It allows for dual-weapon warrior shenanigans, though, which are otherwise impossible... and it seems to do so while still giving the implement boost to damage in both cases. That sounds like it's getting a bit beefier than it should be.A real weapon as an implement that is not Weapon implement seems OK by RAW.
Nothing prevents an implement from being useful in ways other than being an implement.
You still don't get implement's empowerment if you're wielding two weapons.
"You don't gain the benefit of implement's empowerment if you are holding anything in either hand other than a single one-handed weapon, other implements, or esoterica, and you must be holding at least one implement to gain the benefit."
If you have a Sword Regalia implement and a Sword Weapon implement you are holding more than "a single one-handed weapon", and the fact that you're also holding "other implements" is irrelevant to that violation as they're still weapons.
Not really abusing the "weapon as an implement" stuff, but I'm currently planning a bomb using Thaumaturge that has Regalia in one hand and a Bladed Gauntlet as a weapon implement, with a Gunslinger dedication for Quick Draw and Munitions Crafter. Free-hand should allow me to quickdraw the Bombs while still applying implement's empowerment, and still allowing weapon reaction. It's going to be a bit pricey getting bombs in the earlier levels, but until level ~3-4ish I'll probably rely more on a Rapier or a gun or something.
That sounds like a fun build but your advanced alchemy will be stuck at level 1 until 12th level. Alchemist dedication gets you reagents and access to quick bomber as well as better advanced alchemy at level 6.
Edit: I forgot about ability score requirements.
True, but you only need Moderate bombs until level 11, and they're only 10gp a pop. Gunslinger's Advanced Alchemy is better than the Alchemist Dedication's as well, giving you level -3 instead of level -5. Quick Draw is just a better Quick Bomb as well. You do miss out on Quick Alchemy though, which is pretty useful for Thaumaturge to trigger multiple weaknesses. If you have a truly absurd amount of time for retraining then going Alchemist first would be a better levelling experience for sure.
With how bombs interact with Exploit Weakness (triggering it on a miss) they're still pretty solid even when you're a die behind Striking runes at level 12 and 13.
You still don't get implement's empowerment if you're wielding two weapons.
"You don't gain the benefit of implement's empowerment if you are holding anything in either hand other than a single one-handed weapon, other implements, or esoterica, and you must be holding at least one implement to gain the benefit."
If you have a Sword Regalia implement and a Sword Weapon implement you are holding more than "a single one-handed weapon", and the fact that you're also holding "other implements" is irrelevant to that violation as they're still weapons.
I believe you're misreading it, unless you've seen clear adjudication to the contrary. It says that you must be holding an implement (actually, it says this twice - first by fundamental requirement of the action described initially and later by outright declaration) and then it limits you to holding nothing else outside of the following set:
- a single one-handed weapon
- other implements
- esoterica
If you have a weapon implement and a regalia implement (which is a weapon) then you are holding one implement and another implement, and need not dip into your "single one-handed weapon" allowance at all.
On the other hand, while that's important for certain areas of thaumaturge balance, it doesn't actually speak one way or the other to whether you can make implements that are not weapon implements out of weapons, as it would work equally well with a weapon implement and a non-implement weapon - either both work (by my interpretation) or neither do (by yours)
Which leads to another question: What if your regalia implement is a two-handed sword? What if it's a crossbow? Technically, by the rules as I can read them, that would still work.
note here that I'm not particularly happy about this conclusion. I don't want this to be the right answer. If I had to lay a guess on the rules as intended, I would guess that this was not intended... but I'm not seeing anything in the actual rules that in any way prevents it.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
You still don't get implement's empowerment if you're wielding two weapons.
"You don't gain the benefit of implement's empowerment if you are holding anything in either hand other than a single one-handed weapon, other implements, or esoterica, and you must be holding at least one implement to gain the benefit."
If you have a Sword Regalia implement and a Sword Weapon implement you are holding more than "a single one-handed weapon", and the fact that you're also holding "other implements" is irrelevant to that violation as they're still weapons.
I believe you're misreading it, unless you've seen clear adjudication to the contrary. It says that you must be holding an implement (actually, it says this twice - first by fundamental requirement of the action described initially and later by outright declaration) and then it limits you to holding nothing else outside of the following set:
- a single one-handed weapon
- other implements
- esotericaIf you have a weapon implement and a regalia implement (which is a weapon) then you are holding one implement and another implement, and need not dip into your "single one-handed weapon" allowance at all.
On the other hand, while that's important for certain areas of thaumaturge balance, it doesn't actually speak one way or the other to whether you can make implements that are not weapon implements out of weapons, as it would work equally well with a weapon implement and a non-implement weapon - either both work (by my interpretation) or neither do (by yours)
Which leads to another question: What if your regalia implement is a two-handed sword? What if it's a crossbow? Technically, by the rules as I can read them, that would still work.
note here that I'm not particularly happy about this conclusion. I don't want this to be the right answer. If I had to lay a guess on the rules as intended, I would guess that this was not intended... but I'm not seeing anything in the actual rules that in any way...
It's pretty simple, are you holding more than a single one-handed weapon? If yes then no implement's empowerment for you. I've said it before and I'll say it again, there is no rule that says stuff can't be two things. Just because you're treating a sword as a Regalia implement doesn't mean it stops being a one-handed weapon.
This line: "You don't gain the benefit of implement's empowerment if you are holding anything in either hand other than a single one-handed weapon, other implements, or esoterica" means that if you hold more than one (1) one-handed weapon you no longer qualify for implement's empowerment, no ambiguity. Yes the Regalia weapon is "other implements", but that does not stop it from being a second one-handed weapon. It doesn't get through by satisfying just one requirement, it also needs to not violate the single one-handed weapon restriction.
It's pretty simple, are you holding more than a single one-handed weapon? If yes then no implement's empowerment for you. I've said it before and I'll say it again, there is no rule that says stuff can't be two things. Just because you're treating a sword as a Regalia implement doesn't mean it stops being a one-handed weapon.
This line: "You don't gain the benefit of implement's empowerment if you are holding anything in either hand other than a single one-handed weapon, other implements, or esoterica" means that if you hold more than one (1) one-handed weapon you no longer qualify for implement's empowerment, no ambiguity. Yes the Regalia weapon is "other implements", but that does not stop it from being a second one-handed weapon. It doesn't get through by satisfying just one requirement, it also needs to not violate the single one-handed weapon restriction.
But... that's not what the words mean. I get that you think that's what they mean, but I'm pretty sure you're incorrect.
It's giving a list of the things that you can hold without disrupting Implement Empowerment. You can hold other implements. You can hold esoterica. You can hold a single one-handed weapon. Adding things to that list makes it less restrictive. Removing things from that list makes it more restrictive. It doesn't say "no more than a single one-handed weapon". It doesn't say "no weapons other than a single one-handed weapon". The "single one-handed weapon" is part of a larger, inclusive clause. You can carry implements, you can carry esoterica, and on top of that you can carry a single one-handed weapon.
Okay but you realize on a technical level why "thaumaturges aren't allowed to have a second weapon or a shield.... oh I'm just going to say my second weapon/shield are implements" is something that might make your GM roll their eyes at you and tell you to quit it, right?
Okay but you realize on a technical level why "thaumaturges aren't allowed to have a second weapon or a shield.... oh I'm just going to say my second weapon/shield are implements" is something that might make your GM roll their eyes at you and tell you to quit it, right?
Oh, absolutely. I'd probably do the same. To be quite clear, this is not me saying that the rules should be this way or that people should play this way. This is me asserting that the rules in this case have holes you could drive a truck through, and further asserting that I don't like that.
Part of my problem is that it's unclear enough that I can't tell where the lines are supposed to be even with a good-faith effort. "You can fully use your powers with a two-handed sword as long as it's your regalia and also your mirror" is obviously dumb and not the way things were intended or should be played... but as far as I can tell the rules don't prevent it, and there aren't any real indicators of where things were supposed to stop.