Glamered + Secured = ???

[Phredd]

If I have an analog melee weapon with both Glamered and Secured on it, and someone else takes the weapon to "inspect" it, what happens?

A) Secured means that glamered no longer works, and it reverts back to its original form.
B) Secured means that they can't change the shape/look of the item, and it's stuck in its current form while they have it.
C) Something else entirely.

Glamered:

As a standard action, a weapon with the glamered fusion can be commanded to change its appearance to assume the form of another object of similar size. The weapon retains all its properties (including bulk) when disguised but does not radiate magic. Only true seeing or similar magic reveals the true nature of a glamered weapon while it is in disguise. After a glamered weapon is used to make an attack, this fusion is suppressed for 1 minute.

Secured:

The secured fusion ties the weapon to a single owner. When you use your weapon, it functions normally, but when wielded by any other, it remains inert and useless. Any analog, nonmagical properties of the weapon that do not require ammunition or charges still function, so a club would still be a club, but a pistol becomes merely an improvised weapon. Only the person who places a secured fusion seal on a weapon can remove it from that weapon. Once removed, the fusion seal can be affixed to a new weapon by a new owner. Even if not the owner, a character trained in Mysticism can remove an installed secured fusion or fusion seal using a process similar to transferring a fusion. For a fusion, this costs half as much as purchasing the fusion for the weapon on which it is currently installed; for a seal, this is half the cost of the seal itself. The process takes 8 hours. Afterward, a fusion can be installed on a new weapon and assigned a new owner for the installation cost, and a fusion seal can be used normally.

["Dr." Cupi]

C)

Glamered is an illusion, therefore, once someone else takes it they'd know that it wasn't what it looks like.

However, due to the wording, even though they do know that it isn't what it looks like they don't know what it is unless they melee with it.

If they melee with it, they do not have access to any special qualities of the weapon due to Secured. Once they have 'attacked' with it, the glamer is removed and now the weapon is known.

This still does not give the new wielder access to any special properties of the melee weapon, due to the Secured.

As such, if the weapon requires ammunition or charges to function normally, it essentially becomes an improvised weapon.

If the melee weapon does not require those things to function, then the Secured fusion is useless on the weapon, aside from the new wielder not being able to utilize the glamered fusion.

**I think that the biggest point of contention might be whether the glamer is removed when transferred to another wielder. I would rule that it isn't due to the wording "...it remains inert..". I focus on this because it implies that it 'remains' in the state that it was in before the transition of wieldership, which was glamered**

**Though, after rereading Glamered, it is a little unclear as to whether it is illusion or transmutation. I will continue assuming illusion**

[Garrett Larghi]

I believe the glammered turns off when it is in the hands of someone else. "Any analog, nonmagical properties of the weapon that do not require ammunition or charges still function..." would tell me that the glam goes away.

[Pantshandshake]

Setting aside the obvious questions (Why would someone want to inspect your toaster, and why are they making an attack with it) for the moment:

Holding something in your hand to look at it, and 'wielding' it should be 2 two completely different things. Someone inspecting your toaster is not wielding it, so EVEN IF fusions were 'weapon properties,' someone looking at your toaster shouldn't set off any of the functions of Secured.

If fusions are considered weapon properties, then the Secured fusion itself would become non-operational, by its own rules, no?

I do agree that Glamered is probably an illusion. So someone holding your toaster would probably figure out "This is not a toaster" pretty quick. But without any way to tell what it actually is, I wouldn't think they'd attempt to attack with it.

So... If someone takes your Secured Glamered Toaster, it'll remain a Secured Glamered Toaster in their hands, unless they decide to wildly experiment with using it as a weapon, in which case, Glamer probably turns off.

[thejeff]

Pantshandshake wrote:

Setting aside the obvious questions (Why would someone want to inspect your toaster, and why are they making an attack with it) for the moment:

Holding something in your hand to look at it, and 'wielding' it should be 2 two completely different things. Someone inspecting your toaster is not wielding it, so EVEN IF fusions were 'weapon properties,' someone looking at your toaster shouldn't set off any of the functions of Secured.

If fusions are considered weapon properties, then the Secured fusion itself would become non-operational, by its own rules, no?

I do agree that Glamered is probably an illusion. So someone holding your toaster would probably figure out "This is not a toaster" pretty quick. But without any way to tell what it actually is, I wouldn't think they'd attempt to attack with it.

So... If someone takes your Secured Glamered Toaster, it'll remain a Secured Glamered Toaster in their hands, unless they decide to wildly experiment with using it as a weapon, in which case, Glamer probably turns off.

It does kind of have to be an illusion. If it's actually transformed how would you even attack with it?

If it's a gun, what do you pull for the trigger? How do you aim? If it's a melee weapon, does it change back mid-attack? No way you could have proper grip and swing with it.

If so, you should at least have a chance to figure out what it really is by physically interacting with it.

["Dr." Cupi]

....

Firstly, this is a rules question not a motivation question. I was making no assumptions of NPC actions based on the melee/toaster situation. It was purely "If they..., then...". If they melee with the toaster, then the glamer stops. It doesn't rightly matter why person A would melee with a toaster. Merely that if they did, then that is the mechanical result.

Secondly, I will not get into a semantical argument about "wielder". 'Wielding' = 'holding in their hand'. Again, this is not motivation dependent.

Lastly, if the mechanics work in x, y, z fashion, then everyone (NPCs included) can know that things work in x, y, z fashion. That is not just knowledge for PCs. If the NPC knows that glamered fusions exist and how they work, then it isn't a stretch that they logic that a toaster that doesn't feel like a toaster might be a glamered weapon and 'attack' with it to check.

[Pantshandshake]

"Dr." Cupi wrote:

....

Firstly, this is a rules question not a motivation question. I was making no assumptions of NPC actions based on the melee/toaster situation. It was purely "If they..., then...". If they melee with the toaster, then the glamer stops. It doesn't rightly matter why person A would melee with a toaster. Merely that if they did, then that is the mechanical result.

Secondly, I will not get into a semantical argument about "wielder". 'Wielding' = 'holding in their hand'. Again, this is not motivation dependent.

Lastly, if the mechanics work in x, y, z fashion, then everyone (NPCs included) can know that things work in x, y, z fashion. That is not just knowledge for PCs. If the NPC knows that glamered fusions exist and how they work, then it isn't a stretch that they logic that a toaster that doesn't feel like a toaster might be a glamered weapon and 'attack' with it to check.

Fine, wielding is the exact same as holding something. Then by your logic, someone holding the toaster trips the Secured fusion's function, and all magical properties of the weapon become inert. Which, again, by your logic, includes the Secured fusion itself. Makes a lot of sense.

["Dr." Cupi]

*shrug*
Sure. If you read it that way.

:O What!? The rules aren't completely clear on this one!? That never happens!

RAW you are correct. By its writing Secured doesn't work because it cancels itself. Guess the RAW is all that matters.

[BigNorseWolf]

I don't know what kind of interaction you're expecting but I don't think it works like either of your options

Any analog, nonmagical properties of the weapon that do not require ammunition or charges still function, so a club would still be a club, but a pistol becomes merely an improvised weapon.

This just means that if I glammer a spear into a walking stick and someone pokes me with the "walking stick" there's going to be a clean up in isle 2. It doesn't mean that you always reverse the reading of every part if the first clause is false.

A--->B

Not A Therefore Not B... doesn't work. (Denying the Antecedent)

Now the question is.. why on earth would you put secured on an analog melee weapon? The fusion says it more or less does nothing for 99.44% of an analog weapons function so... why?

[HastyMantis]

There seems to be an assumption here that someone picking up a glamered weapon would instantly know that it isn't what it appears to be.

Is that in the rules somewhere? This one seems to read they'd need true seeing "or similar magic" to reveal its true nature. I guess an identify spell would tell them it's a glamered weapon?

[thejeff]

HastyMantis wrote:

There seems to be an assumption here that someone picking up a glamered weapon would instantly know that it isn't what it appears to be.

Is that in the rules somewhere? This one seems to read they'd need true seeing "or similar magic" to reveal its true nature. I guess an identify spell would tell them it's a glamered weapon?

I suspect the intention is that you'd need true sight if you're just looking at it while someone else is wielding or carrying it.

Once you've taken it as loot and are able to hold it, it's more obvious. Attacking with a glamered weapon shifts it to it's undisguised form, so attacking must be possible, even for weapons with triggers or the like. The wielder has to be able to use them, which means they can touch them or something.