Post/Author/DateTime	Post
WinDReiN 10-11-07, 07:40 PM	Let's say you sacrifice a 5th lvl spell to get +5 on attack and 5d4 dmg. If you have multiple attacks because of your high BAB you get the bonus on all attack rolles; does the dmg bonus goes to all attack as well, or just on a single one? What if you carry two weapons and what if you carry a two-bladed sword?
Ninja_Ferret 10-11-07, 07:51 PM	All your attack rolls for one round Per level of the spell.
dman11235 10-11-07, 10:05 PM	No, you're wrong Ninja_Ferret. It's until your next turn, not one round/level of the spell. And that's all of the benifits, including damage. Also, another little thing, it's 1d4xspell level, not 1d4 per spell level. So a 5th level spell gives you +5 attack and 1d4x5 damage.
Ninja_Ferret 10-12-07, 01:16 AM	Hmm must have read it wrong when i did. Sorry. Also he is correct about it being 5d4. read the example. it says the character gets +4 attack bonus on his attack rolls and an extra 4d4 damage. It doesnt say 1d4x4 damage. :-p
WinDReiN 10-12-07, 08:25 AM	If you have 4 attacks, and sacrifice a 5 thl lvl spell, you get the +5 attack bonus on all attacks. My main concern is that you get the extra 5d4 damage just once, not on every attack. And I'm not sure how it works with two-bladed weapons. It seems they have an advantage over those that carry two weapons.
McPoyo 10-12-07, 08:31 AM	Don't mean to sidetrack the thread, but can anyone list any point in time in 3.x DnD that you ever multiply the damage rolled, and not the number of damage die rolled? If anyone bothers to try that "You do on a critical" line, I recommend you re-read back over the section in your PHB in chapter 7, Equipment, where it discusses weapon criticals, since it explains that one quite clearly.
Ninja_Ferret 10-12-07, 11:01 AM	I would say yes he would. About the double bladed weapon. Since it says you get it for a weapon of your choice but, When you enchant a double bladed weapon each side counts as different blade. I would rule it that only one side got the extra damage. But thats just me.
WinDReiN 10-12-07, 11:09 AM	I would rule it that only one side got the extra damage. But thats just me. Well, that's how it should be rulled. Still not sure about the extra damage on every attack.
The_Wrath_of_Talos 10-12-07, 11:52 AM	I thought the spell stated that the spell is held until your first attack up to the duration, then its used, end of spell.
Ninja_Ferret 10-12-07, 12:06 PM	Nope it says ALL attacks untill your next turn. It also states you get the damage bonus aswel. So Since it doesnt state that the damage bonus is only for one attack it should be assumed and common sense that its for all the attacks.
goawayugh 10-12-07, 01:03 PM	I can't believe people are even debating about this:...you gain a bonus on all your attack rolls for 1 round... It can't get much more obvious. Oh, and as far as the damage bonus goes, lets continue that same sentence:...as well as extra damage...
Spikes01k 10-12-07, 01:48 PM	I can't believe people are even debating about this: It can't get much more obvious. Oh, and as far as the damage bonus goes, lets continue that same sentence: Thank you for beating me to the punch! I just couldn't believe it ether. Thank you again.
Tordak 10-12-07, 02:26 PM	And for double weapon, if you use both ends it the same as having 2 weapons; the extra damage applies to ALL of your attacks, both ends of the weapon. However house-ruling that it applies to only one end is perfectly legitimate.
Dracomorph 10-12-07, 03:16 PM	Also, you can use the feat multiple times in a round to add more damage to every attack, although the attack bonuses from multiple uses of the feat don't stack.
Tordak 10-12-07, 03:46 PM	Really?? I wasn't aware of that.
Eerongal 10-12-07, 03:52 PM	Really?? I wasn't aware of that. yup, IIRC, 'tis a free action. Pretty much a gish equivilant of going nova, though, so it isn't really that broken, because if you do it too often, you'll be out of spells really really fast.
Ninja_Ferret 10-12-07, 03:53 PM	I thought you can only make one free/swift/imidiate action a turn. >.<
Eerongal 10-12-07, 04:09 PM	I thought you can only make one free/swift/imidiate action a turn. >.< Free action: Free actions don’t take any time at all, though there may be limits to the number of free actions you can perform in a turn. Free actions rarely incur attacks of opportunity. Some common free actions are described below. Swift and immediate actions are special types of free actions that you only get one of a round. Any other free action is limited either by its text (5-foot step limits you to one specifically) or by DM discretion (in this case)
Spikes01k 10-12-07, 04:22 PM	Also, you can use the feat multiple times in a round to add more damage to every attack, although the attack bonuses from multiple uses of the feat don't stack. That is incorrect. The bonuses to attack and damage do stack, the bonus to hit just can't exceed your base attack bonus.
Obsidianjaerc 10-12-07, 04:25 PM	Swift and immediate actions are special types of free actions that you only get one of a round. Any other free action is limited either by its text (5-foot step limits you to one specifically) or by DM discretion (in this case) Bolding mine. They are actually not free actions, and are each an action type unto itself.
Dracomorph 10-12-07, 08:52 PM	The source I saw it at, and I'll go look it up if you want, noted that bonuses from the same source don't stack (even if they are of an unnamed type), but that bonus damage dice do as a peculiar property of damage dice.
themysticbadger 10-14-07, 02:02 AM	and now polymorph into a hydra and watch your DM cry...
Salla 10-14-07, 02:10 AM	I disagree that multiple uses of Arcane Strike stack, either for attack or damage. Same effect, same source, no stack.
Eerongal 10-14-07, 02:32 AM	I disagree that multiple uses of Arcane Strike stack, either for attack or damage. Same effect, same source, no stack. Stacking rules apply to modifiers. A modifier is defined as "A modifier is any bonus or penalty applying to a die roll. A positive modifier is a bonus, and a negative modifier is a penalty." Damage dice are not modifiers, they're extra dice. Stacking rules do not apply to them.
Salla 10-14-07, 02:35 AM	Stacking rules apply to modifiers. A modifier is defined as "A modifier is any bonus or penalty applying to a die roll. A positive modifier is a bonus, and a negative modifier is a penalty." Damage dice are not modifiers, they're extra dice. Stacking rules do not apply to them. Then why doesn't five instances of flaming on the same weapon work? ;) Also notice that for Prestige Classes with sneak attack, they specify that that Sneak Attack stacks with that from the rogue or other sources. This indicates that if they didn't say that, it wouldn't.
calronmoonflower 10-14-07, 02:56 AM	Also, you can use the feat multiple times in a round to add more damage to every attack, although the attack bonuses from multiple uses of the feat don't stack. Multiple effects from the same source do not stack. It is on page 172 of the Player's Handbook. Look at the Same Effect More than Once in Different Strengths:
Spikes01k 10-14-07, 09:34 AM	Arcane Strike effects do stack because their are non typed.
Kromlech06 10-14-07, 10:59 AM	http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2252831&postcount=125 I have found this single post useful in arcane strike discussions. "Why Arcane Strike works with the Duskblade and you get +5 to hit and 20d4 extra damage per weapon with each attack that weapon does. First Arcane Strike is a free action thus you can activate infinite times per round. Only thing stoping you is the number of spells slots you can sacrifice and the damage caps at your bab. Second Arcane Strike has two important lines about the attack bonus and the damage dice. Quote: you gain a bonus on all your attack tolls for 1 round equal to the level of the spell sacrificed Note this is a bonus it is an untyped bonus thus it stacks with anything except itself. Thus a duskblade attack bonus maxes out at +5 for he only has 5th lvl spells. If he sacks 1 5th lvl spell, 5 2nd lvl spells and 5 1st lvl spells only the highest bonus of that type is applied which would be the 5th lvl spell and thus +5 Attack Bonus. Quote: as well as extra damage equal to 1d4 points x the level of the spell sacrificed This is extra damage, it is not a bonus, extra damage stacks with itself, for the same reason sneak attack from multiple sources (assassin, rogue, hunter’s eye spell, etc all would stack). Sneak Attack is extra damage, extra damage stacks with itself even if its of the same type as previous extra damage. Also note a twf fighting duskblade would only get the +5 attack bonus and 20d4 extra damage for one weapon for sacking 20 lvls of spells, he would need to sack 40 lvls of spells to get +5 attack bonus and and 20d4 extra damage. This is the rules of how Arcane Strike works, it is plain as day, if you don’t like it then houserule it. Don’t say it doesn’t work when it does work according to the SRD and Complete Warrior."
Nephlite 10-14-07, 01:05 PM	Then why doesn't five instances of flaming on the same weapon work? ;) Because some DMs' don't like the idea of multiple flaming. No rules prevent it.
Eerongal 10-14-07, 02:33 PM	Because some DMs' don't like the idea of multiple flaming. No rules prevent it. Yup.
WinDReiN 10-14-07, 05:06 PM	http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2252831&postcount=125 I have found this single post useful in arcane strike discussions. That same post is the reason why I posted this post. ;)
Salla 10-14-07, 05:43 PM	Arcane Strike effects do stack because their are non typed. This is not overridden by the rule that effects from the same source do not stack, regardless of typing. A hypothetical spell that provided a +4 bonus to Strength would not stack with itself. You can't cast multiple instances of ... crap, forgot the spell. Nightstalker's Transformation to get more sneak attack from it than one casting. Same source, same effect, no stack.
dman11235 10-15-07, 12:52 AM	Salla is right. The damage and attack bonus do not stack. Besides. It should be a swift action.
Eerongal 10-15-07, 12:42 PM	This is not overridden by the rule that effects from the same source do not stack, regardless of typing. A hypothetical spell that provided a +4 bonus to Strength would not stack with itself. You can't cast multiple instances of ... crap, forgot the spell. Nightstalker's Transformation to get more sneak attack from it than one casting. Same source, same effect, no stack. I agree that the attack bonus would not stack, because it is a modifier, typed or no. No two modifiers from the same source stack. Arcane strike twice is certainly the same source. However, the damage would stack. I'm not trying to be a jerk by continuing with this point, and you are certainly more than welcome to houserule however you want, but damage dice are not modifiers, they are damage dice. Stacking rules only apply to modifiers not damage dice. If you want me to believe to the contrary, show me a rule that shows that damage dice to not stack. If you can show me a rule explicitly stating that they do not stack, i would be more than happy to relinquish my argument. In all reality, i think it probably should be a swift action, but RAW it is not, and there has not been an errata to the contrary. So anything otherwise is a houserule. In regards to Sneak attack wording, since damage dice stacks normally, this clause is put in there so you don't assume SA damage is set to that. For example, if a rogue has SA 2D6 and has a class that gives 1D6 this is so that the person doesnt assume this newer class sets their SA to 1D6 and thusly loses a dice, instead, it tells them it adds to their current SA if they have it all ready. Now, if you oppose the idea of stacking these due to balance issues, i highly contest this of being broken. I think it's a very very ineffecient use of spells. Trading 2 wishes for +9 hit and +18D4 damage? No thanks. Even if it is multiple attacks, a full caster will most likely miss with their poor bab, and low number of attacks. They would be much better just using a spell. Heck, even a direct damage spell. 20D6 in an area or as a touch attack is better than a chance to most likely miss 18D4 twice. And besides, you shouldnt be in melee anyway.For gishes, this makes it a much more viable tactic, since it gives them the flexibility to use spells much more offensevly or for buffing purposes, but really it's just a versatility thing more than anything. And after all, it's direct damage anyways, known to be one of the weakest ways to use your spells. Sure, a caster could burn every single spell they know and have the chance to deal several hundred extra D4's, but have fun being eye candy the rest of the day, and probably just wasting all your spells for nothing, because you missed.
calronmoonflower 10-18-07, 03:33 AM	I agree that the attack bonus would not stack, because it is a modifier, typed or no. No two modifiers from the same source stack. Arcane strike twice is certainly the same source. However, the damage would stack. I'm not trying to be a jerk by continuing with this point, and you are certainly more than welcome to houserule however you want, but damage dice are not modifiers, they are damage dice. Stacking rules only apply to modifiers not damage dice. If you want me to believe to the contrary, show me a rule that shows that damage dice to not stack. If you can show me a rule explicitly stating that they do not stack, i would be more than happy to relinquish my argument. I have. Multiple effects from the same source do not stack. It is on page 172 of the Player's Handbook. Look at the Same Effect More than Once in Different Strengths: It doesn't matter whether it is a modifier or not, it is an effect and from the same source. Remember that stacking rules apply to spells and other weird abilities that do not give bonuses. As more than one rule exist you cannot just look at one to come to a conclusion.
goawayugh 10-18-07, 07:45 AM	I have. It doesn't matter whether it is a modifier or not, it is an effect and from the same source. Remember that stacking rules apply to spells and other weird abilities that do not give bonuses. As more than one rule exist you cannot just look at one to come to a conclusion. Yup. What he said. You can't cast resist energy, enlarge person, reduce person, etc... twice and get double the effect. Effects from the same source don't stack.
Eerongal 10-18-07, 07:54 AM	I have. It doesn't matter whether it is a modifier or not, it is an effect and from the same source. Remember that stacking rules apply to spells and other weird abilities that do not give bonuses. As more than one rule exist you cannot just look at one to come to a conclusion. No, you quoted the RAI not RAW Stacking In most cases, modifiers to a given check or roll stack (combine for a cumulative effect) if they come from different sources and have different types (or no type at all), but do not stack if they have the same type or come from the same source (such as the same spell cast twice in succession). If the modifiers to a particular roll do not stack, only the best bonus and worst penalty applies. Dodge bonuses and circumstance bonuses however, do stack with one another unless otherwise specified. As i stated before the stacking rule only specifically refers to modifiers, and is located in the section about modifiers. Anything else is a house rule. Edit: The reason those spells don't stack: Same Effect More than Once in Different Strengths In cases when two or more identical spells are operating in the same area or on the same target, but at different strengths, only the best one applies.
jaelis 10-18-07, 08:07 AM	I think that technically the damage should not stack. The distinction is this: magical effects from the same source do not stack, but magical damage from the same source does (as damage always does.) So you have to look at whether arcane strike is putting an effect on the weapon, or whether it is dealing damage. I think it is pretty clear that it is putting an effect on the weapon: the effect of using the feat is to enhance your attacks to deal extra damage (and give you a bonus to hit.) The actual damaging of your opponent is a secondary effect, which comes from attacking and hitting him. So the damage stacks in the sense that if you hit more than once, the damage is applied every time. But the effect doesn't stack to give you more damage per hit. Because once you activate the feat, the effect occurs and the weapon is enhanced. Activating the feat again will just enhance the weapon again, but by the general rule enhancements from the same source don't stack. Here are some examples. Damaging spells that stack on multiple castings include acid arrow, fire shield, and acid fog. Weapon-enhancing spells that don't stack include flame arrow, shillelagh, and magic stone.
calronmoonflower 10-19-07, 04:18 AM	No, you quoted the RAI not RAW The rule itself says "Same Effect More than Once in Different Strengths" it then refers to spells, but does not limit the rule to spells.
Eerongal 10-19-07, 10:12 AM	The rule itself says "Same Effect More than Once in Different Strengths" it then refers to spells, but does not limit the rule to spells. Yes, yes it does. Once again, this comes down to RAW vs RAI. The rules as explicitly written refers to spells in specifics, which means it applies to spells and solely to spells. Now if it said "Spells and other effects" then you would have a case, but it does not. Just because the heading says "effects" doesn't mean anything, however, because headings are not rules, the rules beneath them are the rules. It's the same as if you had a sign that read "Free fruit" and below that read "These apples are free". If someone comes up and assumes the oranges are free, merely because it says "Free fruit" s/he is incorrect, as only the apples are explicitly free. The same principle applies here. The body text of the rule refers to spells, therefore this rule encompasses spells and anything governed by the rules of spells (which feats are certainly not). Now I agree that it should probably be a swift action, and thus usable once per round, as stated previous. However, doing so is a house rule, and i acknowledge it as such. Basically, the only reason it stacks is because of a loophole in the rules. Regardless, it still stacks by RAW. In my games, however, it will not stack. Not because i think it broken, but because i prefer consistency and thus it becomes a swift action. Instead of having the knee-jerk reaction and claiming it does not stack, despite evidence to contrary, and continuing to believe and enforce this point, i challenge you to find me a rule that, as written, will not let the effects of a feat you can use more than once per round that does not give a modifier, function like a spell, but gives unnamed damage dice stack with itself. The two rules that have been brought up I have supplied you with sufficient reason by RAW why they do not govern this instance. The text of the rules refers to specific terms and objects in the game in which they effect, meaning that is all they govern. You can feel free to play it however you wish, it's your game of course. My only insistance on this is because when giving out rules and advice, i go by RAW and not what i think it should do, which is exactly what i'm doing in this instance. Unless new points, evidence, or rules are brought up, i am going to ignore any more insistance on these two pointed out rules. I don't feel like arguing the same point over and over until it comes down to flaming (it's been quite a calm discussion thusfar, and I'm not claiming anyone has). So basically, in short, if you can't find me a rule to prove it as it is written, and not interpreted, then free oranges are a house rule.
runestar 10-19-07, 10:36 AM	Because some DMs' don't like the idea of multiple flaming. No rules prevent it. If nothing prevents it, then tell me why the designers bothered printing the pile of dung that is flaming burst, if you could simply tack on 2 flaming properties for the same cost, but better benefit? Even more outrageous would be the fiery burst weapon property in the ELH. Why suffer the x10 weapon cost, when you could simply add 6 flaming weapon properties instead?;) DM fiat has nothing to do with this. You never could stack the flaming weapon property, and you never will, barring some new errata. Arcane Strike effects do stack because their are non typed. Even untyped effects will not stack with each other if they are from the same source. This is why 2 divine graces will not stack. I believe it was clarified somewhere by the Sage, but I have trouble locating that particular article because everything has been replaced by 4e stuff. i challenge you to find me a rule that, as written, will not let the effects of a feat you can use more than once per round that does not give a modifier, function like a spell, but gives unnamed damage dice stack with itself. I call BullS. This has nothing to do with it being a feat or spell. Only the benefit matters. Arcane strike grants an unnamed bonus to your attack roll and damage. As I have pointed out earlier, unnamed bonuses will not stack if they are from the same source. Thus, even if you activated arcane strike multiple times, the bonus will not stack, you only benefit from the highest of all the values.
jaelis 10-19-07, 10:48 AM	If nothing prevents it, then tell me why the designers bothered printing the pile of dung that is flaming burst, if you could simply tack on 2 flaming properties for the same cost, but better benefit? There are several possible reasons: - They were mistaken about whether the bursts were any good. - They decided to put some "loser" enhancements in just so that people could feel good about not using them. - They thought the fun factor of burst abilities was enough to justify their inclusion. And if you claim those are all bogus, then I defy you to explain to me why they included mighty cleaving. :) But I still agree with you about arcane strike. To stretch the analogy, I don't have a problem saying multiple castings of flame arrow don't stack, even though I would allow flaming x2 arrows to be crafted. (The difference being, of course, that you have to pay substantially more for that second instance of flaming. So the second instance isn't really the same as the first.)
runestar 10-19-07, 10:58 AM	And if you claim those are all bogus, then I defy you to explain to me why they included mighty cleaving. My point is that while there are sucky enhancements which exist (yes, such as mighty cleaving), the degree of suckitude is not so bad to the extent that 1 enhancement is so obviously inferior or superior to another in just about every aspect. True, mighty cleaving is weak for its cost, but it confers a unique benefit which cannot be readily replicated (you need the great cleave feat, and not everyone might take it, and no other weapon enhancement exists which fulfills an identical purpose). This means that it can still be justified to apply mighty cleaving to your weapon, if you ever find a need for its benefit for whatever reason. The same cannot be said for flaming burst, were flaming allowed to stack.:P
Nephlite 10-19-07, 11:26 AM	My point is that while there are sucky enhancements which exist (yes, such as mighty cleaving), the degree of suckitude is not so bad to the extent that 1 enhancement is so obviously inferior or superior to another in just about every aspect. True, mighty cleaving is weak for its cost, but it confers a unique benefit which cannot be readily replicated (you need the great cleave feat, and not everyone might take it, and no other weapon enhancement exists which fulfills an identical purpose). This means that it can still be justified to apply mighty cleaving to your weapon, if you ever find a need for its benefit for whatever reason. The same cannot be said for flaming burst, were flaming allowed to stack.:P Flaming burst deals 1d6 + burst effect: that is kinda cool. Deals extra 1d10, 2d10, or 3d10. If using a Scythe: You deal 1d6 +3d10 (average 16.5) for +2 bonus. Averaging 20 fire damage on a Crit. Using a Battle Axe: You deal 1d6 +2d10 (average 11.0) for +2 bonus. Averaging 14.5 fire damage on a Crit. Longsword: You deal 1d6 +1d10 (average 5.5) for +2 bonus. Averaging 9 fire damage on a Crit. You'd need 3x Flaming to get 3d6 (10.5 fire on average total) to beat longsword and that is expensive and it still is less average of Batttle Axe or scythe. True, you don't need a Crit. Works on x2 weapons better than burst. So Burst is not as bad as said to be.
jaelis 10-19-07, 11:33 AM	So Burst is not as bad as said to be. Actually, I'm afraid it pretty much is. With a x2 weapon it's easy to compare: flaming burst is better than flaming x2 only if you crit about 60% of the time that you hit. (Since 1d6 is about 60% of 1d10). But that is nearly impossible: a keen rapier only lets you crit 30% of the time that you hit. To make it worthwhile, you'd have to take Power Critical several times.
runestar 10-19-07, 09:29 PM	So Burst is not as bad as said to be. Compare your math to say, a flaming, shock weapon and see the disparity. The burst enchantments are *very* bad. I just see no way of justifying them...
AtsuiShoto 10-19-07, 10:18 PM	A burst bow can be useful when employing an item of Hunter's Mercy, especially a burst bow modified to a x5 critical multiplier by Deepwood Sniper. Just an FYI.
runestar 10-19-07, 11:23 PM	What does hunter's mercy do?
jaelis 10-20-07, 12:31 AM	Makes your next hit with a bow an automatic crit. Ranger 1 spell, standard action to cast, one round duration. It's a good point, though DWS is technically 3.0, right?
runestar 10-20-07, 12:37 AM	So you can only make an attack every other round? Doesn't seem to game-breaking, even with a bow chock-full of burst enchantments and a means of critting reliably...
jaelis 10-20-07, 12:57 AM	I agree it's not broken. But it does seem like it could make the bursts worthwhile. Maybe... have to see it in action.
calronmoonflower 10-20-07, 01:40 AM	Yes, yes it does. Once again, this comes down to RAW vs RAI. By a literal reading it applies to effects, because it says effects. It really doesn't matter that later it refers to spells because the header is effects. If you look at the stacking effect for bonuses it also refers to spells as well. By what you have put forth here that would mean that all non-spell bonuses stack including the attack bonus from Arcane Strike. Two other effect come under this header as well. Damage reduction and energy resistance. No matter the source they don't stack unless the text specifically says others wise. These are the only two other non-spell/non-bonus effects that I could find.