number of minutes equal to the level of the spell sacrificed, or until this ability is used again to assign the barrel different enhancements.
There is your RAW - Rules as Written - making it legal.
Black and white in simple English. Feel free to house rule games you GM, but this is not the correct forum for that.
ANd yes, firearms can be melee weapons. Pistol whipping is a thing, and rifles do a magnificent d12 when used as melee weapons.
Which means you'd actually have to use them as melee weapons to activate defending...otherwise, it's a ranged weapon, and the ability won't activate. Spending an attack on empty air might do the trick, but you'd still have to spend the melee attack action.
Oh, and do it before you make any other attacks, too, not with the last iterative so you don't have to take the penalty on your ranged attacks.
==Aelryinth
why not with your last iterative? you can't suddenly pistol whip after firing because your arm is tired?
Wouldn't reloading also make sense to activate the ability?
Defending has to be activated before ANY attacks are made, since the penalty applies to all attacks during the round. You aren't allowed, for instance, to activate it on your last iterative, and get full bonuses on your best attacks, then take the penalty on one that's going to miss so you can get best AC.
Works the same as defensive fighting that way.
So, no, it's not because your arm is tired. It's so the penalty applies on ALL attacks during the round you use Defender.
So, you'd have to mime a pistol whip and then shoot, not vice versa.
And it's for reasons like this that they don't allow Defender on missile weapons. Otherwise, if you can shoot first, then mime-whip and get the AC...why can't I do the same if I use all melee attacks? Does shooting the gun suddenly give you a magical ability to use Defender different then someone who has it on a melee only weapon?
Nope. All weapons treated the same, no seperate rules for missiles... except that you can't put it on missile weapons, anyways.
==Aelryinth