Post/Author/DateTime	Post
GhostStepper 01-17-07, 01:39 PM	Im currently running a roguish character who wears a suit covered with knives so naturally i was estatic when i saw boot/elbow/knee/sleeve blades in the Complete Scoundrel. While i could see not being allowed to attack with an elbow or sleeve blade in the same round that you attack with a weapon wielded with that arm, i could easily see my character attacking with 2 held daggers and then with 2 boot daggers as she would be effectively weidling 4 weapons. At 10th level, im already getting 7d6+10 per hit just from sneak attack damage and have 3 attacks per round. If i can get those 2 extra attacks that will make for a possible 5 attacks per round without any magical assistance. Thats a possible 35d6 + 50 sneak attack damage per round at level 10. If i really want to get nasty, i can come up with a straight warblade build that gets +6250 damage in a round using boot blades and Stromguard but that more a problem with Strormguard Warrior and the MWF treen than the boot blades themselves. Ive sent an email to customer service asking if i get extra attacks with boot blades and if a 2 arms person would qualify for MWF if he wields more than 2 weapons at a time.
fatal error 01-17-07, 01:50 PM	Well, there is a feat in Tome of Battle called Snap Kick, which normally does unarmed damage. However, I think it could work with Boot Blades. Just straight allowing you to use two boot blades along with two held weapons though, eh, seems borderline, I've never heard of being able to kick and punch at the same time.
GhostStepper 01-17-07, 01:55 PM	The whole issue is basically whether or not you can attack with 3 or more weapons if you are wielding all 3 simultaneously. The CS is annoyingly silent on the issue and doesnt mention if you threaten with boot blades or if you can use them for additional attacks.
draconic_swine 01-17-07, 03:08 PM	I'm going to give this a big, fat, resounding NO. Nowhere is there a rules provision for attacking with more than two weapons in a round, other than a creature with three or more arms, or a monk using flurry of blows. However, the former requires you to have more arms than most standard PC races, and the latter gives you a specific number of attacks. The closest thing to using a boot blade (that is, wielding a weapon that's not being held in hand) are armour spikes, and those don't let you make three attacks - a weapon in each hand plus the armour spikes. They are counted as your off-hand attack; you can't tack it on to two-weapon fighting with two other weapons.
Lord Nat 01-17-07, 03:14 PM	You might get your DM to let you do it if you take the Multiweapon Fighting tree. The only problem might be getting past the "three or more hands." thing... If can fight over the fact that anything that holds a weapon counts then it works >.> (Two Swords in the hands and one in your teeth FTW)
Bantam 01-17-07, 03:42 PM	From the FAQ about spiked armor. You cannot, however, use your armor spikes to make a second off-hand attack when you’re already fighting with two weapons. If you have a weapon in both hands and armor spikes, you can attack with the weapons in your hands (and not with the armor spikes) or with one of the weapons in your hands and the armor spikes (see the description of spiked armor in Chapter 7 of the Player’s Handbook). By that reasoning two-weapon fighting only works with two different weapons, or one off-hand weapon at a time.
GhostStepper 01-17-07, 03:48 PM	I had forgot about the armor spike rules which seem to be the closest anolog to the boot blades. My DM has told me i could use the boot blades for an extra attack but i think im going to turn down his offer since it could get a bit too broken.
Bantam 01-17-07, 03:52 PM	I had forgot about the armor spike rules which seem to be the closest anolog to the boot blades. My DM has told me i could use the boot blades for an extra attack but i think im going to turn down his offer since it could get a bit too broken. Props to you for self-balancing yourself! :)
Sylvaroth 01-17-07, 04:08 PM	No matter how many weapons you wield (or wear). You can still only attack with two of them in a round. If your rogue wielded e.g. a sap and a rapier (the first being the off-hand weapon the latter being the primary weapon with regards to two-weapon fighting) and wore bladed boots, he could decide to attack with only one weapon (sap, or rapier, or bladed boots), OR the rapier and the sap, OR the rapier and the bladed boots, OR the sap and the bladed boots. The last three options would incur all penalties for two-weapon fighting (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/specialAttacks.htm#twoWeaponFighting). Provided your character does not have a natural kick attack (or a third leg for that matter), I am afraid you will have to restrict yourself to attacking with a maximum of two weapons. :D
draconic_swine 01-17-07, 06:25 PM	Sylvaroth touched upon a very good reason to keep the boot blades: versatility. You might not be able to attack with all of your weapons in a round, but you have the option available to you. This would work well if your other weapons are bludgeoning or slashing/piercing (I'm not sure whether the boot blades are slashing or piercing), or if you want to have a variety of enhancements available without paying tons of money for one super-powerful weapon as opposed to several lesser weapons. I'm thinking, though, that the best part about the boot blades (and probably a bit overpowered or abuseable) is the fact that you can have your hands full and still make attacks - a bonus usually reserved for monks. Or characters wearing armour spikes, for that matter.
LittleCarp04 01-17-07, 06:49 PM	you get sneak attack dmg with both (or in this example 4 possible) attacks with TWF/MWF? wow i never knew that... i guess thats what happens when i only play magicy guys.
Jaxgaret 01-17-07, 06:58 PM	you get sneak attack dmg with both (or in this example 4 possible) attacks with TWF/MWF? wow i never knew that... i guess thats what happens when i only play magicy guys. Yep. And on iterative attacks too once your BAB hits +6 or more. Every attack that qualifies, really :)
Dread_Pirate_Dan 01-17-07, 07:22 PM	i'm hoping the major benefit of boot blades would be to catch your opponent flat footed, like a built in quick draw feat, as this is really the only circumstance i've seen them used in. so really they'd be best used in one on one fights where you dont have anyone flanking and you need to pull that sneak attack damage from somewhere...same thing as with a sword cane i believe
Arem_K 01-17-07, 07:27 PM	THe bladestorm spell says that you can make an attack with every melee weapon you are wielding against every foe within reach. 3rd level ranger spell though.
GhostStepper 01-17-07, 09:24 PM	Sylvaroth touched upon a very good reason to keep the boot blades: versatility. You might not be able to attack with all of your weapons in a round, but you have the option available to you. This would work well if your other weapons are bludgeoning or slashing/piercing (I'm not sure whether the boot blades are slashing or piercing), or if you want to have a variety of enhancements available without paying tons of money for one super-powerful weapon as opposed to several lesser weapons. Since it takes a DC 15 Search check to find them when they are "sheathed" they would make a decent back up weapon and since they are treated as daggers, they are great for invisible blades, characters with the Shadow Blade feat or people with the Bloodclaw Master class. I imagine someone capturing my PC, taking all of her weapons and binding her arms, only to have her kick them in the throat with a boot blade. Im deffinately taking a pair even if i dont ever use them. The whole concept of my character was that she is absolutely covered with daggers. She wears studded leather with armor spikes and rows and rows of blades. On top of that she'll now have knee blades, elbow blades, sleeve blades and boot blades if for no reason other than it perfectly fits with teh flavor im going for. On the MWF note, i have received my response from CustServ and unfortunately (or fortunately) just as i suspected, you cannot make extra attacks with boot blades if your attacking with 2 other weapons.
Orion_Danthyer 01-17-07, 09:42 PM	At 10th level, im already getting 7d6+10 per hit just from sneak attack damage and have 3 attacks per round. If i can get those 2 extra attacks that will make for a possible 5 attacks per round without any magical assistance. Thats a possible 35d6 + 50 sneak attack damage per round at level 10. Just a reminder, you can only do 7d6 sneak attack, even if you have dual strike. So dont even think about it.
paladin2019 01-17-07, 11:11 PM	THe bladestorm spell says that you can make an attack with every melee weapon you are wielding against every foe within reach. 3rd level ranger spell though. The point being argued is that this character can only wield 2 weapons. With a weapon in each hand and a blade in each boot, two of these weapons are not wielded. So, pick two of them and make your Whirlwind Attack with each.
GhostStepper 01-17-07, 11:12 PM	Just a reminder, you can only do 7d6 sneak attack, even if you have dual strike. So dont even think about it. What does Dual Strike have to do with anything? You can get sneak attack on any attack that meets the circumstances for sneak attack. If your flanking for your whole turn, you can add sneak attack damage to each attack that is part of your full attack. If i get 3 attacks i can get an extra 7d6 3 times if i hit 3 times.
ravenshrike 01-18-07, 12:43 PM	Allowable, at the cost of two feats. The first would be EWP boot blade. C'mon, you're gonna have to train pretty damn hard to use these competently. And then MWF. Of course, you're pulling a -4 on all your attacks doing this. Unless you're a catfolk and tossed an 18 to dex, it's gonna be annoying to hit with only 3/4 attack bonus.
Orion_Danthyer 01-18-07, 09:41 PM	If i get 3 attacks i can get an extra 7d6 3 times if i hit 3 times. Uhh, no, im sorry but thats just wrong. Iv never heard of that rule in my life, and iv played for years. Just to make sure im not misunderstanding, your saying you'd be able to do 21d6 damage with three attacks if flanking:confused: thats not true and you'd only be able to do 7d6, and then the other damage for 3 hits.
paladin2019 01-18-07, 10:08 PM	Yes, you deal sneak attack damage on all attacks that qualify. Flanking attacks qualify. All of them. So a rogue who hits with 3 flanking attacks deals all his sneak attack damage dice with each one.
GhostStepper 01-18-07, 11:10 PM	Uhh, no, im sorry but thats just wrong. Iv never heard of that rule in my life, and iv played for years. Just to make sure im not misunderstanding, your saying you'd be able to do 21d6 damage with three attacks if flanking:confused: thats not true and you'd only be able to do 7d6, and then the other damage for 3 hits. Im sorry, but that is how it works. Apparently youve been playing it wrong for years. Basically, a rouge's attack deals extra damage any time her target would be denied a Dexterity bonus to AC, or when the rogue flanks her target. So i attack once while the target is flanked...sneak attack damage because they are flanked. I attack again...oh, they're still flanked...sneak attack again. Last attack...still flanked...one more sneak attack. There is no rule that says a rogue only gets one sneak attack during a full attack. The text says "any time".
Orion_Danthyer 01-18-07, 11:14 PM	Im sorry, but that is how it works. Apparently youve been playing it wrong for years. So i attack once while the target is flanked...sneak attack damage because they are flanked. I attack again...oh, they're still flanked...sneak attack again. Last attack...still flanked...one more sneak attack. There is no rule that says a rogue only gets one sneak attack during a full attack. The text says "any time". ...*Starts to cry for stupidity and stubornness*:weep:
GhostStepper 01-18-07, 11:31 PM	...*Starts to cry for stupidity and stubornness*:weep: Its ok. This isnt the first time this has come up. lol Sorry if i sounded harsh. At a glance it does appear pretty broken but its not too bad once you fight barbarian zombie plants with uncanny dodge.
Radagast 01-19-07, 12:23 PM	Part of the problem is that the Rogue's ability is still called "Sneak Attack" leading to all sorts of arguments about how one cannot get the bonus on more than one attack a round since "you're no longer sneaky" or that you can't even use it against a person if they know you are there since "you are not sneaky then." Even though the rules are quite clear, I've seen plenty of folks get confused by this. A name like "Precise Attack" or "Deadly Strike" or some other thing would have removed the implication that you can only use Sneak Attack when being, well, sneaky.
GhostStepper 01-19-07, 12:37 PM	Part of the problem is that the Rogue's ability is still called "Sneak Attack" leading to all sorts of arguments about how one cannot get the bonus on more than one attack a round since "you're no longer sneaky" or that you can't even use it against a person if they know you are there since "you are not sneaky then." Even though the rules are quite clear, I've seen plenty of folks get confused by this. A name like "Precise Attack" or "Deadly Strike" or some other thing would have removed the implication that you can only use Sneak Attack when being, well, sneaky. I think if your standing right next to somebody and you stab them in the kidney 3 times while they are looking the other way (flanked) thats still pretty "sneaky". ;)
Longarms 01-19-07, 03:19 PM	Word to the wise - I would let these things be no more powerful than armor spikes. They should at a minimum be martial weapons so that rogues need to spend a feat or dip into another class to proficiently wield them. For those that think armor spikes are too powerful or unbalanced, then you would obviously want to make these less powerful than armor spikes :)
ronyon 01-19-07, 06:07 PM	I read the book today in the store, and Im pretty sure you take a -2 to all attakes made with "hidden weapons". Same goes for the Bayonets, I think, but I seem to remeber that the Bow Blades count as punching daggers and have no stated penalty. If so, an Elvencraft Bow with Bow Blades, sounds cool as hell. There's even a picture of a Wight(?) Rogue in the Libris Mortis that seems to be thusly equiped.
Zherog 01-19-07, 06:16 PM	At 10th level, im already getting 7d6+10 per hit just from sneak attack damage and have 3 attacks per round. I'm curious. Where's the "+10" sneak attack coming from? I'm not aware of stuff that adds a flat bonus to sneak attack - but there's plenty of books I don't own.
GhostStepper 01-19-07, 06:31 PM	I'm curious. Where's the "+10" sneak attack coming from? I'm not aware of stuff that adds a flat bonus to sneak attack - but there's plenty of books I don't own. Its a pretty unbalanced feat from Lords of Darkness, a somewhat obscure 3.0 FR book. Its called Craven and allows you to add damage equal to your character level to your sneak attack damage, though your stuck with a -2 penalty on saves against fear. Ive got 5d6 sneak attack, the Assassin's Stance for an extra +2d6 and Craven for another +10, all at character level 10. If i can get some Deadly Precision weapons i can boost it up to 9d6+10 each hit for sneak attack damage that surpases a "normal" 20th level rogue. This is why i thought it would pretty broken if i could get extra attacks with boot blades. Right now ive got TWF (i dont have ITWF because my build is pretty feat intensive) but if i could get MWF and IMWF like a creature with more than 2 arms can id have 8 attacks (2 iterative, 2 off hand, 2 right boot, 2 left boot) for a possible total of 56d6+80 sneak attack without magic weapons, at level 10.
Zherog 01-19-07, 08:17 PM	And you hit me with another one I'm not familiar with: Assassin's Stance. I just assumed you were multiclassed somehow to get the 7d6. Thanks.
Aiden_Bautista 01-19-07, 09:09 PM	I think if your standing right next to somebody and you stab them in the kidney 3 times while they are looking the other way (flanked) thats still pretty "sneaky". ;) Plus a round is only six seconds so yeah, you're still pretty sneaky. ^.^
GhostStepper 01-19-07, 09:59 PM	And you hit me with another one I'm not familiar with: Assassin's Stance. I just assumed you were multiclassed somehow to get the 7d6. Thanks. The Assassin's Stance is from taking a dip in Swordsage (from ToB). And i was multiclassing with the Rokugan Ninja as well.
risner 01-20-07, 08:39 AM	Imy character attacking with 2 held daggers and then with 2 boot daggers as she would be effectively weidling 4 weapons. Ive sent an email to customer service asking if i get extra attacks with boot blades and if a 2 arms person would qualify for MWF if he wields more than 2 weapons at a time. You are limited to TWF. Only creatures with natural additional arms can use MWF. There is no way (short of Polymorph into a MWF creature) to gain MWF as a Human.
Sylvaroth 01-28-07, 06:29 PM	I think if your standing right next to somebody and you stab them in the kidney 3 times while they are looking the other way (flanked) thats still pretty "sneaky". ;) :rofl: That's so sigged man! :D
FreAkOuTRG 01-28-07, 07:56 PM	Just got Complete Scoundrel today. Nearly wet myself when I saw Swift Hunter and Improved Skirmish. Just put the finishing touches on my grippli ranger/1, scout 4 (leading into Thief-Acrobat). Back to the topic at hand, I like the flavor of the boot blade. I don't see how game breaking it could be... Same thing as with the monk. Just 'cause they can use multiple parts of their bodies as weapons, doesn't mean they can do it in the same round.
Radijs 01-28-07, 08:50 PM	Hmm, how would it go? Garillion's blessing gets you 4 claw attacks, or you can carry 4 weapons. Add 2 boot blades, a bite attack, a gore, improved unarmed strike and snap kick. Now you use dancing mongoose style...
enygmatic_me 01-29-07, 01:26 PM	The only way I could see letting this happen, and even this is still questionable at best, is to make it feat intensive to do so. Off the top of my head is to make alternate prerequisites to Multiweapon Fighting, maybe Two Weapon Fighting feat, Improved Two Weapon Fighting feat, Snap Kick feat, and a BAB +8 or more to allow a bipedal creature with only two arms to use their legs to qualify for Multi-weapon fighting. After that you are free to progress through the Multi-weapon tree. As a very specific, feat intensive build I could see this possible being more balanced. Another option would be to create a PrC, similar to the J'zzt Darksun kit from 2e. Either way it would need a lot of play testing to really determine it's balance.
sunkist_junky 01-29-07, 01:34 PM	*sigh...i understand everyone's ruling with the whole must have more than 2 arms to take multiweapon fighting.....but i would allow it...my problem with that is there a numerous monsters in the MM's that have taken multiweapon fighting and only have 2 arms...(the classic claw, claw, bite attack) is where most of it is from
Selgard 01-29-07, 01:53 PM	Don't confuse -Multiweapon Fighting- with -Multiattack-. One allows for use of multiple weapons, the other for multiple natural weapon attacks. The two are not interchangeable. :)