Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Drizzt 666 06-09-05, 11:06 AM	Does multiple speed weapons grant an extra atk for each weapon?
tarkin 06-09-05, 11:12 AM	I believe no. Like most such things, they increase one attack, and does not stack.
Santrilla 06-09-05, 11:13 AM	Ever get the feeling of deja vu? This is, what, the third time this has been asked in the last week? :P No, the speed enchantment confers an extra attack to the wielder, not the weapon. As such, the two enchantments don't stack and overlap, so you only get one extra attack with two speed weapons.
Llathos 06-09-05, 11:32 AM	Why oh WHY is the search function not working. How hard is this? Tons of forums use this template and have working search functions.... What did we ever do to YOU WIZO?
Santrilla 06-09-05, 11:39 AM	Why oh WHY is the search function not working. How hard is this? Tons of forums use this template and have working search functions.... What did we ever do to YOU WIZO? There's a thread on the RPG Boards Business forums about this. Actually, there's a new thread every day, but hey. (What's that taste? Is it... is it the bitter taste of irony? I think it might be.) Anyway, the reason the search function isn't working is because the wizards.community boards are stupidly big.
dragonseth 06-09-05, 12:38 PM	I think I saw some announcement thingy saying you can use Google to search through these.
Santrilla 06-09-05, 03:50 PM	I think I saw some announcement thingy saying you can use Google to search through these. That you can. Do an advanced Google search, put "http://boards1.wizards.com" as the site, and search away. It's not a great system, but it's better than nothing.
UZI 06-09-05, 10:05 PM	Speed When making a full attack action, the wielder of a speed weapon may make one extra attack with it. The attack uses the wielder’s full base attack bonus, plus any modifiers appropriate to the situation. (This benefit is not cumulative with similar effects, such as a haste spell.) Haste When making a full attack action, a hasted creature may make one extra attack with any weapon he is holding. The attack is made using the creature’s full base attack bonus, plus any modifiers appropriate to the situation. (This effect is not cumulative with similar effects, such as that provided by a weapon of speed, nor does it actually grant an extra action, so you can’t use it to cast a second spell or otherwise take an extra action in the round.) Haste grants an extra attack to the creature. Speed weapons grant an extra attack with the weapon. A speed weapon cannot be used as a haste attack weapon, but any other weapon can be used as the haste attack weapon. A marilith can wield several speed longswords (and get extra attacks for each of them) and use a haste spell to make an extra attack with a non-speed longsword. At least that's how I read the above sections.
PlutoniumKnight 06-10-05, 01:40 AM	Haste gains one extra attack, however multiple speed weapons would get multiple extra attacks, one with each. Both ends of this +5 quarterstaff of speed have equal enhancement and special powers, meaning that it allows an additional attack with each end every round.
q'afuu 06-10-05, 04:58 AM	Speed weapons grant an extra attack with the weapon. With the weapon, not to the weapon. The effect still works on the character wielding it. IMO, the basic rule that like effects overlap rather than stack applies, quarterstaffs of speed notwithstanding.
Elandar 06-10-05, 05:14 AM	The basic rule that "like effects overlap". Well it seems to me that if speed gives another attack with the weapon, if you have for instance a longsword of speed and a short sword of speed, the first weapon gives you an extra attack with your longsword, while the second weapon gives you an extra attack with your short sword. These are two different effects. To me, it's not similar to having two enhancement bonusses.
q'afuu 06-10-05, 05:16 AM	Semantics. They both give you an extra attack with a weapon, and neither stacks with Haste (presumably because that's too alike as well, although that's not explicitly indicated). Not to mention that if you have two longswords of speed, you'd get two extra attacks with a longsword - weapon differences don't really say anything. But do what you want to do with it.
Egres 06-10-05, 05:30 AM	From the FAQ: You can use two weapons of speed at a time all right, but you still only get one extra attack, from one weapon or the other, not both. If you are under the effects of a haste spell, you can use the extra attack action from one weapon of speed, or the extra partial action from the haste spell, but not both.
DragonsArt 06-10-05, 06:32 AM	Haste gains one extra attack, however multiple speed weapons would get multiple extra attacks, one with each. Where is this example found?
UZI 06-10-05, 06:48 AM	From the FAQ: You can use two weapons of speed at a time all right, but you still only get one extra attack, from one weapon or the other, not both. If you are under the effects of a haste spell, you can use the extra attack action from one weapon of speed, or the extra partial action from the haste spell, but not both. That must be from the 3E FAQ, because I cannot find it in the 3.5 FAQ. Since 3E Haste (granting an extra action) operates considerably differently from 3.5 Haste, and the entry is omitted from the 3.5 FAQ, I believe it no longer applies. Rules are all about semantics, and the contraints they apply. By the wording of the two separate rules on haste and speed (and the way they cross-reference each other) it is very easy to read that multiple speed weapons provide extra attacks with each weapon. However, I wouldn't try and rub it in the DMs face, as it has become nearly knee-jerk cannon to assume that since a speed-weapon cannot be granted an extra haste attack, that two speed weapons cannot both give extra attacks. Personally, I have no particular interest in it. I have no players clamoring for a single speed-weapon, let alone two. I started reading the rules a few weeks back under the assumption that two speed weapons didn't give multiple extra attacks, but when I read both rules together I had to admit that the wordings didn't flat-out negate it.
Egres 06-10-05, 07:23 AM	That must be from the 3E FAQ, because I cannot find it in the 3.5 FAQ. Since 3E Haste (granting an extra action) operates considerably differently from 3.5 Haste, and the entry is omitted from the 3.5 FAQ, I believe it no longer applies. In 3.5 Haste grants an additional attack on a full round attack, and this is very limited if compared to its old version. This means that this FAQ has more weight now than before. Not to mention that the new FAQ can't bother again with the same answers to old questions.
crazysamaritan 06-10-05, 07:34 AM	or, ya'know, it's more balanced... immediately before 3.5 was decided on, they started trying to nerf the stuff, then figured out that it was practically impossible without a serious re-vamping of the rules. Haste stands out the most since the spell itself was nerfed two ways - they lowered the power of the spell, and they removed partial actions from the game. I don't see a problem with multiple speed weapons giving (one) extra attack per weapon. Players want to abuse it; send in the dervish marilith. Hey! Anyone want to come up with a FAA (frequently asked arguments) for DnD General? That way we can just point people to that thread? I think someone tried that once....
Santrilla 06-10-05, 08:16 AM	Hey! Anyone want to come up with a FAA (frequently asked arguments) for DnD General? That way we can just point people to that thread? I think someone tried that once.... Uh... correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't that exactly what the FAQ is supposed to be?
crazysamaritan 06-10-05, 11:00 AM	Uh... correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't that exactly what the FAQ is supposed to be? no, that answers questions. I'm referring to a statement of trhe argument and a summary of the defenses. But you reminded me that one of the FAQ writers did include arguments, and that's where I remember seeing it.
primemover003 06-10-05, 03:39 PM	That must be from the 3E FAQ, because I cannot find it in the 3.5 FAQ. Since 3E Haste (granting an extra action) operates considerably differently from 3.5 Haste, and the entry is omitted from the 3.5 FAQ, I believe it no longer applies. It still does apply because it's the section for the Speed enhancement, not Haste. Speed hasn't changed at all. It grants one extra attack a round that can only be made with the speed weapon BUT does not stack with the extra attack granted by Haste (either the extra standard action-attack- of 3.0 or the extra attack of 3.5) or similar effect (another Speed weapon).
UZI 06-10-05, 08:58 PM	It still does apply because it's the section for the Speed enhancement, not Haste. Speed hasn't changed at all. It grants one extra attack a round that can only be made with the speed weapon BUT does not stack with the extra attack granted by Haste (either the extra standard action-attack- of 3.0 or the extra attack of 3.5) or similar effect (another Speed weapon). Speed has changed, considerably. A weapon of speed allows the wielder one single extra attack each round at his highest bonus. It is not cumulative with haste. The extra attack must be with this weapon, not with some other weapon. The weapon does not grant the benefits os a haste spell, so an additional partial action is not what is granted, simply an extra single attack with this weapon. In 3.0 you could make an extra attack without making a full attack (which you cannot in 3.5), just as you also got an extra partial action from haste (which you cannot in 3.5). These extra attack actions and partial haste actions conflict in 3.0, they don't in 3.5 since neither apply. The effect was given a benefit (one single extra attack) and a constraint (must be with this weapon). That is very easy to read that you cannot get two speed weapons to work in the same round, since each would grant one extra attack, but only one could be used (or conversely, neither as the constraints of each would cancel the other out). In 3.5, speed was rewritten: When making a full attack action, the wielder of a speed weapon may make one extra attack with it. The attack uses the wielders full base attack bonus, plus any modifiers appropriate to the situation. (This benefit is not cumulative with similar effects, such as a haste spell). In 3.5, you are granted an extra attack with the weapon when making a full attack. You cannot use the extra attack from haste to over-clock a speed weapon (that is, they do not stack). There is nothing in the new rules that states you cannot use haste with a non-speed weapon while still using the speed weapon's extra attack, or that two speed weapons would not both grant extra attacks. 3.0's FAQ applied to 3.0's rules of haste, speed, and partial actions. All of which are gone. Do I claim this as cannon? No. Do I think it is reasonable? Yes.
primemover003 06-10-05, 10:01 PM	I fairly sure you couldn't make more than one normal attack in 3.0 without taking a Full attack action. Speed didn't change that fact. Notice it says at your highest BAB... referencing iterative attacks. The rules on attacks in a round didn't change that much.
UZI 06-10-05, 11:05 PM	I fairly sure you couldn't make more than one normal attack in 3.0 without taking a Full attack action. Speed didn't change that fact. Notice it says at your highest BAB... referencing iterative attacks. The rules on attacks in a round didn't change that much. In 3.0 you could use the extra partial action from haste to get an extra attack. Effectively, you could perform an attack, make another attack using the extra partial action from haste, and take a move action all in one round. Alternatively with haste, you could cast a spell, cast another spell using the extra partial action, and take a move action. With quicken spell, you could get three spells off in one round.
OrbitalB 06-11-05, 10:17 AM	But, what you couldn't do is make an extra attack with more than one speed weapon... and you still can't.
UZI 06-11-05, 10:59 AM	But, what you couldn't do is make an extra attack with more than one speed weapon... and you still can't. ...and your basis for this in 3.5 is? I could have simply stated that you can, but I preferred to actually explain why. I've written why I believe it is reasonable for a DM to interpret each speed weapon granting a haste-extra attack with that weapon (but not multiple haste-extra attacks with a single weapon). I recognize that the "similar effects clauses" could lead some to squelch it. That is why I do not recommend asserting it (unless you stumble across the quarterstaff of alacrity). In 3.0 it was explicitly forbidden since haste and speed both took up the extra partial action for the round (which you would use for the extra attack), and the rules were written to only allow one extra partial action perround.
primemover003 06-11-05, 03:19 PM	Let's stick to the subject... Speed in 3.0 did NOT give you an extra partial action. It only gave you one extra attack during a full attack action. Only Haste gave the partial action. As for the Quarterstaff of Alacrity you'll notice it is an Epic weapon. In it's description it allows for an extra attack with both ends... a specific exception to the rule. Epic weapons can break normal rules.
baersark 06-11-05, 03:29 PM	although the quarterstaff of alclarity is an epic weapon its speed ability is non-epic. many epic weapons have non-epic abilies and as a matter of fact I thought that if you give a weapon +11 in magical low level magical bonuses its a epic weapon. (dm discression) so i dont think that it being an epic item discounts it as a valid example. altough I dont know how to look at this item through 3.5eyes, I do know there is no errata for this item.
Thorak 06-11-05, 04:12 PM	although the quarterstaff of alclarity is an epic weapon its speed ability is non-epic. many epic weapons have non-epic abilies and as a matter of fact I thought that if you give a weapon +11 in magical low level magical bonuses its a epic weapon. (dm discression) so i dont think that it being an epic item discounts it as a valid example. altough I dont know how to look at this item through 3.5eyes, I do know there is no errata for this item. The Quarterstaff of Alacrity also says it has "special powers, meaning that it allows an additional attack with each end every round." In short, the stacking of the two Speeds is specifically a special power above and beyond what normally happens with the basic enchantments. Which if anything strengthens the argument that Speed doesn't stack with itself.
DragonsArt 06-11-05, 05:14 PM	The Quarterstaff of Alacrity also says it has "special powers, meaning that it allows an additional attack with each end every round." In short, the stacking of the two Speeds is specifically a special power above and beyond what normally happens with the basic enchantments. Which if anything strengthens the argument that Speed doesn't stack with itself. Nope... that's your INTERPRETATION of what it says... If you read it... Quarterstaff of Alacrity Both ends of this +5 quarterstaff of speed have equal enhancement and special powers, meaning that it allows an additional attack with each end every round. While the quarterstaff of alacrity is held, it grants its wielder a +5 resistance bonus on Reflex saves. It also deflects ranged weapons as if the wielder had the Deflect Arrows and Infinite Deflection feats. Caster Level: 21st; Prerequisites: Craft Magic Arms and Armor, Craft Epic Magic Arms and Armor, protection from arrows, shield; Market Price: 462,600 gp; Cost to Create: 231,600 gp + 14,620 XP. Here's what it REALLY says... Both ends have the same special ability and enhancement bonus. Since either side of a quarterstaff can be enchanted independantly, it's simply stating that both ends have the exact same enchantments.... +5 enchancement bonus and the speed enhancement. It could just as easily be a staff of elements with +5 flaming, flaming burst on one end and +5 frost, frost burst on the other... but it specifically says it has the same enchantments on both ends. If anything... it's "special powers" refer to the +5 resistance bonus on reflex saves and the INFINITE DEFLECTION feat, which is really the only epic thing about it. Personally, I think this is a mistake. I think this is a left over from 3.0, but as written, there is no hint or reference to anything that says the weapon's ability to make two extra attacks (one with each end) is a product of it being an epic weapon. It's pure speculation on your part. Also, power is used to refer to a weapon's special ability... Bows, crossbows, and slings so crafted bestow the chaotic power upon their ammunition. You'll find similiar entries for the varies alignment types.
Thorak 06-11-05, 06:13 PM	Nope... that's your INTERPRETATION of what it says... If you read it... Here's what it REALLY says... Both ends have the same special ability and enhancement bonus. Since either side of a quarterstaff can be enchanted independantly, it's simply stating that both ends have the exact same enchantments.... +5 enchancement bonus and the speed enhancement. It could just as easily be a staff of elements with +5 flaming, flaming burst on one end and +5 frost, frost burst on the other... but it specifically says it has the same enchantments on both ends. If anything... it's "special powers" refer to the +5 resistance bonus on reflex saves and the INFINITE DEFLECTION feat, which is really the only epic thing about it. No, it says it has "equal enchantment and special powers, meaning that it allows an additional attack with each end every round." The second clause, "it allows an additional attack with each end every round", is tied directly to the first; that it has equal enchantment and special powers. And, considering that the equal enchantment is irrelevant, it must be the special powers it's referring to. And, to further back up my point; Speed doesn't stack with similar effects. Is something similar to itself? It has to be. That's absolutely obvious. And Speed doesn't affect the weapon. It affects the wielder. It's the wielder making the attacks, after all. So it is very simple. It is not cumulative with haste and similar effects. So, if the wielder is already affected by one of those effects, like another Speed weapon, then it isn't cumulative. Your argument can only work if you ignore the line in Speed saying it isn't cumulative, and ignore that Speed obviously affects the wielder.
DragonsArt 06-11-05, 06:27 PM	No, it says it has "equal enchantment and special powers, meaning that it allows an additional attack with each end every round." If both ends had the same special power... then wouldn't he be making 3 attacks per round? One attack for the normal speed, then since BOTH sides have the "special power" to ignore the rules, they each get an ADDITIONAL attack. Unfortunately, it doesn't make sense the way you interpret it. Powers in this case is referring to the speed ability. At no point in the items description does it mention some sort of special power to bypass the rules. In fact, it also doesn't mention that these special attacks don't stack with haste. Are you saying it does? The second clause, "it allows an additional attack with each end every round", is tied directly to the first; that it has equal enchantment and special powers. And you know this because the game designers told you? You're making some BIG assumptions, where there really isn't any basis. Sure, it's epic. But since it doesn't specifically refer to a "power" that allows the speed enchantments to stack, that means either: a) Speed enchantments with multiple weapons stack or b) It's a mistake. And, considering that the equal enchantment is irrelevant, it must be the special powers it's referring to. What specific power is it referring to? Can you name it? What is it on the chart? Is there an Epic speed property? I've asked customer service for a clarification, since logic has never dissauded you from your opinion before. I suspect, however, that even customer service's clarification won't be enough for you. And, to further back up my point; Speed doesn't stack with similar effects. Is something similar to itself? It has to be. That's absolutely obvious. You would think that something THAT obvious would be detailed in the weapon's description, since it's breaking a rule. Since it doesn't mention it specifically as one of it's powers (overcoming the normal limitation), I can't say that it's OBVIOUS. And Speed doesn't affect the weapon. It affects the wielder. It's the wielder making the attacks, after all. So it is very simple. It is not cumulative with haste and similar effects. So, if the wielder is already affected by one of those effects, like another Speed weapon, then it isn't cumulative. One would think so. Again, I think the Staff of Aclarity is a mistake. I don't think it's meant to bypass the normal rules. Also... as far as both ends having the same power, that's simply clarifying the enchantment on EACH end, since each end is like a seperate weapon... [Quote=SRD]Creating magic double-headed weapons is treated as creating two weapons when determining cost, time, XP, and special abilities. Your argument can only work if you ignore the line in Speed saying it isn't cumulative, and ignore that Speed obviously affects the wielder. It doesn't say it isn't cumulative... it says it doesn't stack with haste and haste-like effects... it doesn't mention specifically other speed weapons. And your argument can only work if the designers somehow forgot to mention that the weapon is an exemption to the normal rules of Speed. Since they went through all the trouble of mentioning it in the definition that it doesn't stack with haste, you'd think they'd say something to the contrary in the description of the Quarterstaff.
Egres 06-11-05, 07:09 PM	I suspect, however, that even customer service's clarification won't be enough for you. Actually, no one here on the boards, except for a few newbies, trust CustServ replies.
DragonsArt 06-11-05, 07:16 PM	Actually, no one here on the boards, except for a few newbies, trust CustServ replies. ACTUALLY.... that's not true... people seem to agree with them when it supports their argument and disagree with them when it doesn't support their argument. Come to think of it... most people on the boards tend to ignore anything that doesn't support their argument... including RAW...
Tsuul 06-11-05, 08:13 PM	ACTUALLY.... that's not true... people seem to agree with them when it supports their argument and disagree with them when it doesn't support their argument.Depending on the argument and your stance, I may agree with you when you support my view and disagree when you show no support. I do not blindly trust anyone. As for the Q-Staff of Alacrity, I'd have to side with Skip on this. It is an epic property that breaks the normal rules.
Thorak 06-11-05, 08:39 PM	If both ends had the same special power... then wouldn't he be making 3 attacks per round? One attack for the normal speed, then since BOTH sides have the "special power" to ignore the rules, they each get an ADDITIONAL attack. It doesn't say they both have equal special powers, it says they have equal enchantment and special powers. The special powers aren't linked to the "equal" bit of the clause. At least, not necessarily. And you're being disingenuous. There are only 2 Speed enchantments to even provide an extra attack. I have no idea where you think the third would come from. Unfortunately, it doesn't make sense the way you interpret it. Powers in this case is referring to the speed ability. At no point in the items description does it mention some sort of special power to bypass the rules. In fact, it also doesn't mention that these special attacks don't stack with haste. Are you saying it does? No, I'm saying that it has special powers, and that means that you get an extra attack with both ends. Just like the SRD says. And you know this because the game designers told you? You're making some BIG assumptions, where there really isn't any basis. No, I know that because of basic English grammar. A clause starting with "meaning that" is a dependent clause, which modifies the clause it is connected to. Sure, it's epic. But since it doesn't specifically refer to a "power" that allows the speed enchantments to stack, that means either: a) Speed enchantments with multiple weapons stack or b) It's a mistake. Except for the "meaning that it allows an additional attack with each end every round" power it directly refers to in that same sentence. That was sort of my point. What specific power is it referring to? Can you name it? What is it on the chart? Is there an Epic speed property? I've asked customer service for a clarification, since logic has never dissauded you from your opinion before. I suspect, however, that even customer service's clarification won't be enough for you. They're called special powers because they're not standard powers. As for custserv; I was pushed to sending them a comment once, recently. They admitted that I had a point, despite their previous response to someone, and passed my comments on to the dev team. So yes, a custserv clarification isn't enough. You would think that something THAT obvious would be detailed in the weapon's description, since it's breaking a rule. Since it doesn't mention it specifically as one of it's powers (overcoming the normal limitation), I can't say that it's OBVIOUS. What are you talking about? You don't think it's blindingly obvious that something is "similar" to something identical to itself? Frankly, that's ridiculous. It doesn't say it isn't cumulative... it says it doesn't stack with haste and haste-like effects... it doesn't mention specifically other speed weapons. And your argument can only work if the designers somehow forgot to mention that the weapon is an exemption to the normal rules of Speed. Since they went through all the trouble of mentioning it in the definition that it doesn't stack with haste, you'd think they'd say something to the contrary in the description of the Quarterstaff. Okay. Watch carefully. I am about to perform linguistic magic. Speed says; "This benefit is not cumulative with similar effects, such as a haste spell." Haste says; "This effect is not cumulative with similar effects, such as that provided by a weapon of speed . . ." So Speed is similar to Haste, and Haste is similar to Speed. If it weren't blatantly obvious that something is similar to something it is identical to, they're not cumulative with Haste and similar effects. What's similar to Haste? Speed weapons. And, again, they do make an exception for the quarterstaff. They say it has special powers, meaning above and beyond +3 Speed on each end, and that this means that it allows an extra attack with each end in a full attack. That's an exception right there.
UZI 06-12-05, 08:20 AM	Let's stick to the subject... Speed in 3.0 did NOT give you an extra partial action. It only gave you one extra attack during a full attack action. Only Haste gave the partial action. You're reverse engineering 3.5's speed effect into 3E. In 3E, speed gave you an extra attack each round regardless of taking a full attack (unless your version of the 3E rules on speed includes something about a full attack that mine doesn't). This was in line (although not identical) with 3E Haste. In 3.5, speed is listed as having to use a full attack to get the extra attack. This is in line with 3.5 Haste, which was changed to keep casters from getting the effective benefits of extra spell castings for the duration of haste. The whole issue (as it always becomes) is whether a speed enhancement that grants an extra attack on one weapon is "similar" to a speed enhancement that grants an extra attack with a different weapon. There are those who assert that the definition of extra attack makes two weapons similar (which was literally true in 3E's definition of speed with its separate clauses for extra attack and "must use this weapon" constraint), and there are those who assert that the extra attack with a specific weapon makes them different (since the extra attack is modified by "with it" instead of standing alone in a separate constraint clause). In any case, haste cannot speed up any speed weapons since that would be cumulative. And like I've written before. It is a reaonable read. You can ignore 3E's FAQ since it applies to the interaction of effects and spells which have both been changed. However, many people read 3E speed and haste (and FAQ) first and now take it as cannon that these effects in no way can be used together even if they are applied to different weapons (since 3E didn't allow it). If you're unsure, ask your DM. But beware, anything you can do, he can do too. Whether multiple speed weapons working as desired is "core" I'll leave to the rules lawyers and holy warriors of "similar effects"
UZI 06-12-05, 08:28 AM	And as to haste not stacking with speed in 3.5 rules by themselves... Speed allows an extra attack with a specific weapon. Haste allows an extra attack with any weapon. You cannot use the extra attack granted from haste to get an extra attack with a speed weapon. They do not stack. However, you can use a haste attack with a non-speed weapon regardless of whether you are also wielding a speed weapon in another hand, since you are not stacking the haste attack on top of a speed weapon. I argue that the narrow focus of speed (with the weapon) only prevents the application of haste to that weapon. It comes down to whether (a) you think haste allows you to take any weapon (except a speed weapon) and get an extra attack with it, or (b) you think haste grants you a single extra attack and that you can use any weapon to execute it. I favor (a), others favor (b). B was strongly indicated in 3E, but the mechanics on haste and speed practically required it.
OrbitalB 06-12-05, 09:03 AM	You're reverse engineering 3.5's speed effect into 3E. In 3E, speed gave you an extra attack each round regardless of taking a full attack (unless your version of the 3E rules on speed includes something about a full attack that mine doesn't). This was in line (although not identical) with 3E Haste. Well, lets see. 3.0 Speed says: "A weapon of speed allows the wielder one single extra attack each round at his highest bonus. It is not cumulative with Haste. The extra attack must be with this weapon, not with some other weapon. The weapon does not grant the benefit of the haste spell, so an additional partial action is not what is granted, simply an extra single attack with this weapon." So unless you can point out how the 3.0 version of speed is in any way shape form or fashion different from the 3.5 version... your whole basis for arguement just flew out the window. And in case you think it "not mentioning" full attack is a valid arguement... you wanna suggest how you'd get that extra attack when it clearly does not give an extra partial, like 3.0 haste did, unless it was during a full attack? Perhaps it was a free action :rolleye2: Maybe it was an immediate action (or equivilant) because it doesn't say "during your turn", it mearly says one extra attack each round. :uh-huh:
Egres 06-12-05, 09:06 AM	You're reverse engineering 3.5's speed effect into 3E. In 3E, speed gave you an extra attack each round regardless of taking a full attack (unless your version of the 3E rules on speed includes something about a full attack that mine doesn't). This was in line (although not identical) with 3E Haste. That's funny. You are using a 3.0 Epic Magic Weapon to support your PoV for a 3.5 rule. Note: No, the 3.5 SRD is different from the ELH, but we have no official reprint of the ELH for the 3.5, nor we have any update of the Quarterstaff in any 3.5 book.
UZI 06-12-05, 10:11 AM	3.0 Speed says: "A weapon of speed allows the wielder one single extra attack each round at his highest bonus. It is not cumulative with Haste. The extra attack must be with this weapon, not with some other weapon. The weapon does not grant the benefit of the haste spell, so an additional partial action is not what is granted, simply an extra single attack with this weapon." So unless you can point out how the 3.0 version of speed is in any way shape form or fashion different from the 3.5 version... your whole basis for arguement just flew out the window. Right, you are not granted an extra-partial action with 3E Speed, so you cannot be wielding a speed weapon and then assume you can cast an extra spell. 3E did not require a full attack to use a speed weapon, if those words are in there (like they are explicitly in 3.5) then I'm missing them and need them pointed out.
UZI 06-12-05, 10:49 AM	That's funny. You are using a 3.0 Epic Magic Weapon to support your PoV for a 3.5 rule. Note: No, the 3.5 SRD is different from the ELH, but we have no official reprint of the ELH for the 3.5, nor we have any update of the Quarterstaff in any 3.5 book. I only point it out as a positive confirmation. However, since the Epic section of the 3.5 SRD still includes this item, and the aforementioned item hasn't needed to be reprinted (since the ELH was updated and that item wasn't dropped or changed); it is still "Epic" core. Accordingly in 3E, either the quarterstaff was in core-error, the FAQ was in core-error (although this is asserted to not be the case by the rule-precedence policies), or logically the quarterstaff gained its extra attack because it was epic (which I believe, given the FAQ, is the most logical for 3E). The 3E FAQ makes it quite clear that the extra partial action of haste and the extra attack from speed were exclusive. You could not take an extra partial action while hasted if your used a speed weapon to get an extra attack. The inference is that the speed weapon uses the extra partial action segment of the character's turn that would otherwise be provided by haste. Two speed weapons would likewise contend for that slot. This also allows you to get an extra attack without a full attack since you consumed the segment used by the extra partial action to do it. But yes, I believe it is a PoV (and a well justified one). Just as I believe the contrary is also a PoV based upon most people's belief of the FAQ from a previous version in which both ends (speed and haste) of the rules operated differently. Some people believe the speed effects operate the same between versions, and they are just worded differently, and therefore the old FAQ still applies (even though it references defunct partial actions). I believe that is not the case (ie, not requiring a full attack in 3E), and that the fact they are worded differently makes them operate differently. The RPGA rules probably disallow dual-speed weapons also; I don't know, I don't play RPGA games. However, as I've written before it is still reasonable to allow them, as the core rules as written leave open ambiguity on whether (a) you think haste allows you to take any weapon (except a speed weapon) and get an extra attack with it, or (b) you think haste grants you a single extra attack and that you can use any weapon to execute it.
Thorak 06-12-05, 12:14 PM	Right, you are not granted an extra-partial action with 3E Speed, so you cannot be wielding a speed weapon and then assume you can cast an extra spell. 3E did not require a full attack to use a speed weapon, if those words are in there (like they are explicitly in 3.5) then I'm missing them and need them pointed out. I'm using the 3.0 SRD, but it says pretty clearly; "If a character gets more than one attack per action, the character must use the full attack action to use those additional attacks." And 3.0 Speed says; "A weapon of speed allows the wielder one single extra attack each round at the wielder’s highest bonus. It is not cumulative with haste. The extra attack must be with this weapon. The weapon does not grant the benefits of a haste spell, simply an extra single attack with this weapon." So, explain to me exactly how 3.0 Speed is an exception to the 3.0 general rule that you must use a full attack action to get more than one attack per action. It doesn't even suggest that. This hasn't changed between 3.0 and 3.5; you have always needed a full attack to get the extra attack from a Speed weapon.
DragonsArt 06-12-05, 12:37 PM	If you are wielding two weapons with the speed enchancement on them, do you g... Discussion Thread Response (Sam S.) 06/12/2005 09:13 AM John The Epic Level Handbook is a 3.0 resource. In 3.5, the "Speed" special ability does not stack with itself or the spell Haste. It is up to the DM whether he wants the epic quarterstaff to break the rules and be allowed. Good Gaming! To login to your account, or update your question please click here. Sam S. Customer Service Representative Wizards of the Coast 1-800-324-6496 (US and Canada) 425-204-8069 (From all other countries) Monday-Friday 7am-6pm PST / 10am-9pm EST Customer (John Cressman) 06/10/2005 03:23 PM The quarterstaff of aclarity, while being an epic weapon, allows two attacks since both ends have the speed enchantment. Does epicness allow it to circumvent the normal convention of non-stacking haste features? Does this mean you could have two epic weapons of speed and gain two attacks? I know most peopel don't like Cust Serv answers, but I definately agree with it. Until such time as the Epic handbook gets updated to v3.5, Speed weapons (even epic ones) don't stack. So, as I suspected, Thorak was trying to argue 3.5 rules with a 3.0 example. This answers the question for me, Speed weapons don't stack... ever. Not even epic ones, unless the DM house rules it. Argue until you're blue in the face to the contrary...
Tsuul 06-12-05, 01:49 PM	Weapons of speed don't normaly stack in 3.5. Weapons of speed don't normaly stack in 3.0 either. Quaterstaff of alacrity is a 3.0 weapon where the Speed abilities apparently stack. Would it be out of line to have a 3.5 version to have the same exception to the stackng rules? No. Cust Service is incorrect by implying that speed abilities normaly stack in 3.0.
Thorak 06-12-05, 11:30 PM	So, as I suspected, Thorak was trying to argue 3.5 rules with a 3.0 example. Actually, I was showing why a 3.0 example was irrelevant, because it was an exception to the standard rules then, and would still be an exception to those standard rules now. I wasn't the one who brought up the quarterstaff.
UZI 06-18-05, 08:35 AM	I'm using the 3.0 SRD, but it says pretty clearly; "If a character gets more than one attack per action, the character must use the full attack action to use those additional attacks." And 3.0 Speed says; "A weapon of speed allows the wielder one single extra attack each round at the wielder’s highest bonus. It is not cumulative with haste. The extra attack must be with this weapon. The weapon does not grant the benefits of a haste spell, simply an extra single attack with this weapon." So, explain to me exactly how 3.0 Speed is an exception to the 3.0 general rule that you must use a full attack action to get more than one attack per action. It doesn't even suggest that. To get more than one attack per action you need to use the full-attack full-round action. Never claimed otherwise. In fact I never even mentioned that, as I never referred to more than one attack per action. I was referring to more than one attack per round without having to make a full attack. 3.0 Haste granted an extra partial action per round which you could use to make an attack in addition to the attack you could use on your standard action (grand total of 2 attacks even if you had a BAB of 20). Speed did the same thing. Both speed and haste in 3.0 could not be used together because they both used the extra partial action. If you took a full attack while hasted, the action consumes the full round (presumably including the extra partial action), and the application of 3.0 Haste looks more like 3.5 Haste. All this just to demonstrate the 3.0 Haste is not 3.5 Haste so that the relevance of the 3.0 FAQ can be ignored (coupled with speed being written differently in each version), so that I could get back to referring to just the 3.5 rules as written. Which takes me all the way back to the fundamental basis for my explanation of why I think two speed weapons are reasonable (though by no way required, and I'm not about to even state that one way or the other is "core" and the other is house-rule, since whatever a DM allows is "core" in that game): It comes down to whether (a) you think haste allows you to take any weapon (except a speed weapon) and get an extra attack with it, or (b) you think haste grants you a single extra attack and that you can use any weapon to execute it.
primemover003 06-18-05, 01:42 PM	To get more than one attack per action you need to use the full-attack full-round action. Never claimed otherwise. In fact I never even mentioned that, as I never referred to more than one attack per action. I was referring to more than one attack per round without having to make a full attack. 3.0 Haste granted an extra partial action per round which you could use to make an attack in addition to the attack you could use on your standard action (grand total of 2 attacks even if you had a BAB of 20). Speed did the same thing. Both speed and haste in 3.0 could not be used together because they both used the extra partial action. No that's not how it worked. Speed in 3.0 did not grant an Partial action. It merely granted an extra attack. To utilize the extra attack you needed to make a full attack action. If you just happened to have a Haste spell on you the two did not stack. Speed and Haste in 3.0 were similar but NOT the same. However Speed and Speed in either edition do not stack.