Ask a Simple Question, Get a Simple Answer, Part 2

[TheWordSlinger]

Q246: Would a Warforged with the Adamantine Body feat be able to use a Least augment crystal without enchanting his composite plating?

[Surreal]

Why do you want to get rid of the subtype anyway?

He wants to add the Phrenic template to a Half-giant.

That's it

Phrenic paired with Primordial Giant template (Secrets of Xen'drik) would make for some tasty mental stat boosts

I find that these minor things are easily solved just by asking the DM...

player: can I apply the phrenic template to my half-giant?
DM: isn't that template restricted to non-psionic creatures?
player: well yeah, but that's a stupid rule anyways
DM: I dunno...
player: I brought beer
DM: done!

[Kuroimaken]

The joys of beer, huh?

[PhaedrusXY]

I find that these minor things are easily solved just by asking the DM...

player: can I apply the phrenic template to my half-giant?
DM: isn't that template restricted to non-psionic creatures?
player: well yeah, but that's a stupid rule anyways
DM: I dunno...
player: I brought beer
DM: done!

And barring that, you could fall back on the old "There is nothing that really competes with DM fellatio" from someone's sig. 

Edit: Ah, I see it was someone quoting Kuro, actually.

[The_Mad_Linguist]

Why do you want to get rid of the subtype anyway?

He wants to add the Phrenic template to a Half-giant.

That's it

Phrenic paired with Primordial Giant template (Secrets of Xen'drik) would make for some tasty mental stat boosts

Well, you could tack on the LA+0 unseelie fey template (Dragon Compendium) instead.  +2 cha + 2 dex, -2 str, -2con, plus scaling DR, a pretty decent (su) ability, and a chance at twice base flight speed and special vision.  Type changes to fey, which is pretty much a wash.

[Kuroimaken]

I find that these minor things are easily solved just by asking the DM...

player: can I apply the phrenic template to my half-giant?
DM: isn't that template restricted to non-psionic creatures?
player: well yeah, but that's a stupid rule anyways
DM: I dunno...
player: I brought beer
DM: done!

And barring that, you could fall back on the old "There is nothing that really competes with DM fellatio" from someone's sig. 

Edit: Ah, I see it was someone quoting Kuro, actually.

The funny thing is, I was quoting someone else in the same thread. For some reason when I quoted it people noticed it, though.

[PhaedrusXY]

I'm not so sure this is simple, but...

Q247: How many times per round can I gain the "ready vs a charge" benefit from the Steadfast Boots? Here is the text:

Furthermore, as long as you carry a two-handed weapon, you are treated as if you had readied that weapon against any
creature that charges you (and thus it deals double damage if your attack is successful), even if the weapon can't normally be
set against a charge.

It seems to me that this should work against every creature that charges me, no matter if it is 1 or 50, which is really crazy... crazy good that is!

Q248: Also, what happens if I actually do ready my weapon against a charge, and I have these boots? Do I get two attacks that do double damage vs. a creature that charges me (and then likely an AoO if I have more reach than they do)?

[Takanaki]

A247 - Hmm, if we're going by the text it appears it would work against everything. If we're using any measure of common sense it would be the first attack only. Of course, RAW =/= common sense.

A248 - If it's for my campaign, no =p

[PhaedrusXY]

A247 - Hmm, if we're going by the text it appears it would work against everything. If we're using any measure of common sense it would be the first attack only. Of course, RAW =/= common sense.

A248 - If it's for my campaign, no =p

LOL, exactly what I thought. Yeah, I think it's a bit overpowered to use in a real game, but I think that is literally how it should work, if you follow the rules slavishly. I added those boots at the last minute, then did a double take and went "WTF!".

[The_Mad_Linguist]

A247 - Hmm, if we're going by the text it appears it would work against everything. If we're using any measure of common sense it would be the first attack only. Of course, RAW =/= common sense.

A248 - If it's for my campaign, no =p

You might want to allow it if the attack kills the first charging creature.  Your spear goes RIGHT THROUGH the first enemy and impales the second.

[Surreal]

A247 - Hmm, if we're going by the text it appears it would work against everything. If we're using any measure of common sense it would be the first attack only. Of course, RAW =/= common sense.

A248 - If it's for my campaign, no =p

LOL, exactly what I thought. Yeah, I think it's a bit overpowered to use in a real game, but I think that is literally how it should work, if you follow the rules slavishly. I added those boots at the last minute, then did a double take and went "WTF!".

As a DM I would probably allow it, since for the most part I think monsters will be smart enough to not keep running at the guy who seems to be able to counterattack each charge.

[Negative Zero]

Q249: Does the spell Enlarge Weapon ( Complete Scoundrel 96 ) increase reach?

[Kuroimaken]

A247 - Hmm, if we're going by the text it appears it would work against everything. If we're using any measure of common sense it would be the first attack only. Of course, RAW =/= common sense.

A248 - If it's for my campaign, no =p

Given that the text for readying a spear against a charge basically means you ready an action for it, I'd have to say no on the first count, and probably two on the second. If you actually do ready the spear you basically have the same readied action twice, which happens twice. If two critters acted on the same initiative and the first one dies, though, you could probably attack each once.

[PhaedrusXY]

But even if I'm not readying an action, I'm treated as if I am readying one against any creature that charges me. So, it doesn't cost me an action, and it doesn't "deactivate" just because someone already charged me, because it never cost me anything in the first place, and it is an "always active" ability of the magic item.

I could see not allowing it as a DM, sure, but as for how it is written, I think you'd at least get an attack against anyone that charged you, no matter how many of them there were. I can see how you'd argue that you can't also actually ready an action, though.

[Operation Shoestring]

Q249: Does the spell Enlarge Weapon ( Complete Scoundrel 96 ) increase reach?

A249 Not unless it specifies that it does.  Reach is based on the wielder's size, iirc.

[Ivory Knight]

By following a Link in the Weapon Enchantments Thread, this came to mind
Q 250: What do I need, to make a Warforged Kensai's Unarmed Strike work with Metalline?
Possible Answers, that crossed my mind: Battlefist component, Silver Tracery Feat

[Operation Shoestring]

Q 251  What happens when you combine Kensai and Soulknife.  If you dismiss/dissolve your soulblade, so you lose all those Kensai benefits and have to spend XP all over again?

(If it does, that might just be the worst class combo EVER)

[CannibalSmith]

A251: It could be argued that it's the same blade all the time that's manifested and dismissed. By RAW, that is not the case. But I don't think there exists a DM that would rule this RAW. In all other aspects the combo is very good. Kensai lets have you any enchantment from any book on your weapon (not reassignable though).

[Bozwevial]

Q252: If I have the Pounce ability, and I initiate a War Master's Charge, does the extra damage apply to each one of my attacks? What if my allies have Pounce?

[archangel.arcanis]

Q253:How does Quintessence interact with object created by spells/powers with limited durations?  Its example is a key for 1 dollop, what if that key were made by Major Creation and kept within the quintessence beyond the normal duration?