Ring of Shocking Grasp as a Second Weapon
kje...@gothamcity.jsc.nasa.gov
Dexterity: 18. He has just found his third magic item, a Ring of
Shocking Grasp. I asked Norm, the DM, a question which has him
stumped:
Can a character use a Ring of Shocking Grasp as a second weapon?
-- Ken Jenks, NASA/JSC/GM2, Space Shuttle Program Office
kje...@gothamcity.jsc.nasa.gov (713) 483-4368
"Orcs are cruel and hate living things in general,
but they particularly hate elves and will always
attack them in preference to other creatures."
-- AD&D Monster Manual 1, p. 76.
The WolF
Sure, why not? Can a character swing with a sword and then punch his opponent?
Not usually, but it should be possible in some cases.
Jon WolF - Si tu voudrait gagner, pour quoi tu joue avec moi? - M. Loup
RedSwordTarga
>Ko-Ko is a 2nd Edition Bard, 5th level, with Strength: 8, and
>Dexterity: 18. He has just found his third magic item, a Ring of
>Shocking Grasp. I asked Norm, the DM, a question which has him
>stumped:
>Can a character use a Ring of Shocking Grasp as a second weapon?
I don't see why not. Of course, the modifiers are going to be
a pain. Also, remember that that will be an unarmed attack.
That means your opponent gets a +4 to hit you and if he
does, it spoils your attack.
Axly
Jacek Warecki
Are you asking if could combine the ring attack with the
weapon attack(ie. use the sword as a conductor)?? Any one
have any ideas on this.
Jack
Chuck Charbeneau
In article <1993Apr1.0...@aio.jsc.nasa.gov>,
kje...@gothamcity.jsc.nasa.gov says:
[stuff deleted...]
>Can a character use a Ring of Shocking Grasp as a second weapon?
>
Well I'd have to say no, unless he has a double weapon attack proficiency
or at least off hand use. It would probably be ruled as a punch attack
recieving the usual minus for off hand..etc..what the hell, don't say no...
ROLE THE DICE anything's possible, it's up to the DM to decide HOW possible.
Just my opinion...
Chuck.
cach...@mtus5.bitnet
cach...@major.cs.mtu.edu
Rob McNeur
> Ko-Ko is a 2nd Edition Bard, 5th level, with Strength: 8, and
> Dexterity: 18. He has just found his third magic item, a Ring of
> Shocking Grasp. I asked Norm, the DM, a question which has him
> stumped:
>
> Can a character use a Ring of Shocking Grasp as a second weapon?
>
> -- Ken Jenks, NASA/JSC/GM2, Space Shuttle Program Office
> kje...@gothamcity.jsc.nasa.gov (713) 483-4368
>
One of my thief characters ended up with one of these rings as his sole
magic item (at level 7 at the time). He always wore it on his sword hand,
and anytime he made a backstab, would trigger the ring as well.
The ring description states that the charge can be directed down a conductor,
so the charge goes down the ring into the backstabbee.
This effectively means that the charge hits even if you can't penetrate
the armour. So the ring can do damage even if the sword doesn't as long as
he hits AC10 (modified by the creatures dex and any plusses on the armour).
Of course, if he penetrates with the sword and does treble backstab damage
as well, he's MUCH happier. :-)
Rob McNeur
R...@ccc.govt.nz
George Vacek
Well, if memory serves, armour conducts the "shock", according to rulebooks
(1st.ed). If armour can, why not weapons. So probably one could discharge
the shock through their weapon, and the opponents armour. Thus a free
ring attack, not a second attack with modifiers. Considering parried blows
and the affects of armour, the weapon attack wouldn't even need to "hit" for
the shock to work fine. At least that's how I would DM it.
Now before I get flamed for what may be considered a munchkinish ruling,
remember, I wasn't the one that gave the party the ring. I just said how
I would DM it IF they had such a ring.
Croag the Glowing
va...@athena.cs.uga.edu
my opinions are my own. -- croag
(better .sign in progress)
kje...@gothamcity.jsc.nasa.gov
: >Can a character use a Ring of Shocking Grasp as a second weapon?
Chuck Charbeneau (CACH...@MTUS5.BITNET) replied:
: Well I'd have to say no, unless he has a double weapon attack
: proficiency or at least off hand use. It would probably be ruled as a
: punch attack recieving the usual minus for off hand..etc..what the
: hell, don't say no... ROLE THE DICE anything's possible, it's up to
: the DM to decide HOW possible.
: Just my opinion...
: Chuck.
: cach...@mtus5.bitnet cach...@major.cs.mtu.edu
I've never heard of a "double weapon attack proficiency" or "off hand
use." Are these your house rules, or am I missing something in AD&D2?
A "punch attack recieving [sic] the usual minus for off hand" was what
I had in mind. Would I do punching damage in addition to Shocking
Grasp damage? Would a weapon-weilding creature be able to "fend off"
this attack? (In general, can a weapon weilding creature fend off
touch spells?) (Or is the concept of fending off attacks left over
from AD&D1 and not in the AD&D2 rules at all?)
-- Ken Jenks, NASA/JSC/GM2, Space Shuttle Program Office
kje...@gothamcity.jsc.nasa.gov (713) 483-4368
"Orcs are fecund and create many cross-breeds,
most of the offspring of such being typically orcish."
-- AD&D Player's Handbook 1, p. 17
David Covin
Yes, the rule states that the damage could be inflicted trough any
conductor, but I suppose a sword is wrapped with leather or something
leather-like material where you handle it. So my rule will probably be:
you can discharge trough your weapon provided you remove your leather
gloves (if any), and you wield your nice and sharp sword from the blade
(not a safe thing to do!).
What do you think about that?
Fine, but what prevents the PCs from simply *unwrapping* the leather
on the sword hilt? Or wrapping some wire around the base of the blade
and across the leather grip?
--
David Covin co...@tartarus.uchicago.edu
Rob McNeur
>
> Yes, the rule states that the damage could be inflicted trough any
> conductor, but I suppose a sword is wrapped with leather or something
> leather-like material where you handle it. So my rule will probably be:
> you can discharge trough your weapon provided you remove your leather
> gloves (if any), and you wield your nice and sharp sword from the blade
> (not a safe thing to do!).
>
> What do you think about that?
sword. These will transmit current quite well. Also, many weapons are held
with the hands close to the quillions (crossbar) or pommel, these can also
allow the current into the body of the sword.
And there is no reason why the whole thing could not be a steel handle.
(uncomfortable and probably slippery when you got sweaty but still usable).
Just a thought
Rob McNeur
R...@ccc.govt.nz
Red Sword Targa
>Most swords have rivets holding the main handgrip onto the main body of the
>sword. These will transmit current quite well. Also, many weapons are held
>with the hands close to the quillions (crossbar) or pommel, these can also
>allow the current into the body of the sword.
>And there is no reason why the whole thing could not be a steel handle.
>(uncomfortable and probably slippery when you got sweaty but still usable).
A point to be considered here is that a ring of shocking grasp doesn't
confer any particular immunity to electricity. You have a neat little
raised disk in the center of your palm from which the current flows.
Send that current running through a piece of metal you are holding onto
and it sure seems like you'd give yourself a nice little shock.
Axly
Rob McNeur
In article <C55t...@raistlin.udev.cdc.com>, g...@shamash.cdc.com (Gianluca
Sacco) writes:
>
> Yes, the rule states that the damage could be inflicted trough any
> conductor, but I suppose a sword is wrapped with leather or something
> leather-like material where you handle it. So my rule will probably be:
> you can discharge trough your weapon provided you remove your leather
> gloves (if any), and you wield your nice and sharp sword from the blade
> (not a safe thing to do!).
>
> What do you think about that?
Most swords have rivets holding the main handgrip onto the main body of the
sword. These will transmit current quite well. Also, many weapons are held
with the hands close to the quillions (crossbar) or pommel, these can also
allow the current into the body of the sword.
And there is no reason why the whole thing could not be a steel handle.
(uncomfortable and probably slippery when you got sweaty but still usable).
Just a thought
Rob McNeur
R...@ccc.govt.nz
Red Sword Targa
r...@ccc.govt.nz (Rob McNeur) writes:
>Most swords have rivets holding the main handgrip onto the main body of the
>sword. These will transmit current quite well. Also, many weapons are held
>with the hands close to the quillions (crossbar) or pommel, these can also
>allow the current into the body of the sword.
>And there is no reason why the whole thing could not be a steel handle.
>(uncomfortable and probably slippery when you got sweaty but still usable).
A point to be considered here is that a ring of shocking grasp doesn't
Marceivind Cruz Evensen
>Organization: Christchurch City Council, New Zealand.
>
>In article <C55t...@raistlin.udev.cdc.com>, g...@shamash.cdc.com (Gianluca
>Sacco) writes:
>>
>> Yes, the rule states that the damage could be inflicted trough any
>> conductor, but I suppose a sword is wrapped with leather or something
>> leather-like material where you handle it. So my rule will probably be:
>> you can discharge trough your weapon provided you remove your leather
>> gloves (if any), and you wield your nice and sharp sword from the blade
>> (not a safe thing to do!).
>>
>> What do you think about that?
>sword. These will transmit current quite well. Also, many weapons are held
>with the hands close to the quillions (crossbar) or pommel, these can also
>allow the current into the body of the sword.
>And there is no reason why the whole thing could not be a steel handle.
>(uncomfortable and probably slippery when you got sweaty but still usable).
>
Why limit this to swords? A staff with metal bands would work, as
well as polearms. As a matter of fact, I seem to remember a demon
(I can't recall the name) which would skewer someone and then cast
a shocking grasp through it.
-- Marc
Lei Wang
>
> A point to be considered here is that a ring of shocking grasp doesn't
> confer any particular immunity to electricity. You have a neat little
> raised disk in the center of your palm from which the current flows.
> Send that current running through a piece of metal you are holding onto
> and it sure seems like you'd give yourself a nice little shock.
Sorry, I'd have to disagree here.
Your body is a good condition on its own, although not as good as steel.
The disk in the center of your palm connects to the rest of your body, and it's
not there by itself. (otherwise if you hold anything metal in your hands,
the current will go from the extrusion to metal to your fingers/wrist, and
there goes)
--
l2w...@napier.UWaterloo.ca
ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
ME: Univ. of Waterloo YOU: Huh? o=> ME: in Canada, YOU: Huh?
ME: in Ontario, YOU: Huh? /o/ ME: up north! YOU: Aaaaaahhh...
ME: near Toronto, YOU: Huh? ==o Huh??
kje...@gothamcity.jsc.nasa.gov
McNeur) and others mention using a metallic weapon to conduct the
electricity from a Shocking Grasp into the target. This seems like a
fine idea, and it looks like it would work according to the rules, but
my DM has explicitly stated that it would not work for this particular
ring. Since my bard has an extraordinary DEX (his only 18), I'm
interested in the "second weapon" aspect.
We tried it last Saturday. +2 shortsword in right hand, Ring of
Shocking Grasp in left. Before I thought better of it, I almost tried
to tag a mummy with my bare left hand. When used against other
opponents, it did not seem to do an outrageous amount of damage,
especially when compared with the +1 dagger which would be my second
weapon if I were not trying the Shocking Grasp. But I am a little
concerned about the idea of using the Shocking Grasp in the same round
as swinging a weapon. This might set an ugly precedent.
Has anybody else ever tried this in a campaign?
-- Ken Jenks, NASA/JSC/GM2, Space Shuttle Program Office
kje...@gothamcity.jsc.nasa.gov (713) 483-4368
"Three Rings for the Elven Kings under the sky,
Seven for the Dwarf-lords in their halls of stone,
Nine for Mortal Men doomed to die,
One for the Dark Lord on his dark throne.
In the Land of Mordor, where the Shadows Lie."
-- "Lord of the Rings," J.R.R. Tolkien
David Covin
Red Sword Targa (dv5...@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu), r...@ccc.govt.nz (Rob
McNeur) and others mention using a metallic weapon to conduct the
electricity from a Shocking Grasp into the target. This seems like a
fine idea, and it looks like it would work according to the rules, but
my DM has explicitly stated that it would not work for this particular
ring. Since my bard has an extraordinary DEX (his only 18), I'm
interested in the "second weapon" aspect.
We tried it last Saturday. +2 shortsword in right hand, Ring of
Shocking Grasp in left. Before I thought better of it, I almost tried
to tag a mummy with my bare left hand. When used against other
opponents, it did not seem to do an outrageous amount of damage,
especially when compared with the +1 dagger which would be my second
weapon if I were not trying the Shocking Grasp. But I am a little
concerned about the idea of using the Shocking Grasp in the same round
as swinging a weapon. This might set an ugly precedent.
Has anybody else ever tried this in a campaign?
Hm. I'm surprised it didn't do much better than your +1 dagger.
1d8+n (n=8? I don't remember), average damage 4.5+n, vs.
1d4+1, average damage 3.5...
I actually allowed a PC to use 2 weapons, one in conjunction with
a ring of shocking grasp, in a short-lived campaign once. It *did*
become a problem when the PC was possessed by a ghost and turned on
the party...
We've traditionally allowed fighter/magic-users to discharge
the spell through a sword, though. The spell explicitly says that
its effect will last until it's discharged, so the mage can cast
the spell in one round and then attack in the next; this doesn't
significantly increase the caster's average damage/round, though.
Does the ring's description state that the charged extrusion will
remain until a strike? If so, you could use your tactic even
if you can't activate the ring and use the sword in the same round.
One could argue that the ring doesn't require much effort on your
part, just a command word; but then I suppose other folks might
want to extend that to *their* rings. "Why can't I use my ring
of spell storing: flamestrike and attack with my sword in the
same round? My dex is high enough..."
Then again, the DM could readily respond that the shocking grasp
ring is "special" in this way, being designed for hand-to-hand
combat, whereas most other magical devices are not. This would
avoid setting the precedent. It sounds like your use of the ring
is sufficiently limited that Shocking Grasp rings themselves
aren't likely to get out of hand in the campaign (particularly
if you forget against another mummy... :)
--
David Covin co...@tartarus.uchicago.edu
Lei Wang
> In article <73434516...@his.com>, Red.Swo...@f716.n109.z1.his.com (Red Sword Targa) writes:
> >
> > A point to be considered here is that a ring of shocking grasp doesn't
> > confer any particular immunity to electricity. You have a neat little
> > raised disk in the center of your palm from which the current flows.
> > Send that current running through a piece of metal you are holding onto
> > and it sure seems like you'd give yourself a nice little shock.
>
> Sorry, I'd have to disagree here.
>
> Your body is a good condition on its own, although not as good as steel.
Conductor, that is.
Ron
>Shocking Grasp in left. Before I thought better of it, I almost tried
>to tag a mummy with my bare left hand. When used against other
>opponents, it did not seem to do an outrageous amount of damage,
>especially when compared with the +1 dagger which would be my second
>weapon if I were not trying the Shocking Grasp. But I am a little
>concerned about the idea of using the Shocking Grasp in the same round
>as swinging a weapon. This might set an ugly precedent.
>Has anybody else ever tried this in a campaign?
We've done it both ways, and it didn't overbalance the campaign. Especially
in the hands of a thief, with their horrible thac0 and low Str it doesn't
come close to rivaling the damage done by a fighter. In the hands of a
fighter it's nice, but since our ring can only function three times a day
it's not that important (beyond the visual affect!).
- Ron
MVS...@psuvm.psu.edu
spells? I once knew a druid who would stack shocking grasp, poison,
harm, cause (insert here) wounds, cause blindness, etc....
The only problem is if a fly were to land on your face or something,
and you swatted it...heh. Oh, also he was a druid of Math Mathonwy
(that's how he got the mage touch spells).
Martin Schulte
Lei Wang
Most of them can be stacked, but cause wounds, blindness, and poison
has to be used the round that they are cast, and do not have duration
beyond that round.
TimeLord
Was I the weilder of the Shoking Grasp ring, I would wear in not on my hand,
but on top of a leather glove - thus all the current would go through the
sword, doing damage at the moment of melee attack. Non-conductive armor
like leather would protect its owner from shock if melee attack missed - but
metal armor would conduct electricity even in case of a miss.
-------
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
== BEST LUCK, EARTHWORMS!!! YOU LOOK LIKE YOU NEED ALL THE LUCK YOU ==
== CAN GET!.. (GDR - GRINNING, DUCKING & RUNNING ;-) ==
== ==
== *** T I M E L O R D *** ==
== X3...@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU HURR-GHA (MONGOLIAN-'KILL THE ENEMY!")==
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Petter Jon Mandt
-p
TimeLord
>
> Hha-ah!
>
>Was I the weilder of the Shoking Grasp ring, I would wear in not on my hand,
>but on top of a leather glove - thus all the current would go through the
>sword, doing damage at the moment of melee attack. Non-conductive armor
>like leather would protect its owner from shock if melee attack missed - but
>metal armor would conduct electricity even in case of a miss.
My own post. Sorry. Correction:
in case of a melee miss shock is conducted only if (attack roll < {Total AC -
Armor AC}). This way if a blow was stopped by metal armour - shock is conducted
but if the attack was stopped by magical protection or dexterity bonus, the
sword never touched the opponent - thus electrical shock does not take place. I
guess items like ring or cloak of protection, boots of speed, cloak of
displacement would also protect from the shock.
Gadget
>>Was I the weilder of the Shoking Grasp ring, I would wear in not on my hand,
>>but on top of a leather glove - thus all the current would go through the
>>sword, doing damage at the moment of melee attack. Non-conductive armor
>>like leather would protect its owner from shock if melee attack missed - but
>>metal armor would conduct electricity even in case of a miss.
>My own post. Sorry. Correction:
>in case of a melee miss shock is conducted only if (attack roll < {Total AC -
>Armor AC}). This way if a blow was stopped by metal armour - shock is conducted
> but if the attack was stopped by magical protection or dexterity bonus, the
>sword never touched the opponent - thus electrical shock does not take place. I
> guess items like ring or cloak of protection, boots of speed, cloak of
>displacement would also protect from the shock.
I used to use a ring of shocking grasp in combinatin with an unarmed fighting
style. while we were fighting monsters, questions of armor, swords etc
conducting were never raised. However, I do remember that the ring causes
a circular disk to appear on the palm, which shocks the touched person. So
wearing a gauntlet could only protect the person you are attacking!!
Gadget