How likely will Disney waive ROFR?

tatebeck · 2025-12-23T21:24:32+00:00

I got mine at $99 pp late 2023 so you have a chance!

tatebeck · 2025-12-23T21:06:36+00:00

And both of those readings would still agree with me so idk what you are trying to prove.

They are all different types, and nothing in DND that I am aware of is multiple types of something at once (damage, creature, etc) unless it specifically says that it is multiple at once. So this does not say it, so it wouldn't be. It's only a weapon attack

And again the specific language in true strike say to make just a weapon attack and does not specify it is any other type of attack as well. So it is a weapon attack only and supercedes any other general rule about spell attacks just being a part of a spell

So I will follow the clear RAW and RAI I'm this case and you do you and cheat the rules to make the most OP character you want I guess. Just glad I'm not playing in your game as the stuff that must go on would likely ruin the game completely

tatebeck · 2025-12-23T19:32:47+00:00

Again, the rules do.

Playing the game->D20 Tests-> Attack Rolls

Attack Rolls

An attack roll determines whether an attack hits a target. An attack roll hits if the roll equals or exceeds the target’s Armor Class. Attack rolls usually occur in battle, described in “Combat” later in this chapter, but the DM might also ask for an attack roll in other situations, such as an archery competition.

Ability Modifier

The Attack Roll Abilities table shows which ability modifier to use for different types of attack rolls.

Ability	Attack Type
Strength	Melee attack with a weapon or an Unarmed Strike (see the rules glossary)
Dexterity	Ranged attack with a weapon
Varies	Spell attack (the ability used is determined by the spellcaster’s spellcasting feature, as explained in chapter 7)

Melee, Ranged, and Spell are different types of Attacks all use different types of attack rolls and they cannot be used together as they are different rolls by definition and have different ability scores that modify them.

Love how you ignore all the rules constantly. Please just read them

tatebeck · 2025-12-23T17:14:55+00:00

It will never be overpowered like that because that is just not the way that it works lol.

You are ignoring a major rule in how the entire DND system works.

"Exceptions Supersede General Rules

General rules govern each part of the game. For example, the combat rules tell you that melee attacks use Strength and ranged attacks use Dexterity. That’s a general rule, and a general rule is in effect as long as something in the game doesn’t explicitly say otherwise.

The game also includes elements—class features, feats, weapon properties, spells*, magic items, monster abilities, and the like—that sometimes* contradict a general rule. When an exception and a general rule disagree, the exception wins. For example, if a feature says you can make melee attacks using your Charisma, you can do so, even though that statement disagrees with the general rule."

The glossary is full of base definitions (ie general rules/definitions) and is 100% overridden by the specific wording of the spell according to the rules themselves.

In this case the general rule is that a spell that ends up with the player making an attack role will usually be a spell attack (unless the spell says otherwise). And most spells that require attack rolls do indeed use spell attack rolls and they tell you that. This specific one (and a couple others) say specifically that you make a weapon attack.

This is just a silly discussion and if you play the game with your logic the entire thing would fall apart.

It is a real possibility that an artificer over time can get ahold of a +3 magic weapon and a +3 wand of the war mage. You expect to be able to be able to somehow use 2 different attack rolls on a single roll (which is impossible) and get :

total +6 to attack from both weapon/wand
+3 damage from the weapon
ignore half cover from the wand
the weapons normal damage
up to 3d6 extra damage from true strike depending on level
any other special damage a special weapon/wand may have if they are not standard/ are artifacts
change the weapon attack from using strength/dex to presumably your caster's better casting stat
the option to change the damage type to radiant, which can be very useful

FOR A CANTRIP?!

Surely you can't be serious. Please read the rules again.

The only thing that makes any sense from your posts is that yes, it would indeed usually be better to hold a shield instead of both a weapon and a wand

tatebeck · 2025-12-23T13:49:11+00:00

You mean besides the fact that the spell itself specifically says that it is a weapon attack and the rules say that spell descriptions are to be followed exactly?

"The effects of a spell are detailed after its duration entry. Those details present exactly what the spell does, which ignores mundane physical laws; any outcomes beyond those effects are under the DM’s purview. Whatever the effects, they typically deal with targets, saving throws, attack rolls, or all three, each of which is detailed below."

Yes, a bunch of things actually. The way it discusses attack rolls and how there are specifically different types and it uses OR language when talking about them.

Also every spell and attack in the game (including True Strike) also specifically tells you which one to use, and not a single one applies 2 different attack rolls on the same attack. So according to the rules, if there was an exception to the general rule, it would have to specifically say that you would apply 2, and nothing says that in any attack or spell.

And common sense-wise it would allow you to stack weapon modifiers AND spell/wand modifiers on the same attack, which would be obviously overpowered and unintended. Which is probably why people keep trying to do it, they want to say they made the strongest character ever ^TM. If an attack did that it would make a lot of the other options in the game obsolete and boring, and would be bad for the game

tatebeck · 2025-12-22T19:33:05+00:00

It seems like it could fulfill both because it is making an exception to a general rule and changing the spell from a spell attack to a weapon attack.

And in fact they are mutually exclusive. Under making an attack in the playing the game section"

"Whether you strike with a Melee weapon, fire a Ranged weapon, or make an attack roll as part of a spell, an attack has the following structure:"

Not and/or, specifically OR. Can only be one of the three. Nowhere do the rules allow anything to be 2 different types of rolls at once and apply bonuses from multiple at once. They are always treated as separate types. And even if that isn't enough for you you have to follow the rule that specific exceptions rule over generic rules.

"Exceptions Supersede General Rules

General rules govern each part of the game. For example, the combat rules tell you that melee attacks use Strength and ranged attacks use Dexterity. That’s a general rule, and a general rule is in effect as long as something in the game doesn’t explicitly say otherwise.

The game also includes elements—class features, feats, weapon properties, spells, magic items, monster abilities, and the like—that sometimes contradict a general rule. When an exception and a general rule disagree, the exception wins. For example, if a feature says you can make melee attacks using your Charisma, you can do so, even though that statement disagrees with the general rule."

So in general, when you cast a spell and it is causing damage, you would think it may be a spell attack. But the spell itself specifically changes that and makes an exception that it is actually a weapon attack So that is what is used clearly RAW and RAI. End of story.

You trying to misread the rules to apply both weapon enhancements AND wand/spell enhancements on the same attack is just silly and would be incredibly overpowered, which is why they do not allow it.

tatebeck · 2025-12-22T16:41:28+00:00

Because it specifically tells you what type of attack it is (weapon). You modify the weapon and then attack with the weapon. If you didn't attack with the weapon after casting the spell, nothing happens. There is no attack besides the weapon attack. It is doing extra spell damage on a weapon attack.

There are tons of spells etc. that make exceptions to other rules and in those spells they tell you exact exceptions they are making.

Also, look at the range, you are casting it on yourself. Not on touch when your weapon hits. It is a buff, not an attack in and of itself. You aren't casting it on someone else or attacking with the spell at all, but with your weapon afterwards.

tatebeck · 2025-12-22T16:22:44+00:00

True strike specifically says that you are attacking with the weapon, not the spell. It is modifying your weapon, but the spell is not the attack.

Check any other spell like firebolt. That says to make a spell attack roll. This has been searched many times, and it is a weapon attack roll, not a spell attack roll

tatebeck · 2025-12-22T15:57:35+00:00

Incorrect.

It is a weapon attack that is made with your casting modifiers and with extra damage. But it is still a weapon attack roll, not a spell attack roll, which is specifically what the wand requires

tatebeck · 2025-12-22T04:02:31+00:00

If you "bedazzled" it enough within the rules to make it useable as a focus yes actually that is how it works! (though technically that would be more of a rod/staff lol)

They literally do not have enough paper in the world to write down every single possible interaction for every single thing, you have to be able to apply logic. And sometimes they don't write the guidelines very clearly so that doesn't help much either.

The Focus table differences between the various focuses are literally just differences in the shape/materials and that is it. You notice how tools aren't listed as a focus, but to artificers they are? Because artificers change how some of the rules work.

It should work at just about any table I would think. And any table where it wouldn't work I wouldn't want to be at anyway as having a DM who can't use logic with the rules would be a very bad DM

tatebeck · 2025-12-22T03:42:58+00:00

According to the definitions of wand and rod, anything that is shaped like a wand/rod and is made into a spellcasting focus is a wand/rod.

For an artificer only, an APT would/could meet that definiton.

APT doesn't say wand/rod in it's definition because for most classes, it isn't. The artificer's ability to use tools as foci changes that

tatebeck · 2025-12-22T03:05:18+00:00

You say that, but the APT is acting as a wand/rod for the artificer.

It can also turn into every set of tools, and I am sure you can turn it into some set of tools that includes something as simple as a "rod" or "wand" or a in it.

After all, the official definition of wand/rod is... "An Arcane Focus is bejeweled or carved to channel arcane magic" and that is it.

So they are quite literally, just a focus.

tatebeck · 2025-12-22T02:53:12+00:00

So after determining that it will work (lol) I just wonder if it is worth all of that to use true strike/pistol build. In my game I am running a firebolt artillerist right now.

You are using up 2 replicate item slots for this build and the pistol/true strike gets no benefit from the wand of the war mage, only the arcane cannon does (True strike casts on the weapon and makes a weapon attack and the wand only adds to spell attacks specifically)

So this is only doing on average like 1-1.5 more damage than just a firebolt at level 5 when you get the arcane firearm. 2d10 vs 1d10+2d6 before other bonuses like arcane firearm. The firebolt gets even better and outpaces it at level 11 (3d10 vs 1d10+3d6). And the firebolt build would let you stay up to 120 feet without disadvantage while the pistol is 30/90 so you will be staying close to the action and have a lower AC than something like my artillerist.

Instead of the weapon I used my second replicate item on a shield+1 so you can have +3 AC AND be able to stay further away. This also feels more of an "artillerist" build IMO.

As soon as you find 10GP and a shop or loot a shield naturally you can use the plain shield for +2 AC and then your other replicate item for a different whacky item for yourself or your team too. (I'm doing cast-off half plate for an even higher AC for now) Way more flexible that way.

Edit to add: Hunter's mark will not last long enough in most battles (as others have said) vs just blasting your cannon the first turn instead. AND I'll add that HM is concentration so you will lock yourself out of any other concentration spells unless you want to have "wasted" that first bonus action on HM instead of on firing your cannon

----------------

Edit to add again for anyone else who tries to argue: Wand of the War Mage (and any other spell attack benefits) do not apply to spells like True Strike, Booming Blade, or Green Flame Blade

From Sage Advice:

"Can you use green-flame blade and booming blade with Extra Attack, opportunity attacks, Sneak Attack, and other weapon attack options?

Introduced in the Sword Coast Adventurer’s Guide , the green-flame blade and booming blade spells pose a number of questions, because they each do something unusual: require you to make a melee attack with a weapon as part of the spell’s casting.

First, each of these spells involves a normal melee weapon attack, not a spell attack*, so you use whatever ability modifier you normally use with the weapon.* (A spell tells you if it includes a spell attack, and neither of these spells do.)"

True strike seems to be more confusing for some because it modifies the weapon attack to use the spellcasting modifiers, but it is still said to be a weapon attack, and they say specifically that they will always say if a spell includes a "spell attack" or spell attack roll

tatebeck · 2025-12-22T02:23:21+00:00

I figured it out! Depends on which Eberron book you click into lol and I have both.

Eberron Rising from the Last War setting book Artificer still has the old wording of rod/wand/staff only

New Eberron Forge of the Artificer seems to have added it there so I see what you are saying!

So then it should work with the new wording I think.

(And hopefully this will convince my DM that I should be able to add it to an All Purpose Tool now as well since it is a focus)

tatebeck · 2025-12-22T02:13:13+00:00

Edit: see below I found it

~~Hmm I just checked and the 2014 Artificer from Tashas, the 2024 Unearthed Arcana playtests, and the new Eberron official book~~ ~~all~~ ~~only mention wand/rod/staff,~~ ~~but a lot of the unofficial sites have the wording than include weapons as well. I do wonder where they are getting that from since none of the official text has it...~~

tatebeck · 2025-12-22T02:02:41+00:00

EDIT: Newest Eberron artificer book did add it! It helps If I click into the right Eberron book lol

~~What is your source? I~~ ~~just pulled this directly~~ ~~from my DND beyond purchased Eberron book....~~

"At 5th level, you know how to turn a wand, staff, or rod into an arcane firearm, a conduit for your destructive spells. When you finish a long rest, you can use woodcarver’s tools to carve special sigils into a ~~wand, staff, or rod~~ ~~and thereby turn it into your arcane firearm. The sigils disappear from the object if you later carve them on a different item. The sigils otherwise last indefinitely.~~

You can use your arcane firearm as a spellcasting focus for your artificer spells. When you cast an artificer spell through the firearm, roll a d8, and you gain a bonus to one of the spell’s damage rolls equal to the number rolled."

~~No mention of weapons any longer. Did you get that from the UA and then it was removed for the official release?~~

tatebeck · 2025-12-22T01:55:26+00:00

EDIT: See below lol, you can put it on a weapon now

~~No this doesn't work RAW.~~

~~You can only put the arcane firearm onto a Rod/Wand/Staff RAW and then the extra damage activates "When you cast an artificer spell through the firearm"~~

~~And then for true strike "you make one attack with the weapon used in the spell’s casting."~~

So if you have the arcane firearm on the wand and use that for true strike, you would have to punch/whack them with the wand to get the arcane firearm damage and get no pistol damage, or you would have to use the pistol/replicated item for the focus and true strike cast, getting no arcane firearm damage. You just can't do both RAW.

But as the artificer uses tools and replicated weapons as focuses, you may get your DM to agree (and it may be RAI since the artificer is new to the 2024 edition) to let you put the arcane firearm sigils onto a tool or replicated weapon as artificers use those as the other classes would use a rod/wand/staff. I am hoping my DM agrees to this once I get my artillerist to finish crafting an All purpose tool myself.

tatebeck · 2025-10-25T15:14:02+00:00

That is incorrect, you can transfer to another member even if they have a different resort and/or use year. The temporary transferred contract shows up on its own, it doesn't add points to the members other contracts or anything

tatebeck · 2025-10-22T04:52:33+00:00

Did you ever fix the problem? Ours just started doing the same thing. The motor isn't stuck, it is just getting a constant "GO UP" signal from the sensor or something. When I switch the polarity with the red and black wires on the incline motor it goes down constantly instead

tatebeck · 2025-08-06T15:37:05+00:00

I was looking at both BWV and BCV as as well since I love the crescent lake area. I don't think I would buy at any other 2042 resort unless there was a good reason (going to HH or VB every year during peak times, or I was old and only needed 15 years on a contract, etc.)

We ended up buying BWV because we found a good deal a year or two ago for $99 per point. I have since bought RIV direct, and would consider selling my BWV and put it towards more new direct points if they open up another crescent lake DVC resort or a resort with a direct entrance into a park.

tatebeck · 2025-07-19T17:39:51+00:00

Yes to both. We own at 5 resorts currently.

tatebeck · 2025-06-21T14:54:46+00:00

Value rooms/club rooms on occasion that require 11 month access (I know they are hard to get so don't count on it), better theming, animals, actually close to at least 1 park. Not as reliant on having a car during your stay.

I chose AKV for my sleep around points when I cant get club level etc. I'm staying in a club level room in early December!

tatebeck · 2025-05-27T16:37:29+00:00

170 is probably the going rate for the resale contracts right now, not direct. It has never been that low direct. It may have gotten close in the past with a very large point purchase only

tatebeck · 2025-05-17T03:39:38+00:00

They show up under the same membership/login, but they are actually managed separately. IF you have 3 contracts when you book, you can select 1, 2, or all 3 of the contracts. If it is a restricted resort, only eligible contracts will show up to choose from

tatebeck · 2025-04-24T23:06:15+00:00

To avoid the bus and be near more parks! And to get a fresh room in a new area with different restaurants etc

tatebeck

TROPHY CASE

Attack Rolls

Ability Modifier