A trip maneuver typically adds the bonus of the weapon used to trip. Thunderstomp uses either a weapon or a 'stomp' to create a trip effect. Is there any reason one wouldn't add the enhancement bonus of a weapon or unarmed strike to their Thunderstomp trip attempt?
|
You stomp your foot or strike your weapon against the ground or floor, creating a ripple of power that you can use to trip a creature. Attempt the combat maneuver check to trip the target, but instead of your base attack bonus you can use your caster level, and instead of your Strength modifier you can use your spellcasting ability score modifier (Intelligence for magi and wizards; Wisdom for druids and rangers; Charisma for bloodragers and sorcerers). This does not provoke an attack of opportunity. This spell has no effect if you cannot reach the ground or floor, or if your target is not in contact with the ground or floor.
You're not tripping with the weapon. You're hitting the ground with your weapon. The spell then creates a ripple from the point of impact that attempts the trip.
The thing is, between this blog post and the text of the spell, it seems to me like the RAW and RAI would be that:
A)tripping, as a rule, uses a weapon and adds enhancement bonuses,
B)if a weapon is utilized in a maneuver, it's weapon bonuses take effect,
C)Thunderstomp directly calls out that a weapon (or unarmed strike) must be used in creating the trip effect; without some kind of weapon involved, the spell does nothing.
Put all together, it seems to me like it's a pretty strong case for involving the bonuses of the weapon (or unarmed strike) used in the effect of the spell; the way the spell is written seems like a direct nod to the general rule that tripping uses a weapon.
|
|
The thing is, between this blog post and the text of the spell, it seems to me like the RAW and RAI would be that:
And for reasons I've pointed out (i.e. the text of the spell itself) I disagree. I don't see how you can claim that the weapon is doing the trip when the spell lets you hit the ground and then someone 20' away gets tripped from a ripple of energy. To me it seems pretty disingenuous way of trying to get more power out of the spell, but at your table you're welcomed to let your players do whatever you want, that's the glory of systems like Pathfinder. At my table, I would rule as I stated above.
'Disingenuous'? Sure, you don't agree; that's fine, and thanks for the input. I posted it because I was curious what other people thought. Why do rules questions always bring out the bitterness?