Returning and Harpoons.

[Sekhmet]

A player of mine wants to put Returning on the Harpoon from Frostburn, suggesting that it would negate the opponent's ability to make a heal check to safely remove the harpoon, and it would deal it's secondary damage just before your next turn due to Returning forcing it back the way it entered the body.

I've always considered 3.5's Returning to be a boomerang sort of effect, where the item strikes the target and then flies back in a circular motion; whereas he sees it as the weapon stops midair and travels backward exactly as it did forward, as if you'd hit rewind.

What do you guys think would occur in this instance?


Returning: This special ability can only be placed on a weapon that can be thrown. A returning weapon flies through the air back to the creature that threw it. It returns to the thrower just before the creature’s next turn (and is therefore ready to use again in that turn).
Catching a returning weapon when it comes back is a free action. 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.

Harpoon: The harpoon is a broad-bladed spear forged
with barbs. The shaft of the harpoon has a trailing rope
attached to control harpooned opponents. Though designed
for hunting whales and other large sea creatures, the harpoon
can be used on dry land.
If it deals damage, the harpoon lodges in an opponent
who fails a Refl ex saving throw (DC 10 + the damage dealt).
A harpooned creature moves at only half speed and cannot
charge or run. If you control the trailing rope by succeeding
on an opposed Strength check while holding it, the
harpooned creature can move only within the limits that
the rope allows (the trailing rope is 30 feet long). If the harpooned
creature attempts to cast a spell, it must succeed on
a DC 15 Concentration check or lose the spell.
The harpooned creature can pull the harpoon from
its wound if it has two free hands and takes a full-round
action to do so, but it deals damage to itself equal to the initial
damage the harpoon dealt. A character who succeeds
on a DC 15 Heal check can remove a harpoon without
further damage.

 

[frankthedm]

First edit the text. When you typed that harpoon info out, you hit the enter key too often.

Do you want it to work? If so, let it work. If not, just say you are not allowing it to work.

Never liked the harpoon since it clashes with some of the concepts and narrative uses of HP loss. Arrows, javelins and spears hit you, no problem, but some weapon pulled from a splat book hits you, it sticks in and becomes a notable hindrance.

If i had to think up a 'reason' why it would not work, just say the pull from returning is not enough to pull the harpoon out.

I also am of the opinion if someone takes possession of a thrown weapon with returning through some 'catch projectile' ability, the catcher is now the one in possession of the weapon and it no longer returns to the thrower. I'd probably extend that possession concept to having the weapon buried in you.

 

[Alexander123]

aren't other thrown weapons technically also buried in you? Whether arrows or javelins.

 

[irdeggman]

aren't other thrown weapons technically also buried in you? Whether arrows or javelins.

Nope not per raw, well it does not say one way or another. So this is another one of the abstract rules of D&D combat. Since a thrown weapon can be used again - technically I don't see whay it would be "stuck" in someone - only that it did damage and then fell to the ground. 2nd Ed's Player's Option - Combat and Tactics had a lot more detailed rules about weapons sticking in targets (like thrown axes sticking in shields).

Arrows are projectiles and auto break when they hit and a 50% break chance if they miss. This is spelled out in the rules.

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

Not by RAW, at least not to the point that they hinder you or cause damage to take out (if someone's getting magical healing anyway sand you like the image of the wound closing as the arrow is pulled out or whatever, go for it), that's something unique to the harpoon and a few other weapons.

I agree with Frank, I don't really like the harpoon and how it goes against normal rules. So...allow it if you want it to work. It certainly won't make him as powerful as a spellcaster, and throwing weapons is an extremely weak specialty already, so it wouldn't be unbalanced to allow, IMO. Just be glad he hasn't discovered Bloodstorm Blade prestige class (Tome of Battle). They don't need no stinckin' returning property, they can full attack with the same thrown weapon, it keeps returning to their hand immediately after each attack!

For further reference in decision making consider:
1) The Snatch Arrows feat. It lets you catch, and (if you want) throw back at the attacker, a thrown weapon. If a creature caught and opted to keep his harpoon, would you let returning work? Probably not, because the creature's possession trumps the property, it can't just take away an attended item, right? So...if being held is enough to negate returning, why wouldn't being lodged in the person's torso stop it?

2) Raptor Arrow from MIC. It's a unique re-usable non-destroyable relic arrow of Ehlonna. I think it automatically buries itself in the target's flesh and automatically rips itself out (for more damage) and returns to the shooter on his next turn, IIRC. Check it out, similar to a harpoon and returns as a base ability, might help you gause whether the player's harpoon trick is acceptable.