TOPIC: Focus weapon clairification

Kirk Bauer wrote: [
So for a Bard this really limits the effectiveness of the Shield of the Scholar. Basically it used to be a shield that allowed you to attack and use a scroll on the same turn. So the only use now would be:

1. Attack and then stow weapon as a free action
2. Use scroll as a free action and then either use another scroll or cast a spell for the character card
3. Use free action to retrieve weapon and then attack

I guess it is OK if you had two scrolls you wanted to use in the same turn but then theoretically you would have needed the foresight to use your free action on the last turn to stow your weapon.

Yup - this rule puts a reasonably large ding in the effectiveness of anything that lets you use magic as a free action - as it means you have to set it up the prior round by getting your hands ready.

I guess you could view it through a positive light: spellcasters who are focused on casting spells only are more effective at it than others who are alternating between casting spells and other stuff.

Ooh - here's a good one:

1. Can I physically attack with a thrown weapon and then use Ring of Spell Storing or Shield of the Scholar because my other hand is now empty? Combo!

"Since the ruling on WML and SOS that you can Bardsong, physically attack, and read a scrol predate Focus weapons - I'm guessing either this ruling needs to be revisited, or WML does something special here and lets you use magic with junk in your hands contrary to normal rules. "

Well since you are not attacking but the Lute is attacking I think that is the special magic. You are playing the lute the lute is holding your weapon. At least according to the tokendb.

jedibcg wrote: "Since the ruling on WML and SOS that you can Bardsong, physically attack, and read a scrol predate Focus weapons - I'm guessing either this ruling needs to be revisited, or WML does something special here and lets you use magic with junk in your hands contrary to normal rules. "

Well since you are not attacking but the Lute is attacking I think that is the special magic. You are playing the lute the lute is holding your weapon. At least according to the tokendb.

I understand the attacking part.

What I'm confused about is we've established you can't read a scroll with SoS unless your hands are free or they are holding a focus weapon. In the case of WML your hands are not free - yet the ruling says you an attack and read a scroll.

Maybe in general you can read a scroll while holding an instrument?

Matthew Hayward wrote:

Kirk Bauer wrote: [
So for a Bard this really limits the effectiveness of the Shield of the Scholar. Basically it used to be a shield that allowed you to attack and use a scroll on the same turn. So the only use now would be:

1. Attack and then stow weapon as a free action
2. Use scroll as a free action and then either use another scroll or cast a spell for the character card
3. Use free action to retrieve weapon and then attack

I guess it is OK if you had two scrolls you wanted to use in the same turn but then theoretically you would have needed the foresight to use your free action on the last turn to stow your weapon.

Yup - this rule puts a reasonably large ding in the effectiveness of anything that lets you use magic as a free action - as it means you have to set it up the prior round by getting your hands ready.

I guess you could view it through a positive light: spellcasters who are focused on casting spells only are more effective at it than others who are alternating between casting spells and other stuff.

SotS is only once per room. I always thought of it as a post-it board where you pasted a scroll so that you can read it sometime during the battle. So, I could see a Widseth's/SotS/non-focus weapon allowing song/swing/scroll without stowing the weapon.

But I have zero authority.

Man, this toothpaste is getting on everything!

Matthew Hayward wrote:

jedibcg wrote: "Since the ruling on WML and SOS that you can Bardsong, physically attack, and read a scrol predate Focus weapons - I'm guessing either this ruling needs to be revisited, or WML does something special here and lets you use magic with junk in your hands contrary to normal rules. "

Well since you are not attacking but the Lute is attacking I think that is the special magic. You are playing the lute the lute is holding your weapon. At least according to the tokendb.

I understand the attacking part.

What I'm confused about is we've established you can't read a scroll with SoS unless your hands are free or they are holding a focus weapon. In the case of WML your hands are not free - yet the ruling says you an attack and read a scroll.

Maybe in general you can read a scroll while holding an instrument?

Sorry what I was saying is you are not even holding the shield though the Lute is. So it is supplying the hands. It hands are magical and apparently they don't have to be free to hold the scroll too.

I think this necessitates a wording change on the Viper Strike Set bonus in TokenDB, which says:

"When at least three items are equipped, no matter what class the character is, that character gains +2 To Hit on all attack slides - including spells cast from the character card."

With this new ruling you can get the Viper Strike Set bonus while casting spells, even if you are not equipping a Viper Strike Fang while you are casting the spell (so long as you own it).

Matthew Hayward wrote: With this new ruling you can get the Viper Strike Set bonus while casting spells, even if you are not equipping a Viper Strike Fang while you are casting the spell (so long as you own it).

Maybe it's the lateness of the day talking, but I don't follow your reasoning here.

1. You cannot qualify for a set bonus unless you have actually equipped the required items. Therefore, the only spellcasters that are even part of this discussion are Paladins and Rangers. But since it's hypothetically possible that a caster could have a Viper Strike Set Bonus (VSSB), let's proceed.
2. Neither Paladins nor Rangers have spells requiring an attack slide, so it's a moot point. But just as an academic exercise, let's go a little further.
3. In a world where a Paladin can cast a spell requiring an attack slide, I see no problem with Pat the magically-aggressive Paladin taking a round to cast an offensive spell. Pat would simply cast the spell, make the slide, and on the following round go back to slicing with a VS fang.

Tell me what I'm not seeing here.

Druegar wrote:

Matthew Hayward wrote:

1. You cannot qualify for a set bonus unless you have actually equipped the required items.
Tell me what I'm not seeing here.

Are you sure about that?

In the rules and clarifications posted on this thread it was stated that:

Druegar wrote:

Matthew Hayward wrote: Does "magic use has no bearing on set bonuses" mean one may freely unequip set items while retaining their bonuses while using magic?

yes

So - I don't believe you don't need to equip the Viper Strike Fang in order to receive the +2 to spell slide to hit. (so long as you do equip the Viper Strike Belt and Shirt, and can show the Fang). Which is why I brought this up.

I agree that you'd have to jump through some big (artifact sized) hoops for this to matter today.

Matthew Hayward wrote:

Druegar wrote:

Matthew Hayward wrote:

1. You cannot qualify for a set bonus unless you have actually equipped the required items.
Tell me what I'm not seeing here.

Are you sure about that?

In the rules and clarifications posted on this thread it was stated that:

Druegar wrote:

Matthew Hayward wrote: Does "magic use has no bearing on set bonuses" mean one may freely unequip set items while retaining their bonuses while using magic?

yes

So - I don't believe you don't need to equip the Viper Strike Fang in order to receive the +2 to spell slide to hit. (so long as you do equip the Viper Strike Belt and Shirt, and can show the Fang). Which is why I brought this up.

I agree that you'd have to jump through some big (artifact sized) hoops for this to matter today.

I think you're using the word "equip" wrong. It doesn't mean "currently holding," it means "put into a slot." The confusion came when Drugar didn't call out your misuse of the word "unequip" in the second quote because he was listening to what you meant, not what you said.

The three-piece Might Ranger stays level 5 when swapping from melee mode to ranged because the Orb is "equipped" in the melee offhand slot, and must always be, even though the Ranger is currently holding a Bow of Might.

Runestones are equipped (which might surprise some, but see tokendb.com/token/runestone-fitting-base/ ) by turning them in to the coach, so you get the effect even though you don't even own them anymore.

The Paly keeps the slide bonus to casting because the Fang is "equipped" in the melee main slot, even if s/he has to stop holding it to swap from melee mode to magic to cast the currently non-existent spell.

So, the TokenDB doesn't need updating. We just all have to pay extra attention to what the verb "equip" means in game terms.

In short: no, you may not under any circumstances unequip the Fang if you're using it towards a set bonus.

But, yes, you may spend a free action to stow the Fang to switch to magic mode and cast spells, then spend another to switch back to melee mode and return to stabby mode.

If I understand this properly.

Brad Mortensen wrote: In short: no, you may not under any circumstances unequip the Fang if you're using it towards a set bonus.

I agree. In short, you as a Wizard can't unequp a VSF because you could never equip it to begin with to get the bonus.

Ed