# Returning Magic Weapons + Full Attack



## phadeout (Dec 31, 2004)

I'm a little confused as to how the Returning enhancement for magic weapons reallys works.  The description could be taken in different ways from the DMG.  According to they way I've seen Returning items work in NPC examples (Take the Master Thrower character example from Complete Warrior, using the Returning Javelin, PG 59).

It appears that in the example characters, Returning will let you make a Full Attack using the same weapon in one round.  So if you have +6/+1 BAB, you could throw a Returning dagger, have it return, and throw it again in the same round to make 2 attacks.

When I read the descriptive text on Returning, and sit and think about it, it somehow seems that the item returns on the next round... BUT, at the same time the text says on the next "turn" not round, so maybe you should be allowed to make a full attack with returning a weapon?

"... It returns to the thrower just before the creature's next turn (and is therefore ready to use again in that turn).  ... "

Just want to make sure that I'm correct on the "can be used to make a full attack".


----------



## Khaalis (Dec 31, 2004)

I'll be interested to see the responses on this as well. I've always taken as the DMG states with turn meaning round, so only one shot per round. If you want full attack, you need multiple items.  This would make the most sense since if you are a master throwing and hurling daggers you will need multiple daggers for a full attack. With returning daggers you at least only need one set of daggers (one per iterative attack), not dozens of daggers.


----------



## phadeout (Dec 31, 2004)

I've been looking more closely at the example character in CW, and under possesions what do I see?  Oh... jee... "3" Returning +1 Javelins....

Still, I wanna see the replies too.


----------



## Hypersmurf (Dec 31, 2004)

The weapon doesn't return until just before your next turn.

Of course, if you throw more than two, you have a problem... since they all return at the same time, and you can only catch them if you have a free hand.  If you throw six, then as soon as you catch the first two, you don't have any more free hands...

-Hyp.


----------



## Khaalis (Dec 31, 2004)

phadeout said:
			
		

> I've been looking more closely at the example character in CW, and under possesions what do I see?  Oh... jee... "3" Returning +1 Javelins....
> 
> Still, I wanna see the replies too.




This is what I thought but since I dont have the book handy at work, I didnt want to comment on it. This supports my original view. One toss per weapon.


----------



## shilsen (Dec 31, 2004)

Hypersmurf said:
			
		

> The weapon doesn't return until just before your next turn.
> 
> Of course, if you throw more than two, you have a problem... since they all return at the same time, and you can only catch them if you have a free hand.  If you throw six, then as soon as you catch the first two, you don't have any more free hands...
> 
> -Hyp.



 Still, it's a good strategy as long as you have lots of hit points


----------



## Klaus (Dec 31, 2004)

Actually, they don't return at the same time. They return split-seconds apart (same delay you took to throw them). So it would be like two guys juggling, say, 4 bowling pins, except that there is no second guy and the bowling pins return on their own.


----------



## Sammael (Dec 31, 2004)

Where does it say in the _returning_ description that a character must have a free hand to catch it? What's stopping a character with _returning shuriken_, for example, to "catch" them into his shuriken belt pouch by holding it up in the air or something?

Furthermore, would you let someone with returning javelins catch more than one in his hand, provided he made a successful Dex check (perhaps with a penalty for each javelin already held)?


----------



## HellHound (Dec 31, 2004)

Binford the Giant, a halfling psion / rogue in our longest-running 3.0 / 3.5 campaign (now in semi-retirement at the dizzying heights of level 23), was the master of skiprocks.

Returning Skiprocks.

We always ruled that they returned 6 full seconds after being thrown. So he would throw four of them in a round with a full attack, and then end the round with none... and then just start throwing them again as they appeared in his hands. 

(footnote: at level 1, it was comical how many kobolds were slain by skiprock ricochets - the only thing more lethal was the nature cleric's hawk).


----------



## Khaalis (Dec 31, 2004)

Sammael said:
			
		

> Where does it say in the _returning_ description that a character must have a free hand to catch it? What's stopping a character with _returning shuriken_, for example, to "catch" them into his shuriken belt pouch by holding it up in the air or something?
> 
> Furthermore, would you let someone with returning javelins catch more than one in his hand, provided he made a successful Dex check (perhaps with a penalty for each javelin already held)?




I believe the statement refers to this sentance. If you have no free hands, you cant catch it. In your example of the pouch, I would still consider this a "free hand" as it is specifically being used to catch the item.

_"If the character can’t catch it, or if the character has moved since throwing it, the weapon drops to the ground in the square from which it was thrown."_

Personally on your second question... yes I would allow them to catch more than one Javelin on return (probably up to as many as 4 for reality sake). Javelins are relatively small weapons, and they return read for use, which means to me that they appear in an easy to grab manner in your hand, not that they are hurtling towards you.

However, I would say that it takes a move-action to separate the multiple Javelins (effectively sheathing the extras by say sticking them point down inthe ground) to be ready to actually throw one. A free action if they want to just drop them. However, if they drop them, picking them up is a move action that will cause an AoO.

JMHO. YMMV.


----------



## phadeout (Dec 31, 2004)

This is where a "Quick Sheath feat" would really really come in handy...   

I can see a guy throwing 4 daggers and then as they return to his hand you see them almost instantly disappear into wrist sheaths.... coo.


----------



## Diirk (Dec 31, 2004)

Sammael said:
			
		

> What's stopping a character with _returning shuriken_, for example, to "catch" them into his shuriken belt pouch by holding it up in the air or something?




Probably the fact that shurikens, being treated as ammo, are destroyed when they hit their target. And 50% are destroyed even on a miss.


----------



## Sejs (Dec 31, 2004)

> This is where a "Quick Sheath feat" would really really come in handy...




Or ranks in Perform (Juggling)


----------



## Sammael (Dec 31, 2004)

Ordinary shurkiens, maybe. Magical shurikens are enhanced differently than magical arrows and bolts, which leads me to believe they aren't destroyed.

BTW, there is a returning arrow in a relatively recent WotC sourcebook, I just can't remember which one.


----------



## Hypersmurf (Dec 31, 2004)

Klaus said:
			
		

> Actually, they don't return at the same time. They return split-seconds apart (same delay you took to throw them).




No, they don't.  They all return "just before the creature’s next turn".

And it specifically states that it's a free action to catch them, and you can't take free actions outside your own turn.  So if you throw six Returning daggers in one round, then just before your next turn, six daggers return.  All six return before it's your next turn and you can take free actions to start catching.

You can't catch one, throw, then have the next one return.  They explicitly all return before you're able to catch even the first one.

-Hyp.


----------



## Hypersmurf (Dec 31, 2004)

Sammael said:
			
		

> Magical shurikens are enhanced differently than magical arrows and bolts...




No, they aren't.



> ... which leads me to believe they aren't destroyed.




Yes, they are.

_Although they are thrown weapons, shuriken are treated as ammunition for the purposes of drawing them, crafting masterwork or *otherwise special versions* of them (see Masterwork Weapons), and *what happens to them after they are thrown*._

-Hyp.


----------



## Sammael (Dec 31, 2004)

Hypersmurf said:
			
		

> No, they aren't.



Alright, when shuriken are enhanced by magic, _how many are affected at once_?

If they work like ammunition, 50 shuriken are affected in place of a single permanent weapon. Seems an awful lot for 301 gp, right? But it can't be just one, if they work _exactly the same as ammunition_.


----------



## coyote6 (Dec 31, 2004)

Hypersmurf said:
			
		

> They all return "just before the creature’s next turn".
> 
> And it specifically states that it's a free action to catch them, and you can't take free actions outside your own turn.




So how do you catch _any_? They return before your next turn, it's a free action to catch 'em, but you can't take a free action outside your turn, and they return outside your turn. Ergo, you can't catch a _returning_ weapon -- no?


----------



## Hypersmurf (Jan 1, 2005)

coyote6 said:
			
		

> So how do you catch _any_? They return before your next turn, it's a free action to catch 'em, but you can't take a free action outside your turn, and they return outside your turn. Ergo, you can't catch a _returning_ weapon -- no?




You can't catch it before it returns.  Therefore you have to catch it after it returns.

It returns just before your turn... and then it's your turn, and you catch it.

The problem is when more than two return, and you've only got two hands... because they _all_ return before your turn.  They don't come in in a nice, evenly-spaced sequence while you're capable of dealing with one before the next arrives.  They all arrive before you can act.

-Hyp.


----------



## Hypersmurf (Jan 1, 2005)

Sammael said:
			
		

> Alright, when shuriken are enhanced by magic, _how many are affected at once_?




50.



> If they work like ammunition, 50 shuriken are affected in place of a single permanent weapon.




That's right.



> Seems an awful lot for 301 gp, right?




That's right.  The table would appear to have a cut'n'paste error from 3E.

A single masterwork shuriken only costs 7gp in 3.5.  50 cost 350gp.  301 is not a figure that can be calculated with any relevance in 3.5... but it was the cost of a masterwork shuriken in 3E, and appeared on the table as such.

Correct it to Shuriken (50): +350gp, and you'll have no more problem 



> But it can't be just one, if they work _exactly the same as ammunition_.




Right.  It's 50.  For +350gp.

-Hyp.


----------



## Lonely Tylenol (Jan 1, 2005)

Doesn't mean you can't catch them.  I can hold a handful of knives in my left hand and throw them one by one with my right.  Why can't I catch them all with my left hand?


----------



## argo (Jan 1, 2005)

Hypersmurf said:
			
		

> The problem is when more than two return, and you've only got two hands... because they _all_ return before your turn.  They don't come in in a nice, evenly-spaced sequence while you're capable of dealing with one before the next arrives.  They all arrive before you can act.
> 
> -Hyp.




Yes but you need a _free_ hand to catch the returning weapon, not an _empty_ hand.  Free is one of those game terms that isn't very well defined and is left up to DM judgement.  For example, you can hold an object (like a javalin) in the same hand that you have a light shield equiped.  Shouldn't you then be able to catch a javalin that is tossed to you using you shield hand.  Saying that free=empty is certainly logical but not exclusively so.  I probably would't let someone catch multiple greatswords in one hand but I would have little problem having someone catch multiple daggers.

Besides, who says that if you throw multiple returning daggers that they all don't return neatly stacked and in a position where it is easy to grab all of them at once?  It's magic after all.


----------



## Ezieer (Jan 2, 2005)

coyote6 said:
			
		

> So how do you catch _any_? They return before your next turn, it's a free action to catch 'em, but you can't take a free action outside your turn, and they return outside your turn. Ergo, you can't catch a _returning_ weapon -- no?




 Free Action: An action that takes no appreciable time at all. You can take as many free actions during your turn as your DM will allow, but you cannot take free actions during someone else's turn.

1 free action: A fairly rare casting time. When you cast a spell with a casting time this short, you still can use a standard or full-round action during your turn to cast another spell,. You cannot, however, cast another spell with a casting time of 1 free action. Casting a spell as a free action doesn't provoke an attack of opportunity. Normally, you can use a free action only during your own turn, but some spells with casting times of 1 free action can be cast anytime (feather fall, for example). In this case, casting the spell during someone else's turn doesn't count as the one spell you can cast as a free action during your next turn.

So applying this to catching the weapon... you still have a full round action available to you after catching the weapons. However, the DM can put a restriction on how many free actions you can take (catching each weapon and/or how many you can hold in your hand. 
I would rule the following. One in the throwing hand and a few in the other as per weapon.

Dart/Shuriken (less than 1 lb.) - 1/4
Dagger (less than 2lb. to 1 lb) - 1/3
Bolas/Javelin/Light Hammer/Throwing Axe (less than 3lb. to 2 lb)  - 1/2
Club/Net/Spear/Trident (3lbs or more) - 1/1​
Note that Mithril weapons now have advantages as they reduce weight. Finally a use for Mithril weapons... Of course this was always the case with Darkwood armor... but now also with weapons.


----------



## phadeout (Jan 3, 2005)

Well, I guess one thing we all have to remember is they are magic items and this is D&D.  I mean come on, if an archer can accurately shoot 4 arrows in one pull of the string (realisticly impossible due to the way a bow string is shaped - and if you wanna argue about that, make a new thread on Manyshot), I think that you could catch multiple returning daggers/darts at the very least if they are Magic, especially darts!  I guess if you feel that a rule needs to be added, then make one, like the quick sheath or something.  If you don't feel it necessary, great.

I guess if you want, you could create a new magic item, like a Glove of Darts, that you can use to conjure/create an unlimited number of darts (or maybe even Javelins, Daggers if you like) and just keep throwing them, one round after they are thrown, they disappear.  Kinda like the "ever full Quiver" magic items that are very cliche in fantasy...  The items created could even be made from something else, like Ice or Force.


----------



## aco175 (Jan 3, 2005)

That is sort of like the way I always ruled them.  After they hit, they fade out and return to the owner's hand just before the next turn.  Some items, like daggers return to the sheath.  I mostly did this to do away with people trying to catch them and intercept their flying path.  Never seemed to have a problem with it.  Of course, after you throw a weapon you now have nothing to defend yourself with.


----------



## Klaus (Jan 3, 2005)

I just make 'em turn around and return.

Reading a Fafhrd & Gray Mouser comic where Faf uses a returning hand axe (against a devourer in Bazaar of the Bizarre) just makes it too much fun!

Faf (handing the axe to Mouser): Amuse yourself, clown. And here's your slapstick!


----------



## CapnZapp (Oct 21, 2017)

Looking at this from the year :2017:, I am slightly amused. 

Of course "Returning" is only cumbersome and unfun if you can't use a single weapon for all your attacks in any given turn. Not to mention if you forgot you couldn't move, or if you no longer have a free hand. Cumbersome. Unfun.

Luckily, in 5th edition this was fixed, since the Dwarven Thrower sets a sensible precedent:

"Immediately after the attack, the weapon flies back to your hand." 

You throw it to make an attack, and then you... wait for it - *hold it again*, ready for your next attack. You never have to catch it, you never have to keep track of from where you threw it, you never have to consider what each hand is holding, and you never have to have more than one weapon. 

All this thread's questions simply evaporate. Talk about an improvement!

A generalized "returning" D&D magic item quality should be exactly like this, IMNSHO, regardless of edition.


----------



## Greenfield (Oct 24, 2017)

Consider this version of the Full Attack:

I take some (but not all) of my iterative attacks with my spear/axe/other weapon, and finish off the set by throwing the weapon at an opponent.

Since I took a Full Attack sequence I can't move more than 5 feet in the round, so the "can't move" thing really isn't much of a penalty.  I probably want to take that five foot step in the middle of my attack sequence anyway by stepping back from the person/people/things I was in close melee with, so they don't AoO me when I throw the weapon.

Next round it returns to me at the start of my action and I'm ready to go again, another full-attack sequence.

Reading the full text of the ability though it's clear to me that it returns on your next action.

As for three returning Javelins?  Not an issue:  Throw all three in your action.  Next action you catch the first one and drop it immediately (swift/free action to drop something), then catch the other two.  

Now can you repeat that free action in the same round if, for example, you are using a shield?  Or if you have more than three weapons thrown?  That's up to the DM.

We used to joke about the "Free Dismount" teleport maneuver:  If you can make a DC20 Ride check your mount/dismount action from a horse is considered a free/swift action.  So if you have a line of horses, side by side, and can repeat that same "free" mount/dismount, you can travel from one end of that line to the other using essentially no time.

So there's good reason to limit the number of times a "free" action can be repeated.  Dropping returning weapons would be a good one to allow, IMHO.

Similarly, shifting a weapon like a hand axe or javelin from one hand to the other might also be counted as "free" for situations like this, thus allowing a skilled thrower to catch with one hand and accumulate with the other:  A person can reasonably hold a couple of javelin in one hand, if the number is sane.  (You won't hold 20, but you could hold two or three.)

If you couldn't then throwers would be limited to two hurled weapons:  The act of drawing the weapon is considered a Move action, so you have to be able to hold several if you plan to throw them all in a round.


----------



## Random Bystander (Oct 27, 2017)

Windows Vista would be a good time to release some electronic tools. I mean, official ones. Does anyone know if it's gonna be any good?

[sblock]Just to mess with the timeline some more...[/sblock]


----------



## Greenfield (Oct 27, 2017)

Hey, it's Halloween season.  Thread-necromancy is seasonal, isn't it?


----------



## Tony Vargas (Oct 28, 2017)

I took considerable pains to build a 'knife thrower' character in 3e, cobbled together from fighter, ranger & rogue.  The result was not exactly awesome, and it did end up carrying plenty of normal daggers in addition to a pair of returning daggers (made of different materials, natch), for exactly the reasons this thread goes into.  You had to stand relatively still to make those full attacks, anyway, so that wasn't a big deal, and, if you did end up in melee, well, TWF/Finesse with those two magic daggers.  

In 4e, there was nothing to the same character:  a rogue (DEX for ranged & melee), a magic dagger (all magical thrown weapons returned, the moment the attack roll was resolved), a gonzo power like Blinding Barrage (up to 25 victims!), and off you go.  

I don't recall if 5e has a generic throwing dagger in the same class as the Dwarven Thrower Zapp mentions, above, but that's all it would take.  Well, a thrown-weapon fighting style would be nice.  But finessing the daggers for melee isn't even a feat, and TWFing is straightforward...


----------



## CapnZapp (Oct 29, 2017)

Tony Vargas said:


> I don't recall if 5e has a generic throwing dagger in the same class as the Dwarven Thrower Zapp mentions, above, but that's all it would take.  Well, a thrown-weapon fighting style would be nice.  But finessing the daggers for melee isn't even a feat, and TWFing is straightforward...




Nope, the only magical throwing weapons are the javelin of lightning (and that works... differently) and the dwarven thrower. So all we can hope is that this indicates that the developers think like I do (as posted above) ☺



Sent from my C6603 using EN World mobile app


----------



## CapnZapp (Oct 29, 2017)

As for throwing style, I would be inclined to give an initiative bonus. (What else distinguishes thrown weapons from melee or ranged, but the ability to "surprise" your foe?)

Sent from my C6603 using EN World mobile app


----------



## Random Bystander (Oct 29, 2017)

CapnZapp said:


> Looking at this from the year :2017:, I am slightly amused.
> 
> Of course "Returning" is only cumbersome and unfun if you can't use a single weapon for all your attacks in any given turn. Not to mention if you forgot you couldn't move, or if you no longer have a free hand. Cumbersome. Unfun.
> 
> ...



To address your post - This seems part of a rather sad trend in 3.X supplements, where items, special abilities, and feats given to non-caster classes not only often lag behind the abilities of spells, they are "nerfed" compared to what a reasonable person would expect that ability to be able to do.

On the other hand, items, special abilities and feats given to casters are not only buffed beyond those given to the non-caster classes, they generally address a wider, if not much wider, range of, for lack of a better word, "stuff".

Weapon Focus, on the one hand, provides a +1 bonus to hit with one single weapon. Spell Focus, on the other hand, provides essentially a +2 bonus to hit with an entire school of spells.

Natural Spell and Eschew Material Components Ignore Your Class's Only Real Weakness, Druid and Wizard Editions, are simply the injury on top of insult.

And the worst part is that there's a beautiful, balanced, and well-built system under this pile of mechanical garbage.


----------



## CapnZapp (Oct 29, 2017)

Random Bystander said:


> And the worst part is that there's a beautiful, balanced, and well-built system under this pile of mechanical garbage.




True, dat. 

Still doesn't change that from over here, in 2017 using 5e, where the grass is simply greener, that beautiful system looks awfully similar to a pile of garbage...  

I kid, I kid. And not just because I don't want to do edition-warring either; I do think:

True, dat.

Sent from my C6603 using EN World mobile app


----------



## Tony Vargas (Oct 30, 2017)

Random Bystander said:


> To address your post - This seems part of a rather sad trend in 3.X supplements, where items, special abilities, and feats given to non-caster classes not only often lag behind the abilities of spells, they are "nerfed" compared to what a reasonable person would expect that ability to be able to do.



 It's hardly unique to 3.x supplements.



CapnZapp said:


> As for throwing style, I would be inclined to give an initiative bonus. (What else distinguishes thrown weapons from melee or ranged, but the ability to "surprise" your foe?)



 Nice.  Clear/obvious & simple.  Incentivizes the realistic practice of walking around with a throwable weapon in-hand. 

...mixing melee & ranged, I suppose, is the other obvious advantage of a thrown style.  A realistic advantage of throwing a weapon is that you don't have to absorb any of the shock of impact, yourself - so thrown weapons usually hit harder than melee.   Historically, thrown weapons like the francisca were used to good effect when combined with a charge, and the pilum was designed to sick in an enemy's shield and hamper it's use.  So there's a variety of possibilities, from simple to hard-to-model, and generally-applicable to overly specific.


----------



## Random Bystander (Oct 30, 2017)

Tony Vargas said:


> It's hardly unique to 3.x supplements.



3.X was, however, by far the largest offender. In AD&D and earlier, fighters enjoyed rather good saving throws against all magic at higher levels; powerful spells nearly always had a corresponding cost; and a magic-user's entire spell list could not be prepared in a single hour, unless they were low-level. In 4e, all classes were (nearly) equal. In 5e, the gap is quite a bit smaller, especially with the introduction of the concentration requirement for many otherwise game-breaking spells.


----------



## Greenfield (Oct 30, 2017)

In first edition our standard round was the "Four Ms", in order:  Missile, Magic, Movement, Melee.

Movement and Melee could be reversed, in some cases, but Missile attacks went first.  Not a true "initiative bonus", in that the numbers didn't change, but since they were resolved first it acted like one.  

In 3.*, where the timing of damage in the round is more significant for spell casters, it makes sense to muddle that a bit.  (In 1st ed any damage taken in the round, at all, fouled a spell, no dice roll.  In 3.* it has to occur *while* the spell is being cast, either through AoO, Readied Action on the part of the attacker, or ongoing damage.)


----------



## Tony Vargas (Oct 30, 2017)

Random Bystander said:


> 3.X was, however, by far the largest offender. In AD&D and earlier, fighters enjoyed rather good saving throws against all magic at higher levels; powerful spells nearly always had a corresponding cost; and a magic-user's entire spell list could not be prepared in a single hour, unless they were low-level.



Then again, a high-level magic-user had so many spells he rarely had to re-memorize all of them.   But those were the core rules, not the supplements, which included a lot of magic items and spells, over the years, but only one perk for the fighter - weapon specialization.  







> In 5e, the gap is quite a bit smaller, especially with the introduction of the concentration requirement for many otherwise game-breaking spells.



The gap in 5e is smaller than it was at it's most egregious - as you point out in 3.5 - but it has widened quite a bit since the last edition - even concentration, the one seemingly-non-trivial limitation left on 5e casters is on very few spells, and, unlike comparable sustain requirements in 4e, requires no action.



> In 4e, all classes were (nearly) equal.



Initially, and the martial power books were even first in the supplement rotation, so by 2010 the fighter still edged out the wizard for class with the most powers.  

Still, supplements gave away unique perks of weapon-use, like superior weapons, or the epic-level improved-crit feats, to implement users a lot more than vice-versa.  And, Essentials saw wizard schools & sub-classes, and thus new spells, in every 'Heroes-of...' supplement, while the fighter got zip after the two cut-down daililess sub-classes in HotFL.


----------



## Random Bystander (Oct 30, 2017)

Tony Vargas said:


> Then again, a high-level magic-user had so many spells he rarely had to re-memorize all of them.   But those were the core rules, not the supplements, which included a lot of magic items and spells, over the years, but only one perk for the fighter - weapon specialization.  The gap in 5e is smaller than it was at it's most egregious - as you point out in 3.5 - but it has widened quite a bit since the last edition - even concentration, the one seemingly-non-trivial limitation left on 5e casters is on very few spells, and, unlike comparable sustain requirements in 4e, requires no action.
> 
> Initially, and the martial power books were even first in the supplement rotation, so by 2010 the fighter still edged out the wizard for class with the most powers.
> 
> Still, supplements gave away unique perks of weapon-use, like superior weapons, or the epic-level improved-crit feats, to implement users a lot more than vice-versa.  And, Essentials saw wizard schools & sub-classes, and thus new spells, in every 'Heroes-of...' supplement, while the fighter got zip after the two cut-down daililess sub-classes in HotFL.



Some of that, I was not aware of. However, I am not contesting it.  I do have some familiarity with other editions, and that all of the editions have caster bias; just not the extent of it.

Thank you for the edification.


----------

